this post was submitted on 23 Apr 2026
130 points (95.1% liked)

Technology

84431 readers
5523 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
130
Anthropic Mythos shaping up as nothingburger (www.theregister.com)
submitted 2 weeks ago by HaraldvonBlauzahn@feddit.org to c/technology@lemmy.world
39 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://feddit.org/post/28915273

[...]

That marketing may have outstripped reality. Early reports from Mythos preview users including AWS and Mozilla indicate that while the model is very good and very fast at finding vulnerabilities, and requires less hands-on guidance from security engineers - making it a welcome time-saver for the human teams - it has yet to eclipse human security researchers.

"So far we've found no category or complexity of vulnerability that humans can find that this model can't," Mozilla CTO Bobby Holley said, after revealing that Mythos found 271 vulnerabilities in Firefox 150. Then he added: "We also haven't seen any bugs that couldn't have been found by an elite human researcher." In other words, it's like adding an automated security researcher to your team. Not a zero-day machine that's too dangerous for the world.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] pageflight@piefed.social 28 points 2 weeks ago (8 children)

And if it's like a lot of security scans, most of the results are technically correct, but, within the context of the project, not something anyone's going to take the time to fix.

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 8 points 2 weeks ago (6 children)

most of the results are technically correct, but, within the context of the project, not something anyone’s going to take the time to fix.

I don't mind leaving "technically correct" vulnerabilities in place while there's no known way to create an exploit. If you've got a vuln with a known exploit and are relying on "but nobody is ever going to actually try that on us" - then you're part of the problem, a big part.

[–] Whelks_chance@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It might be a config thing, but pretty often these scans will find issues which are only relevant on e.g. windows, when building a Linux container. Or the issue is in some XML parsing library in the base OS but the service never receives XML and isn't public facing anyway. Context matters.

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 2 points 1 week ago

One that I have to copy-paste over and over are vulnerabilities in the CUPS printer driver chain that don't apply because we don't print arbitrary things, we only print things that we create. Yeah, there's a vulnerability here in image-magick if you throw it such and such maliciously crafted... well, we only allow it to process our internally generated reports and there's no pathway for maliciously crafted input to reach it, so...

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)