The hacking aspect has been hit and miss for me. Just today I was trying to verify a fix for a CVE and even giving the agent the CVE description + details on how to exploit it and the code that fixed it, it couldn't write the exploit code correctly.

Not to say it's not super useful, as we can see in the article

>... but as there's no complete feedback loop, it still would require a lot of human effort.

Not for long. Picture this: a robot receives instructions on what to physically solder in order to complete the desired modification task.

However, before it can send an image back to the vision-aware LLM guiding it, the PCB lights on fire along with the robot because said LLM confidently gave the wrong instructions.

Then, the robotic fire brigade shows up and mostly walks into walls unable to navigate anywhere useful.

The future is bright.

Minor correction. At 27c3's "Console Hacking 2010" talk. Geohot's Hypervisor work is mentioned at 4:25 or so. Described as "really unreliable" and "eh whatever" due to requiring hardware modification and only granting rudimentary hypervisor access.

These were the same people that then went on to explain how they reverse-engineered the encryption keys of the PS3 to enable "fakesigned" code to be installed

didn't PS3 have a hardcoded nonce for their ECDSA impl that allowed full key recovery? I would agree that I doubt LLMs let people mount side-channel attacks easily on consumer electronics though.

> fully secured against attackers, of which the mere existence of a hypervisor layer is proof of

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_machine_escape

> Perhaps an LLM can assist with mounting such an attack, but as there's no complete feedback loop, it still would require a lot of human effort.

LLMs have had no problem modifying software on an attached android phone. It's only a matter of time.