upvote
It's hard to get a $90k bounty from Google, even with Claude in hand, so we shouldn't be dismissive of that, but it is pretty annoying to read write-ups written entirely in LLM voice.
reply
Shallow dismissals like this contribute nothing to the discussion.
reply
How much more depth is the dismissal supposed to have? The original deception lacks depth.
reply
deleted
reply
Are you referring to your own post? If so, accurate
reply
An llm is a tool, I had access to Claude too but I didn’t find the bug. The author found it.

Research taste, among other things are still abilities that differentiate among humans.

In fact, I expect the elimination of other limiting factors by AI to lead to those becoming more important. By the same mechanism that make ugly hedge fund managers more performant.

The problem then is that composition of the top performers will change. Which is problematic since being a top performer ( ‘artist’, ‘researcher’, ‘writer’,..) is often an identity which ‘we often create to protect ourselves: the strong one who never breaks, the intelligent one who is always certain... The mask that once protected you can eventually become the cage that prevents you from changing’

reply
reply
An invitation for a semantic debate online on a minor point along with a random linked in post stating something about said debate?

No thank you says pretty much everyone.

reply
Yeah, I was about to comment that I’m not reading all that. But good for them though.
reply
Then why is it marketed like one? And why can I use it like a tool?

I do have to send input to the thing to get a response, no?

reply
Sure it is. And it's AI, not 'AI' -- not sure why the need to add quoting.
reply
It's literally the title. It seems every reply to this is just someone saying they didn't read it.
reply
Correct. The headline is incorrect with both the quoting of AI as well as the claim it isn't a tool.

You can hardly blame anyone for avoiding a clickthrough into an auth-walled, user-hostile site to read the point the headline made in an attempt to "gotcha"

reply
deleted
reply
deleted
reply
[flagged]
reply
[flagged]
reply
Are you saying I am an llm?
reply
You know that enticing someone to commit suicide is a crime in most of the jurisdictions?
reply
For now, an AI agent is not a 'someone'
reply
You are underestimating how much effort and prior knowledge it takes to work with claude on this kind of thing.
reply
It really hurts the fingers to type "make no mistakes" in every prompt.
reply
I bet, I could take "Trading places" style, anyone off the street, give them a 100 "Secret" word list and they could spend 6 months discovering all sorts of things.

I agree effort and prior knowledge are required, but a few magic words is like 80% of the effort.

reply
Well the first 80% is easy. It's the second 80% that really gets ya...
reply
OK do it. And make yourself 90K along the way.

This is the typical "ugh that's just rsync" when Dropbox was announced, but for a new LLM age.

_If it's so easy, do it_. Don't post about it. Do it. Fix these bugs at scale. Charge people money for it once you've built up a reputation. Get your own bug bounties.

reply
Perhaps next time they can carve 1's and 0's by hand from a slate tablet.

Same old tired complaining about people not using technology correctly, or the way a _real_ coder would do it.

reply
You mean, using butterfly, right?
reply
For the uninitiated: https://xkcd.com/378/
reply
handing clients access to an LLM gets them beginner level code, easily. same with beginner level exploits. an RCE against google is not a "beginner level exploit". If you've seen AI generated code, I can tell you that AI generated security findings also have that "beginner" smell. an expert who knows what they're doing has to drive them to look at the right places, and use the experts preferred method.
reply
If you're going to make this argument, at least say GLM 5.3 instead of Claude, Claude will refuse to touch anything remotely close to this unless you're in the super special club.
reply
I could have overlooked but doesn't seem there is a mention of Claude in the blog post? Did author say they had used Claude?

I also am wondering if Claude will proceed on a prompt which is about finding a bug like that? I am not sure, has anyone tried?

reply
Took about 3 sentences for me to be as certain as I've ever been about anything I've ever been in my entire life that this blog post was authored by an LLM, though truthfully it's impossible to know for sure if it was a Claude model or a distill.
reply
The cookie is "what caught my eye." not realistic phrasing

The cookie contained a pickle-serialized payload, "which was bad enough on its own." maybe not best practice but not bad on it's own

Flask session cookies are signed", not encrypted," so the... LLMs love to tell you what things aren't, as an emphasis on what they are

reply
Tbf as someone with an infosec background, I would have probably written just about the same.

Pickle payload is a red flag precisely because pickle is not a safe serialisation format format when taken as untrusted input, here the input was trusted but it's still giving someone en easy escalation path (exactly what happened)

And most people would assume the whole cookie payload would be encrypted if they saw just a binary blob, and not realise you can fully read it if it's just signed

But, yes, the post was probably edited by an LLM, as is pretty much everything else you read online these days.

reply
If he used an old school source code scanner would the credit go to him or to the tool? Because Claude is a tool, not a person.

;)

reply
This is a clear example of why it is a shame we cannot block commenters on this website.
reply
welcome to the club
reply