Maybe? I've long argued open source isn't inherently less buggy/more secure but the *process* around it can make it easier to secure. Either way, LLMs are changing how we should think about securing code…
@mjasay
-
LLM Security: Reverse Engineering Vulnerabilities in Proprietary Software
By
–
With LLMs there's no such thing as security through obscurity even for proprietary software. Every patch is also an easily reverse-engineered pointer to exactly what was broken. Open source doesn't fix this, either, but it's best not to have a false sense of security.
-
Enterprise AI Success Requires Unglamorous Engineering Work
By
–
Everyone wants sexy AI demos. Almost nobody wants to do the dull engineering (Retrieval, evals, memory, governance, etc.) that makes them work. That’s the real enterprise AI gap. (My @InfoWorld column: https://
infoworld.com/article/415750
6/ai-has-to-be-dull-before-it-can-be-sexy.html
…) -
April’s Cruelty: Utah Defies T.S. Eliot’s Famous Quote
By
–
TS Eliot wrote that "April is the cruelest month," but so far it's treating Utah fine.
-
Tom’s Arrival Makes the Day Even Better
By
–
And now my day just got even better. Tom has entered the chat!
-
From Team Leader to Individual Contributor: Finding Joy in New Roles
By
–
Cool role! Though it must be bittersweet to go from leading a team to being an IC (I suspect it will be sweeter by the day. I love leading teams but being an IC has its own joys). Thanks for being someone I admire, if from afar.
-
Multi-Agent Systems: The New Microservices Trap
By
–
Everyone wants to do multi-agent systems…but few should. Multi agent is the new microservices. Multi-agent systems, like microservices, can be powerful. But most enterprises risk adding distributed complexity long before they have a problem worth distributing, as I argue in my
-
AI Splits Enterprises Into Fast and Slow Teams
By
–
"Instead AI is splitting enterprises into fast-learning and slow-learning teams and is rewarding organizations that redesign work, govern risk, and turn lower software costs into more software, not less." – @mjasay infoworld.com/article/415157… [Translated from EN to English]
-
Richmond Alake teaches multi-agent systems at London ExCel Centre
By
–
London has many wonderful things. The ExCel Centre isn't one of them. BUT…watching @richmondalake teach developers how to build their first multi-agent system *is* awesome, no matter where it's taking place (or however awkwardly shaped the room 😬).
-
LiteLLM Supply Chain Attack: Bug Saved Developers from Credential Theft
By
–
When vibe coding is an unalloyed good: your hacker vibe coded their way to a bug that limited the efficacy of their attack. 😅😮💨 (But still very serious.) Andrej Karpathy (@karpathy) Software horror: litellm PyPI supply chain attack. Simple `pip install litellm` was enough to exfiltrate SSH keys, AWS/GCP/Azure creds, Kubernetes configs, git credentials, env vars (all your API keys), shell history, crypto wallets, SSL private keys, CI/CD secrets, database passwords. LiteLLM itself has 97 million downloads per month which is already terrible, but much worse, the contagion spreads to any project that depends on litellm. For example, if you did `pip install dspy` (which depended on litellm>=1.64.0), you'd also be pwnd. Same for any other large project that depended on litellm. Afaict the poisoned version was up for only less than ~1 hour. The attack had a bug which led to its discovery – Callum McMahon was using an MCP plugin inside Cursor that pulled in litellm as a transitive dependency. When litellm 1.82.8 installed, their machine ran out of RAM and crashed. So if the attacker didn't vibe code this attack it could have been undetected for many days or weeks. Supply chain attacks like this are basically the scariest thing imaginable in modern software. Every time you install any depedency you could be pulling in a poisoned package anywhere deep inside its entire depedency tree. This is especially risky with large projects that might have lots and lots of dependencies. The credentials that do get stolen in each attack can then be used to take over more accounts and compromise more packages. Classical software engineering would have you believe that dependencies are good (we're building pyramids from bricks), but imo this has to be re-evaluated, and it's why I've been so growingly averse to them, preferring to use LLMs to "yoink" functionality when it's simple enough and possible. — https://nitter.net/karpathy/status/2036487306585268612#m