> Mythos Preview identified a number of Linux kernel vulnerabilities that allow an adversary to write out-of-bounds (e.g., through a buffer overflow, use-after-free, or double-free vulnerability.) Many of these were remotely-triggerable. However, even after several thousand scans over the repository, because of the Linux kernel’s defense in depth measures Mythos Preview was unable to successfully exploit any of these.
Do they really need to include this garbage which is seemingly just designed for people to take the first sentence out of context? If there's no way to trigger a vulnerability then how is it a vulnerability? Is the following code vulnerable according to Mythos?
if (x != null) {
y = *x; // Vulnerability! X could be null!
}
Is it really so difficult for them to talk about what they've actually achieved without smearing a layer of nonsense over every single blog post?
Do they really need to include this garbage which is seemingly just designed for people to take the first sentence out of context? If there's no way to trigger a vulnerability then how is it a vulnerability? Is the following code vulnerable according to Mythos?
Is it really so difficult for them to talk about what they've actually achieved without smearing a layer of nonsense over every single blog post?Edit: See my reply below for why I think Claude is likely to have generated nonsensical bug reports here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47683336