Re: Keepassxc hard masked, why ?
Alexis <[email protected]> Sat, 18 Apr 2026 09:39:19 +1000
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.gentoo.user |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Philipp Ludwig <[email protected]> writes: > Thank you for this insight. This is far worse than I imagined. And there are not only issues of general code quality: * "AI-authored code contains worse bugs than software crafted by humans" https://www.theregister.com/2025/12/17/ai_code_bugs/ * "LLMs are Bug Replicators: An Empirical Study on LLMs' Capability in Completing Bug-prone Code" https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.11082 but also issues of security: * "Georgia Tech tracker confirms dozens of real-world CVEs introduced by AI-generated code - and says the true number is 5-10x higher" https://vibegraveyard.ai/story/georgia-tech-vibe-security-radar-ai-code-cves/ * "Study: one in five organizations breached because of their own AI-generated code" https://vibegraveyard.ai/story/aikido-ai-generated-code-breach-study/ * "AI-assisted code commits leak secrets at double the baseline rate" https://vibegraveyard.ai/story/gitguardian-secrets-sprawl-ai-code-leak-study/ * "Study of 1,430 AI-built apps finds 73% have critical security flaws" https://vibegraveyard.ai/story/vibeeval-ai-app-vulnerability-scan-study/ * "Study finds 69 vulnerabilities across apps built by five leading AI coding tools" https://vibegraveyard.ai/story/tenzai-ai-coding-tools-vulnerability-study/ * "Veracode tested AI-generated code from 100+ models and 45% of it failed security checks" https://vibegraveyard.ai/story/veracode-genai-code-security-45-percent-failure/ * "Do Users Write More Insecure Code with AI Assistants?" https://arxiv.org/abs/2211.03622 Alexis.