This is the real AI disruption story, not chatbots writing marketing copy. AI tools finding legitimate kernel vulnerabilities at 10x the rate humans could, and the bottleneck shifting from "finding bugs" to "processing bug reports."
The interesting detail is that most reports are correct. The problem isn't quality, it's volume. The kernel security team is essentially experiencing a DDoS of valid information. Their review process was designed for human-speed input and now it's getting machine-speed input.
This is going to force a rethink of how open source projects handle security disclosures. You either automate the triage (AI reviewing AI's work, which is a weird loop) or you create some kind of proof-of-stake system where reporters put something on the line to submit. Otherwise every project with a public security contact is going to drown in correct-but-overwhelming reports.
The Friday and Tuesday spike pattern is interesting too. Suggests the same AI pipelines running on similar schedules.
This is the real AI disruption story, not chatbots writing marketing copy. AI tools finding legitimate kernel vulnerabilities at 10x the rate humans could, and the bottleneck shifting from "finding bugs" to "processing bug reports."
The interesting detail is that most reports are correct. The problem isn't quality, it's volume. The kernel security team is essentially experiencing a DDoS of valid information. Their review process was designed for human-speed input and now it's getting machine-speed input.
This is going to force a rethink of how open source projects handle security disclosures. You either automate the triage (AI reviewing AI's work, which is a weird loop) or you create some kind of proof-of-stake system where reporters put something on the line to submit. Otherwise every project with a public security contact is going to drown in correct-but-overwhelming reports.
The Friday and Tuesday spike pattern is interesting too. Suggests the same AI pipelines running on similar schedules.