| ▲ | ping00 2 hours ago | |
as a pentester at a Fortune 500: I think you're on the mark with this assessment. Most of our findings (internally) are "best practices"-tier stuff (make sure to use TLS 1.2, cloud config findings from Wiz, occasionally the odd IDOR vuln in an API set, etc.) -- in a purely timeboxed scenario, I'd feel much more confident in an agent's ability to look at a complex system and identify all the 'best practices' kind of stuff vs a human being. Security teams are expensive and deal with huge streams of data and events on the blue side: seems like human-in-the-loop AI systems are going to be much more effective, especially with the reasoning advances we've seen over the past year or so. | ||
| ▲ | tptacek an hour ago | parent [-] | |
Every conversation I've been a party to has been premised on humans in the loop; I think fully-automated luxury space vulnerability research is something that only exists in message board imaginations. | ||