Re:Bing: “I will not harm you unless you harm me first”
by ivanhoe on Thursday February 16, 2023 @06:37AM
(#34817437)
More realistic threat scenario is that script-kiddies and actual terrorists might start using AI for building ad-hoc hacking tools cheaply, and in theory that could lead to some dangerous situations - but for now AIs are still not capable of producing the real, high-quality and working code without the expert guidance.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Bing: “I will not harm you unless you harm me first”
by PartiallyTyped on Thursday February 16, 2023 @06:57AM
(#34817583)
Wouldn't that result in significantly better infrastructure security out of sheer necessity?
Re:Bing: “I will not harm you unless you harm me first”
by ivanhoe on Friday February 17, 2023 @07:06AM
(#34833683)
SS7 protocol is still vulnerable even though it's known since at least 2014 that it can be used (and has been in wild) for man-in-the-middle attacks. And we're talking of one of the core protocols of every cellular network in the world.
Security (and especially infra-sec) unfortunately just doesn't keep up with the real world challenges that well...
Re:Bing: “I will not harm you unless you harm me first”
by theptip on Friday February 17, 2023 @12:48PM
(#34837869)
You’d expect an improvement in absolute quality security, sure, but no reason to assume the new equilibrium point is at the same or better level of relative security (“attack - defense” if you will).
My base assumption would be defense is harder, and so the easier it is to attack, the worse security gets.