News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Hardening Firefox with Anthropic's Red Team by johannes1234321 on Friday March 06, 2026 @05:29PM (#47281980)
The question still is: will enough useful stuff be included, to make it worth to dig through the slop? And how to tune the prompt to get better results.
Re:Hardening Firefox with Anthropic's Red Team by simonw on Friday March 06, 2026 @05:42PM (#47282118)
Best way to figure that out is to try it and see what happens.
Re:Hardening Firefox with Anthropic's Red Team by Groxx on Friday March 06, 2026 @06:36PM (#47282560)
[claimed common problem exists, try X to find it] -> [Q about how to best do that] -> "the best way to do it is to do it yourself"

Surely people have found patterns that work reasonably well, and it's not "everyone is completely on their own"? I get that the scene is changing fast, but that's ridiculous.

Re:Hardening Firefox with Anthropic's Red Team by simonw on Friday March 06, 2026 @07:05PM (#47282779)
There's so much superstition and outdated information out there that "try it yourself" really is good advice.

You can do that in conjunction with trying things other people report, but you'll learn more quickly from your own experiments. It's not like prompting a coding agent is expensive or time consuming, for the most part.

Re:Hardening Firefox with Anthropic's Red Team by nl on Friday March 06, 2026 @06:44PM (#47282618)
/security-review really is pretty good.

But your codebase is unique. Slop in one codebase is very dangerous in another.

Re:Hardening Firefox with Anthropic's Red Team by LamaOfRuin on Saturday March 07, 2026 @09:26AM (#47287926)
For those not aware, this is a specific feature available in Claude Code.

https://support.claude.com/en/articles/11932705-automated-se...

Re:Hardening Firefox with Anthropic's Red Team by Groxx on Saturday March 07, 2026 @04:35PM (#47291681)
that's kinda what I was looking for tbh. I didn't know that was an option, and nothing in the thread (or article) seemed to imply it was.

I was mostly working off "well I could ask claude to look at my code for security problems, i.e. 'plz check for security holes kthx', but is that really going to be the best option?". if "yes", then it would kinda imply that all the customization and prompt-fiddling people do is useless, which seems rather unlikely. a premade tool is a reasonable starting point.

Re:Hardening Firefox with Anthropic's Red Team by bluGill on Friday March 06, 2026 @05:46PM (#47282163)
That depends on how the tool is used. People who ask for a security vulnerability get slop. People who asked for deeper analysis often get something useful - but it isn't always a vulnerability.
Re:Hardening Firefox with Anthropic's Red Team by unethical_ban on Friday March 06, 2026 @06:53PM (#47282699)
I assume it's just like asking for help refactoring, just targeting specific kinds of errors.

I ran a small python script that I made some years ago through an LLM recently and it pointed out several areas where the code would likely throw an error if certain inputs were received. Not security, but flaws nonetheless.

Re:Hardening Firefox with Anthropic's Red Team by ronsor on Friday March 06, 2026 @05:54PM (#47282221)
You're either digging through slop or digging through your whole codebase anyway.