this post was submitted on 23 Apr 2026
71 points (92.8% liked)

Programming

26901 readers
302 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Rules

  • Follow the programming.dev instance rules
  • Keep content related to programming in some way
  • If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
snowe@programming.dev
Ategon@programming.dev
UlrikHD@programming.dev
bugsmith@programming.dev
Spyro@programming.dev
71
Anthropic Mythos shaping up as nothingburger (www.theregister.com)
submitted 2 weeks ago by HaraldvonBlauzahn@feddit.org to c/programming@programming.dev
25 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

[...]

That marketing may have outstripped reality. Early reports from Mythos preview users including AWS and Mozilla indicate that while the model is very good and very fast at finding vulnerabilities, and requires less hands-on guidance from security engineers - making it a welcome time-saver for the human teams - it has yet to eclipse human security researchers.

"So far we've found no category or complexity of vulnerability that humans can find that this model can't," Mozilla CTO Bobby Holley said, after revealing that Mythos found 271 vulnerabilities in Firefox 150. Then he added: "We also haven't seen any bugs that couldn't have been found by an elite human researcher." In other words, it's like adding an automated security researcher to your team. Not a zero-day machine that's too dangerous for the world.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] AmbitiousProcess@piefed.social 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Better portrayal of Mozilla's response from this ars technica article:

The vulnerabilities identified by Mythos could have also been discovered either by automated “fuzzing” techniques or by having an “elite security researcher” reason their way through the browser’s complex source code, Holley writes. But using Mythos eliminated the need to “concentrate many months of costly human effort to find a single bug” in many cases, Holley added.

The key part there is fuzzing. These tools have existed for a while. (and many are free!!!) Mythos just does what most AI tools do: Take something that requires more understanding or effort, and condense it into a prompt. Instead of starting a fuzzing tool, configuring its scope and some parameters, then letting it go hog wild for a bit, you just tell the AI model with a prompt to perform similar functions. (while costing more money and taking more time due to inevitable overhead from running a whole LLM)

If anything, this points more towards Mozilla not using existing fuzzing tools to find flaws in their code because they were too lazy, not that Mythos is magic and superior to all else.

[–] HaraldvonBlauzahn@feddit.org 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

The key part there is fuzzing.

BTW, fuzzing was described in Kerninghans and Pikes book "The practice of programming, which appeared in 1999. They applied it to Linux command line tools then. So, it is not exactly new either.