# oracle exploit — X 热门讨论 (2026-10-11 04:42 UTC)
## @S1r1u5_ (s1r1us) · 10-11 00:36 · ♥37 ↻4 💬1 imagine a machine that can exploit software and people better than anyone alive, and gets better every release.
this is such a weird world, so many implications, some random thoughts:
1. mathematicians want their proofs to be understood to progress the field, this doesnt apply to security, there are no human politics of understanding here, you either compromise or dont. who cares about the 4d move by a chess engine if your goal is just to win?
2. in the limit case, it is an oracle, you give it a system, and it either finds an exploit or not. this is your defense dominant world, because knowing if something is secure or not becomes possible and cheap. but given the nature of computation, this perfect oracle seems like a dream.
without the oracle, every new model might unlock new vulnerability space. i think, we are already in this messier world, everytime there is new model it finds new 0days in complex systems like browsers and kernels.
also, @matthew_d_green's concern about public key cryptography is an interesting fit here, because decades of human cryptanalysis made us comfortable with certain hardness assumptions, what happens when human mathematical ability is no longer the benchmark?
3. for the oracle case, the economic incentive for humans to understand dies, both offense and defense. this is not the case right now, there are thresholds only expert humans with best model can unlock, no amount of token throwing finds everything yet, that might change.
the one thing that becomes absurdly valuable is containing these models, alignment, you could never handover to these model you are trying to contain.
4. this is pretty weird, even if you saturate software vulnerabilities, humans will always be susceptible to social engineering and persuasion beyond our comprehension.
5. directionally, said "doomer" risks are real. think hard, security wouldnt be in this state if we were good at it, and now imagine containing a model thats better than us at finding flaws.
i am not saying its impossible, i am saying we tend to overestimate our skills and put too much hope in incentives. security is not a default property of anything, it has to be fought for.
and if you're not fighting for it, you're building increasingly powerful models without taking the security of the systems around them seriously. the consequences could be far more catastrophic than a hugging face-style incident.
it doesn't even need a model that is scheming. a reward hack or a bit of instrumental convergence from a powerful model will make things to go very badly. this deserves utmost care.
6. insane concentration of power risks. whoever controls the best models and compute could have an overwhelming offensive advantage over everyone else. this is the strong case for open models.
7. unfortunately, you can’t keep humans in the loop for patching the software, your defense need to be autonomous too, good luck doing that. https://x.com/S1r1u5_/status/2109080657209250248