Event JSON
{
"id": "1fd45701ea062a6ecee48da1110002e6128609a7d49b4ce81ca84c8a07dc35ef",
"pubkey": "b400fa7aeef902979f3076a5e121644bebdc8d0a23ffb0eb724dab671d4b6493",
"created_at": 1779086726,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"imeta",
"url https://files.mastodon.social/media_attachments/files/116/594/226/942/357/543/original/bb1da8c902f5b9a2.png",
"m image/png"
],
[
"proxy",
"https://mastodon.social/@LukaszOlejnik/116594227712369614",
"web"
],
[
"proxy",
"https://mastodon.social/users/LukaszOlejnik/statuses/116594227712369614",
"activitypub"
],
[
"L",
"pink.momostr"
],
[
"l",
"pink.momostr.activitypub:https://mastodon.social/users/LukaszOlejnik/statuses/116594227712369614",
"pink.momostr"
],
[
"-"
]
],
"content": "Linux kernel security list is drowning in duplicate AI-flagged bugs; same issues, with same tools, but different names of human submitters. Maintainers have now formalized the obvious - AI-found bugs are public by definition. New docs define 5 failure modes for AI-assisted reports: too long, Markdown-heavy, threat model-ignorant, reproducer-free, patch-free. Non-compliant reports risk being ignored. Most AI-flagged issues aren’t even real vulnerabilities anyway. 500 submitters, 1 CVE, 0 patches?\nhttps://files.mastodon.social/media_attachments/files/116/594/226/942/357/543/original/bb1da8c902f5b9a2.png\n",
"sig": "21490a52b13ce107bf2ea42b76aa3086458f91a3aec6f034ea05da256e57f21ae590b097837394e935e3c6223fdfe605a262e80ad65b0551a407e3d406dbe6a5"
}