OpenSSH 10.5/10.5p1

alpn•about 1 hour ago

"[..] a security bug identified by AI tools is subsequently independently discovered by a different researcher. This suggests that adversaries who do not report bugs to OSS projects are likely to be able to discover these bugs too. Given this, the OpenSSH team will, for now, be making more frequent releases to get bugfixes into users' hands more quickly rather than batching them until the next planned release."

yjftsjthsd-h•about 1 hour ago

> ssh(1): add a "ssh -Z user@host" mode that prints the keys that will be tried for public key authentication in the order that they will be used.

Oh, that's a nice new feature:)

jscd•about 1 hour ago

Am I crazy to think this title is just incorrect? They say AI reports are welcome, not fixes.

voxadam•about 1 hour ago

That was sloppy work on my part. Updated.

saghm•about 1 hour ago

If you still have the ability to edit it, looks like there's a typo in the word "assistance"

voxadam•about 1 hour ago

It's just not my day.

3asj176•about 1 hour ago

No, AI assistance is NOT welcome in general. They mention security bug reports, so using AI like ASAN etc. is welcome.

akerl_•20 minutes ago

> No, AI assistance is NOT welcome in general.

Can you cite that? I see them specifically welcoming AI security reports; I don't see any evidence that other AI submissions are not welcome.

as12qh•6 minutes ago

The AI boosters should look for evidence that they do allow AI contributions! Why would they mention in the release notes that AI security bug reports are welcome if they allowed AI in general anyway?

rvz•37 minutes ago

You need to understand that they have no choice.

Attackers are going to use AI models to find bugs or 0 days quicker than those without it and of course they will not report them.

So it only makes sense to allow it and accept (valid) AI reports from reputable security researchers to keep ahead before a bug gets exploited in a vulnerable release.

As long as the submitter shows their understanding of the reported bug means and what the change is, it is fine to do so, with the reviewers gating invalid reports.

> so using AI like ASAN etc. is welcome.

AddressSanitizer is not "AI", nor does it use AI. [0]

[0] https://static.googleusercontent.com/media/research.google.c...

dpoloncsak•26 minutes ago

Yeah, I'd rather a secure OpenSSH than an AI free one. I appreciate users taking stands and drawing hard lines in the sand, but I think exemptions for large foundations of networking in general should be made, as like you said, threat actors don't care much about AI assistance and will happily use any 0-days it finds.

as12qh•3 minutes ago

I'm not a native speaker, but in other languages the cited text clearly means "using AI in the manner of ASAN or similar tools".

4L3XV33•about 1 hour ago

Glad they're not letting potential high false positive rate preclude discovery of true positives. Better to get a lot of noise with a little bit of signal, if the alternative was not get that signal at all.

OpenSSH 10.5/10.5p1

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion (15 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews