I would never ever let an LLM anywhere near C code. If you need help from LLM to write a NIF that performs basic C calls to the OS, you probably can’t check if it’s safe. I mean, it needs at least to pass valgrind.
yes
> what makes it not perform rm -rf /
by default -- regexes and prayers, but you're expected to use sandboxing
Using Rust and Rustler turned out to be way easier and it also now works across Elixir versions 1.14 to 1.18.
And it now runs on everything, across more Elixir and Erlang/OTP versions than before!
At the very least, it's fine for personal projects which is something I'm getting into more and more: remembering that computers were meant to create convenience, so writing small programs to make life easier.
It's less spectrum and more that it's relative. Depends on attacker and what they seek to gain.
An unsecured server is an unsecured server. But there is a world of difference if they are attacked by CIA or local script kiddies.
I'd say absent some temporary hack to do something, my bad experiences won't let me say something is low risk. I worked at Microsoft years ago, and after the zillions of vulnerabilities were attacked by people around the time of windows 95 and computers on the net, we did serious code reviews in my team of the data access libraries. There were vast numbers of vulnerabilities. A group of 3 or 4 of us would sit in a room for 3 hours a day, one person a scribe, and we'd go over this c code that was ancient even then - we found problems everywhere, it was exhausting and shocking. The entire data access infrastructure was riddled with memory leaks, strings that were not length limited, input parameters that were not checked or sanitized, etc. I'm sure it was endemic across all components, not just there. We fixed some things, but we found so much shit.
Thank got I wasn't on the team trying to figure out what to do about those problems. I think they end of lifed a lot of stuff.
Sounds like the original vibe coding.