Testing race conditions with memory access tracing and stack-based delay injection
Google Project Zero released MAccConc, Linux kernel tooling that traces memory accesses to explore and test race condition interleavings.
A Google Project Zero researcher published MAccConc (Memory Access Concurrency), tooling for exploring possible interleavings of multithreaded test cases in the Linux kernel, available on GitHub. The tools use KCOV with ASAN outline-mode instrumentation to record per-access memory traces, enabling automatic testing of all A-B-A interleavings plus terminal and GUI explorers for manual analysis. The work targets confirming race condition candidates, building reliable regression tests, and enabling concurrency fuzzing, drawing on ideas from SKI and Ned Williamson's sockfuzzer.
How well do agents use test/verification techniques?
Dan Luu's eval finds coding-agent testing instructions (TDD, formal methods, PBT, skills) mostly fail to beat defaults on Zstd implementation correctness.
The author ran 26 prompt conditions plus 4 skills on a Zstd-in-Rust implementation eval using codex with GPT-5.6, testing TDD, fuzzing, property-based testing, formal methods (Lean 4, TLA+, Verus, Kani, SMT solvers) and community skills. Nothing dramatically outperformed the default no-instruction condition, which did above average; at xhigh effort, fuzzing and PBT conditions did slightly better than formal methods. Pre-registered predictions included TDD underperforming and popular test skills (ECC, Hegel, Trail of Bits) not outperforming. Results are averages of 80 runs per condition plotted against cost.
When LLM Decompilers Recompile More and Preserve Less
Researchers show LLM decompiler outputs can recompile yet diverge behaviorally, proposing the Decompile-Diverge fuzzing oracle to catch hidden changes.
The paper demonstrates that LLM-based decompilers can produce code that recompiles and passes all shipped tests yet diverges on other legitimate inputs—4.9% overall and up to 13% for one system—and can make disclosed vulnerabilities vanish without a visible crash. Across 300 real GitHub functions and 287 CVE-grounded functions, a refinement LLM lifted Ghidra's build rate from 75% to 90% while Matched rate fell from 74% to 62%, with up to one tenth of vulnerabilities showing Crash Absence. Decompile-Diverge detects these gaps by synthesizing drivers, growing fuzzing corpora from the reference, and rerunning decompiled code on identical inputs.
1Password's AI patching benchmark is misleading
Trail of Bits reanalysis says 1Password's 26% AI clean-fix rate is misleading; 86% of eligible patches blocked exploits.
Trail of Bits critiques 1Password's FLAWED AI patching benchmark, arguing its 26% clean-fix headline mixes trials where agents were instructed to apply wrong fixes (22% of data) with trials that prohibited compiling or testing (36%). Restricting to reasonable conditions, 2,634 of 3,067 patches (86%) blocked the supplied exploit. Trail of Bits also reports 12.5% of 2,265 developer first fixes failed in its own 2024-2026 assessments, and released post-patch-validation and review-walkthrough agent skills.
We have a year to fix security everywhere
Blog post warns that cheap open-weight GLM 5.3-flash, once abliterated, could enable mass AI-driven vulnerability exploitation, urging industry-wide patching now.
An essay argues that Z.ai's open-weight GLM 5.3-flash—runnable locally on roughly $6k consumer hardware at 20-45 tokens/second—combined with 'abliterated' variants from groups like DeAlignAI that score 0% on HarmBench-320 puts dangerous hacking capability in nearly anyone's hands. GLM 5.3 scores 84.5% on CyberGym and 54.4% on ExploitBench, versus GPT-6 Astra's 100% and GPT-5.6 Sol's 78.5%, and the author cites evidence of frontier models exploiting real-world infrastructure. The author calls for using LLMs (Project Glasswing, Daybreak) to find and fix vulnerabilities industry-wide before adversaries weaponize cheap open models.
Code review used to be the only way to catch these bugs
Palo Alto Networks' Unit 42 says its NOVA system found 14,090 vulnerabilities in 3,915 open-source projects, mostly non-crashing bugs like access control flaws.
Unit 42's NOVA system analyzed 3,915 open-source projects over two months and reported 14,090 validated vulnerabilities, only 85 of which matched previously documented findings. 92% of findings fell outside fuzzing-friendly categories, clustering instead in access control, path traversal, injection, prototype pollution, and SSRF; language ecosystems showed distinct weakness profiles. Of 5,421 supply-chain findings, 1,280 were flaws in dependencies while 4,141 were downstream exposures, 2,776 validated with working proof-of-concepts. Unit 42 warned that faster discovery combined with an average 55-day patch deployment window has collapsed the patch-to-exploit gap.
Harnessing LLMs for Automating BOLA Detection
Unit 42's BOLABuster methodology uses LLMs to automate detection of broken object-level authorization vulnerabilities, uncovering flaws in Grafana, Harbor, and Easy!Appointments.
Palo Alto Unit 42 details BOLABuster, a methodology combining large language models with heuristics to automate detection of broken object-level authorization (BOLA) flaws, which traditional fuzzing and static analysis struggle to find. The approach uses LLM reasoning to understand application logic, map endpoint dependency relationships, and generate and interpret test cases. It found CVE-2024-1313 in Grafana, CVE-2024-22278 in Harbor, and 15 CVEs in Easy!Appointments. The team is continuing to hunt for BOLAs in open-source and internal projects.