The company post is linked; it seems like an update on where we are with automated cybersec.
So far in 2025, only four security vulnerabilities received CVE identifiers in OpenSSL, the cryptographic library that secures the majority of internet traffic. AISLE's autonomous system discovered three of them. (CVE-2025-9230, CVE-2025-9231, and CVE-2025-9232)
Some quick thoughts:
OpenSSL is one of the most human-security-audited pieces of open-source code ever, so discovering 3 new vulnerabilities sounds impressive. How much exactly: I'm curious about peoples opinions
Obviously, vulnerability discovery is a somewhat symmetric capability, so this also gives us some estimate of the offense side
This provides concrete evidence for the huge pool of bugs that are findable and exploitable even by current level AI - this is something everyone sane believed existed in my impression
On the other hand, it does not neatly support the story where it's easy for rogue AIs to hack anything. Automated systems can also fix the bugs, hopefully systems like this will be deployed, and it seems likely the defense side will start with large advantage of compute
It's plausible that the "programs are proofs" limit is defense-dominated. On the other hand, actual programs are leaky abstractions of the physical world, and it's less clear what the limit is in that case.
I don't know if OpenSSL actually goes through the process of minting CVEs for a lot of the security problems they patch, so this may sound more impressive than it is. My company has reported several similar memory corruption primitives to OpenSSL in the last month found by our scanner and I'm not sure if we ever got any CVEs for it.
Because AI security startups are trying to attract media attention, they have a habit of crediting findings to an AI when they actually involved a bunch of human effort - especially when their tools are not publicly available. You should be healthily skeptical of anything startups report on their own. For a practitioner's perspective on the state of security scanning, there was a blog post posted last month that provided a good independent overview at the time: https://joshua.hu/llm-engineer-review-sast-security-ai-tools-pentesters[1]
Appreciate the pushback and your perspective. Two anchoring facts:
OpenSSL minted and published these CVEs (not us). They’re very conservative. Getting any CVE through their process is non-trivial. In 2025 we reported several issues. Some received CVEs, others were fixed without CVEs, which is normal under OpenSSL's security posture.
On your "AI vs human experts" point: the findings came from a fully autonomous analysis pipeline. We then manually verified and coordinated disclosure with maintainers. The takeaway: our stack surfaced previously unknown, CVE-worthy bugs in OpenSSL's hardened codebase. That’s hard to do by hand at scale.
The company post is linked; it seems like an update on where we are with automated cybersec.
So far in 2025, only four security vulnerabilities received CVE identifiers in OpenSSL, the cryptographic library that secures the majority of internet traffic. AISLE's autonomous system discovered three of them. (CVE-2025-9230, CVE-2025-9231, and CVE-2025-9232)
Some quick thoughts: