Mythos unleashed on Opensource

The Hype Around Mythos and Security

Introduction to the Discussion

• The speaker critiques recent headlines claiming that "zero days are numbered" and that defenders have a guaranteed chance to win decisively against security threats.

• Emphasizes the contradiction in using terms like "chance" alongside definitive claims, suggesting skepticism about these assertions.

Evaluating Mythos' Impact on Security

• Questions whether Mythos will significantly improve security or if it is just another incremental model release with limited impact.

• References an article discussing a vulnerability found by Mythos, indicating mixed feelings about its effectiveness in real-world applications.

The State of AI in Security

Critique of AI's Initial Performance

• Highlights Daniel Stenberg's concerns regarding the influx of low-quality PRs and bugs overwhelming maintainers, leading to a "denial of attention attack."

• Notes that initial experiences with AI tools for security were largely ineffective, with many programmers finding them useless until improvements began to emerge around 2026.

Transitioning from Uselessness to Utility

• By early 2026, reports indicate that AI tools have become more effective at identifying security vulnerabilities, marking a significant shift in their utility for developers.

• The speaker expresses excitement over an article detailing how Mythos successfully identified vulnerabilities within Curl’s extensive codebase.

Analyzing Curl's Vulnerabilities

Background on Curl and Its Testing Framework

• Curl has been developed over many years with rigorous testing protocols, resulting in relatively few disclosed vulnerabilities despite its large codebase (178,000 lines).

• On receiving the Mythos report on May 6th, 2026, there was anticipation regarding potential undiscovered bugs within the code due to its complexity and history of contributions from numerous developers.

Findings from the Mythos Report

• Initially reported five confirmed vulnerabilities; however, further investigation reduced this number to one actual vulnerability deemed low severity.

• The other four findings were classified as false positives or minor bugs not warranting immediate action or out-of-band releases.

Conclusions Drawn from Mythos' Performance

Reflection on AI Tools' Effectiveness

• Despite some improvements noted with Mythos compared to previous tools used by Curl, overall findings suggest no significant advancement in bug detection capabilities beyond what had already been achieved through prior efforts.

• Daniel concludes that while hype exists around new models like Mythos, they do not necessarily outperform existing solutions significantly enough to justify grand claims made by companies like Mozilla about zero-day vulnerabilities being numbered.

Future Outlook on Security Tools

• Acknowledges ongoing developments in both AI tools and human expertise necessary for effective vulnerability detection; emphasizes that reliance solely on automated systems is insufficient without skilled oversight.

Final Thoughts on Security Landscape

Skepticism Towards Overhyped Claims

• Reiterates doubts about claims suggesting an end to security issues due to advancements like those presented by Mythos; believes complexities will persist as both defenders and attackers adapt rapidly alongside technological progress.

Call for Continued Human Involvement

• Concludes that while tools may improve efficiency in detecting issues, human ingenuity remains crucial for navigating evolving challenges within cybersecurity landscapes; warns against complacency based solely on technological advancements alone.