Why does my AI write code that is correct in isolation but insecure in my system?
机会
AI coding assistants generate code that is syntactically valid and functionally correct at the function level but have no model of the security invariants of the surrounding system: the trust boundaries, IAM policies, data classification, and threat model that make a pattern safe or dangerous in a specific codebase. The result is structurally valid code that exposes tokens in logs, omits row-level access checks, or misconfigures permissions in ways an engineer familiar with the system would catch immediately. CVE-2025-48757 is a concrete case where an AI tool generated database schemas without row-level security, silently exposing 170 production applications. Research shows AI-assisted commits leak secrets at more than twice the rate of human-only commits. No current assistant ingests or reasons about a codebase's existing security model before generating code.
为什么重要
Security context unawareness produces a class of vulnerabilities that pass every syntax check and unit test but are trivially exploitable once deployed.
我如何评估机会
机会评分是我的个人判断，而非量化指标：痛苦程度、发生频率，以及当前解决方案的匮乏程度。分数越高，意味着我认为越值得去构建。
出现时造成的痛苦程度。
人们实际遇到它的频率。
当前针对它的优质工具有多匮乏。