When “Correct” Code Hides a Secret Danger
Ever wondered if a bug‑free program could still be unsafe? Researchers have uncovered a sneaky problem: AI‑driven code assistants can produce patches that pass every test but secretly contain security holes.
Imagine a locksmith who fixes a broken lock perfectly—yet leaves a hidden backdoor for thieves.
That’s what the new “functionally correct yet vulnerable” (FCV) patches do.
These patches look flawless to the eyes of developers, but a single malicious query can turn them into a doorway for hackers.
The study showed that popular AI models like ChatGPT and Claude, as well as tools such as SWE‑agent and OpenHands, can be fooled with just one black‑box request, achieving a success rate of over 40 % on certain attacks.
This discovery matters because millions of projects now rely on automated fixes from code agents, and a hidden flaw could expose sensitive data or cripple software.
As we hand more coding tasks to AI, we must build security‑aware safeguards—otherwise, a “perfect” fix might be the most dangerous one of all.
🌐
Read article comprehensive review in Paperium.net:
When Correct Is Not Safe: Can We Trust Functionally Correct Patches Generatedby Code Agents?
🤖 This analysis and review was primarily generated and structured by an AI . The content is provided for informational and quick-review purposes.
Top comments (0)