Bug Larping for Fun and Profit
anti.computer
anti.computer
I don't really see the point of automated triaging myself. Given the sophistication and skill of some writers out there, you should just assume that an attacker-controlled write primitive would eventually lead to RCE. The essay mentions this when it goes into the intersection of skill, motivation and resources. But on the defender side this shouldn't matter no? A bug is a bug, and memory corruption should just blindly be assumed to be a 'worst case'.
I think the utility of auto-triaging is when the bug isn't a clear arb read/write. The article links to https://seanhn.files.wordpress.com/2019/11/heelan_ccs_2019.p..., which talks about how to automatically develop exploits from limit heap corruption primitives.
Very often breaches can be found to be in cloud permission configurations.
There are many business-rules-level vulnerabilities.
The following post will give some insight: https://www.nccgroup.com/us/about-us/newsroom-and-events/blo...
There's a big difference between intentionally duplicating a known flaw in a safe language an unintentionally producing a new exploitable flaw in a safe language.
"Did someone ever find an exploitable bug of the type it was intended to be safe from?" In other words, are there examples of the safety guarantees themselves being exploited?
The answer to this is "of course there have." An entire class of such exploits can be derived from CVE-2009-3869. Java 6 and older did not randomize address space, so any ability to write arbitrary memory was easy to exploit. There are other examples.