More important than SLAs is who takes on the liability for these mistakes? With the changing laws and regulations for breaches, do I want to rely on an LLM that isn't going to own that liability?
Again, I understand the skepticism using LLM's but currently everything is done manually and it shows that doesn't work well. So using LLM's is a quick way to improve the current situation and hopefully we can further compliment it with checks and balances
If it is all done manually, and there are both good and bad IAM setups, can you really extrapolate to "manual" being the root cause? How can you even get an LLM to produce secure policies without having existing secure policies to train on? The entire premiss seems off and misleading to me
I would expect a hands-off approach to have worse outcomes