News
- The three man team is known as “Slopfix”
- It claims to be able to reduce AI generated codebases by up to 65% in size
- They aim to "refactor vibecoded codebases back to maintainability"
Vibecoding has a lot to answer for, not least some excessively large codebases. A new team of software engineers are collaborating to reduce the size of these cumbersome projects… with a $10,000 per week bill.
Slopfix is the name of the team (comprising a trio: Maciej, Kuba, and Krzysztof), but its aim is efficiency and functionality, rather than code golf, where code is reduced to the shortest possible length.
However, while this might seem like a noble task and a service worth paying for, Slopfix isn’t taking a stand against the use of AI. In fact, it is employing AI tools to detect the AI flab in your codebases.
Use an AI to catch an AIChallenges around vibecoded projects have increased in recent months, as the limitations of the technology become apparent.
While using an AI to program based on your prompts and requirements is straightforward, agents habitually begin to lose context and logic once the project reaches a certain size or age. Once that happens, you’re looking at duplication, features breaking, and of course, the dreaded hallucination.
Slopfix is targeting companies that have adopted vibecoding, built huge codebases, and found that they’re running into issues. To find the problematic AI code, however, Slopfix is employing AI.
They state that a full “screen by screen, endpoint by endpoint” evaluation of the vibecoded app is made, which aims to find the duplicated functions, broken logic, and other issues. There’s also the promise of a two-week warranty for anything they break.
All of this is aided by Claude Code “on a very short leash” which Slopfix uses find problems. They clearly state that “the agent doesn’t get a vote.” Instead, they’re relying on their experience as developers to improve your code.
$10,000 seem a bit steep?While the price might seem high, $10,000 for one successful week’s work for three seasoned developers shouldn’t really be a budget breaker.
The fee covers successful work only, and as the Slopfix website states, payment is in proportion to how much of the reduction target the team hits, with $10,000 being the price for hitting the target – it’s not the default fee.
However, there is a lot of preparation involved, and the analysis of your codebase is conducted free of charge. If they can't fix your project's issues, they'll let you know and refuse the contract.
As software consultancies go, Slopfix is an unusual case. But as the problems with vibecoded projects begin to become apparent, competing consultancies may begin offering similar services.
- AI hallucination can be weaponized, new report warns
- HalluSquatting is short for “adversarial hallucination squatting”
- GitHub Copilot, Gemini CLI, and OpenClaw are all affected
Your favorite AI service could be subverted to deploy code that turns your phone or PC into a botnet, according to researchers at Intuit, Technion, and Tel Aviv University.
The technique has been given the name HalluSquatting, a portmanteau of adversarial hallucination squatting, and is similar to typosquatting in that it relies on a mistake in order to distribute malicious code. While typosquatting might occur with the incorrect input of a website URL, HalluSquatting pivots on an LLM being unable to identify a resource or repository with 100% accuracy.
Relying on an LLM’s tendency to hallucinate repository resource identifiers, this weakness could be scaled up to conduct massive ransomware campaigns, botnets, and more.
Push-me-pull-youPrevious LLM-based malware operations have relied on pull-based attacks. In this scenario, a prompt designed to jailbreak or otherwise subvert the AI is (for example) placed on a website and the LLM encouraged to gather the information, thereby reducing its internal security.
What the researchers have shared in their paper, is that pull techniques are being combined with push attacks, which are traditionally executed as code injection.
The paper’s introduction summary states: “By preemptively registering hallucinated resources—a technique we call adversarial hallucination squatting (HalluSquatting)—we demonstrate remote tool execution and remote code execution at scale across a range of popular agentic LLM applications, which could be exploited to the establishment of a botnet.”
Once an attacker has identified the resource likely to be misnamed by an LLM, and squatted on it (to embed adversarial prompts), the work is done. All that remains is for a user to trigger the resource, the AI chatbot or agent to initiate the response, and the squatted resource will be accessed.
Promptware attackFollowing this, the adversarial content held within the squatted resource is activated, triggering the tool invocation stage. This is the promptware attack, where attacker-controlled instructions are executed, with results potentially including turning the device you’re using into a botnet zombie.
LLMs such as the Cursor, Cursor CLI, Windsurf, GitHub Copilot, Cline coding assistants have been used in the testing of this avenue of attack along with Gemini CLI, and the OpenClaw, ZeroClaw, and NanoClaw AI assistants. The researchers successfully achieved remote tool execution (essentially remotely accessing and controlling the LLMs) and remote code execution (RCE, where malicious code is executed remotely).
Some mitigation is available, including LLM developers blocking fetch operations in favor of a search tool, and resource owners enforcing strict naming, perhaps in favor of globally unique resource names. However, these are will require collaboration by disparate parties, and may take a while to implement.
The risk of LLM-based malware is increasing, and some has already been spotted in the wild. Of these, the JADEPUFFER attack is perhaps the most notable, as it isn’t simply AI-based malware – it is a full ransomware attack run entirely by an LLM.
OpenAI is building an AI-powered smart speaker nobody wants. That is, if you believe the Bloomberg report from Mark Gurman and you've read his description of said rumored device.
According to the report:
"OpenAI believes the product’s defining feature will be its personality and ability to connect on a humanlike level with users. The speaker incorporates mechanical elements that can move on their own, creating a sense that it is alive and not just an object responding to commands. The machine also will draw on personal information such as emails to better understand its owner."
The news sources, it appears, come from an insider who decided to spill all the juicy details mere hours after Apple dropped a blockbuster trade-secrets lawsuit on OpenAI's head. OpenAI claims it's done nothing of the sort, and recent reports say that Apple's claim that the AI giant has not even responded to Apple's earliest concerns was based on it potentially incorrectly identifying the former Apple employees who left to join OpenAI (allegedly with Apple trade secrets in tow).
Apple's concerns here are twofold: First, these former employees had access to many of Apple's secretive product development details and may even have asked recruits to share fresh details when they approached them to interview for jobs at OpenAI. The other concern is that Apple is already far behind in the AI race, and if Apple's plans for Siri, AI, and a potential robotic desktop home assistant were also leaked, it could harm its ability to catch up in multiple market sectors.
This latest news, which may or may not be accurate, should put Apple's fears to rest.
OpenAI is apparently not building something that could ably compete with any of Apple's key hardware or future hardware initiatives.
First of all, there's the smart-speaker-ness of the whole rumored OpenAI concept. There are already too many smart speakers on the market, many of them with their own smart assistants. Amazon, for instance, is smack in the middle of trying to convince millions of customers that not only do they need Echo devices throughout the home, but they need the AI-powered Alexa+ to guide them through their smart home experiences and, to some extent, their lives.
Apple has its own HomePod, Siri-infused speakers, which may get considerably more powerful with the Gemini foundation model-backed version arriving this Fall.
Put another way, smart speakers are a known quantity in the home consumer electronics space, and I think what most tech companies are realizing is that people like and use them, but mostly in limited ways: they want music, occasional answers to simple questions, and voice control of their smart home devices. That's it.
Why does my speaker think it's alive?(Image credit: Future)OpenAI appears to be prepared to offer something different: a personality-filled speaker that can watch you, move to engage, seem alive, and generally make you feel uncomfortable.
Obviously, that would not be the objective, but it could be the result. Who needs a speaker that quietly watches you as you walk from your kitchen to the den, waiting and hoping for you to say, "hey ChatGPT, what's up with the Strait of Hormuz today?"
In my home, we have a Psync smart security webcam with one oddball feature: it has a motorized body that can turn almost 360 degrees on its base and lift its thin, rectangular face and camera to keep track of people and alert me to intruders. However, most of the time, it's just watching us move around the house, and I can tell you that my family hates it. Sometimes I come home and find its face forced down so it can't pop up and track anything.
Now, imagine a larger and far smarter OpenAI AI smart speaker in your home, watching, waiting, chiming in when you don't want it to, and generally making people feel uncomfortable.
This will not be the breakout hardware hit OpenAI is hoping for.
Look, I was under the impression that OpenAI (really Jony Ive and Sam Altman) were working on an AI wearable. I didn't love that idea either, but it was a lot less creepy than this.
So, Apple, chill out. OpenAI's plans are no threat to you, even if they do allegedly have a bunch of insidery Apple information.