Summary
- The Linux Foundation, joined by leading organizations, today announced Akrites, a coordinated effort to remediate and disclose vulnerabilities in critical open source software.
- Akrites establishes a shared Security Incident Response Team (SIRT) and a single, standardized Coordinated Vulnerability Disclosure (CVD) process, built on confidentiality-first principles and industry-standard tooling.
- Founding members commit engineering talent, security expertise and funding to harden the shared open source software that banks, hospitals, power grids, telecoms, governments, and AI labs depend on.
- Organizations that contribute engineering resources or funding to the security of critical open source are invited to participate and can learn more at https://akrites.org/.
The Code Rabbit link is about software in general, not the Linux kernel in particular. In many ways the Linux kernel is an outlier among software projects. When it comes to LLMs, I don’t expect devs will be using lower standards for code reviews in quality, while some other teams definitely are doing light “LGTM” reviews of AI code.
The second link expresses a lot of concerns about plagiarism by AI. Certainly related care needs to taken for contributions to the Linux kernel. As far as I could tell, no specific cases of plagiarized code in the kernel were cited.
I agree the kernel devs appear to think they can outsmart the LLM slop problem.
But unless they were able to suddenly get way faster at reviews without a quality drop, which I doubt they did, this indicates it’s not working out: https://www.neowin.net/news/linus-torvalds-declares-massive-ai-fueled-code-surges-as-the-new-normal-for-linux/
You should look at the studies for that. Given the rate of it, in my opinion it seems like the question is rather where these plagiarized items are not whether they exist.