Zum Hauptinhalt springen
Unix & Linux ServerDistribution Release: Qubes OS 4.3.2(03.10.2026 um 00:03 Uhr)
•
Linux Tipps & HardeningSecurity: Mehrere Probleme in redis (Debian)(03.10.2026 um 01:01 Uhr)
•
Sichere ProgrammierungCopilot code review: API support and new default effort level(02.10.2026 um 21:13 Uhr)
•
Sichere ProgrammierungStateless GitHub App installation tokens rolled out(03.10.2026 um 00:18 Uhr)
•
Sichere ProgrammierungWe Tried ISO-AdamW. AdamW Kept Its Job.(03.10.2026 um 00:08 Uhr)
•
Sichere ProgrammierungClaim Ledger gives a project review a paper trail(03.10.2026 um 00:10 Uhr)
••
Sichere ProgrammierungWhat getting into thirteen database projects' docs actually took(03.10.2026 um 00:11 Uhr)
•
Sichere ProgrammierungYour security gate always passes. Can it actually block a release?(03.10.2026 um 00:11 Uhr)
•
Sichere Programmierung🚀 Starting my Hacktoberfest journey!(03.10.2026 um 00:12 Uhr)
•
Unix & Linux ServerDistribution Release: Qubes OS 4.3.2(03.10.2026 um 00:03 Uhr)
•
Linux Tipps & HardeningSecurity: Mehrere Probleme in redis (Debian)(03.10.2026 um 01:01 Uhr)
•
Sichere ProgrammierungCopilot code review: API support and new default effort level(02.10.2026 um 21:13 Uhr)
•
Sichere ProgrammierungStateless GitHub App installation tokens rolled out(03.10.2026 um 00:18 Uhr)
•
Sichere ProgrammierungWe Tried ISO-AdamW. AdamW Kept Its Job.(03.10.2026 um 00:08 Uhr)
•
Sichere ProgrammierungClaim Ledger gives a project review a paper trail(03.10.2026 um 00:10 Uhr)
••
Sichere ProgrammierungWhat getting into thirteen database projects' docs actually took(03.10.2026 um 00:11 Uhr)
•
Sichere ProgrammierungYour security gate always passes. Can it actually block a release?(03.10.2026 um 00:11 Uhr)
•
Sichere Programmierung🚀 Starting my Hacktoberfest journey!(03.10.2026 um 00:12 Uhr)
•
Intelligence View
⚡ tsecurity.de Intelligence

I trusted the code AI wrote for me. My data was silently broken the whole time.

When you're vibe coding with AI, a pattern develops quickly. Describe the feature → get the code → run it → see no errors → move on to the next thing. It's fast…

Beitrag
0
Seite
0
↗ Quelle (dev.to)
Social ReaktionenReagiere als Erste:r — dein Feedback zählt!

When you're vibe coding with AI, a pattern develops quickly.



Describe the feature → get the code → run it → see no errors → move on to the next thing.



It's fast. But "no errors" and "working as intended" are different things. I learned that the hard way.









The feature I added



I built a post-alert tracking system into my crypto bot.



After each alert fires, it was supposed to record the price at 30 minutes, 1 hour, and 4 hours later — building a dataset to answer "when is the best time to sell?"



The bot ran cleanly. No errors. Data flowing into Google Sheets every day.









What I found



One day I opened the spreadsheet: 30-minute column full, 1-hour and 4-hour columns nearly empty.



Why didn't I catch it sooner? To verify the 4-hour entries, you'd need to fire an alert and come back four hours later. The bot looked fine, so I assumed it was working.



The problem was in the code AI had written:




# The broken version
if elapsed >= 30:
record_30min()
elif elapsed >= 60:
record_60min()
elif elapsed >= 240:
record_240min()






Once the 30-minute condition matched, the elif branches never ran. Every alert logged 30 minutes — then silently skipped 1-hour and 4-hour entirely.




# The fix
if elapsed >= 30 and not recorded_30min:
record_30min()
if elapsed >= 60 and not recorded_60min:
record_60min()
if elapsed >= 240 and not recorded_240min:
record_240min()






When I write code myself, I think through the logic line by line. When AI writes it, I check if it runs — and this one ran fine. The structural issue slipped through.









The part that bothered me more



If I'd run analysis on that dataset, I would have concluded: "always sell within 30 minutes."



The data looked clean. No errors, no flags. I would have had no reason to question it. Wrong data → wrong conclusion → wrong strategy, all from a bug that never made a sound.









What changed after this



AI-assisted coding is fast. But asking "does this work?" gets you "yes, it runs." That's not what you actually need to know.



After this, I started asking a different question when reviewing AI-generated code:




"What could be wrong with this?"




That shift caught more issues than anything else I'd tried.

🔍 CTI & Forensik

Cyber Threat Intelligence & Forensik

ATT&CK-Navigator · IoC-Radar · Exploit-Belege
CTI Threat Relationship Graph
Akteure · Techniken · Beziehungen
2 Knoten · 1 Relationen
CVE / Incident Threat Actor Software MITRE ATT&CK CWE Weakness IoC
Ähnliche Beiträge
🔍 Verwandte News

Auch interessante Nachrichten I trusted the code AI wrote for me. My data was silently broken the whole time.

Thematisch verwandte Begriffe: trusted, code, wrote, data · 6 Treffer

Laden...

Videos werden geladen ...

Laden...

Beiträge werden geladen ...

Laden...

Videos werden geladen ...

Laden...

Beiträge werden geladen ...

Laden...

Videos werden geladen ...

Laden...

Beiträge werden geladen ...

Laden...

Videos werden geladen ...

Laden...

Beiträge werden geladen ...

Laden...

Videos werden geladen ...

💬 Kommentare werden geladen…
Zum Aktualisieren ziehen
tsecurity.de Icon
Offline-Lesen, Eilmeldungen & 0ms Ladezeit

Installiere tsecurity.de direkt auf deinen Home-Bildschirm für das ultimative Vollbild-Magazinerlebnis ohne Browser-Leisten.

Nächster Beitrag