Demystifying the Mythos or Disrupting Bugonomics? From Zero-Day Asymmetry to Defender Remediation Throughput
arXiv SecurityArchived May 26, 2026✓ Full text saved
arXiv:2605.24632v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Recent demonstrations of large language models producing candidate and confirmed vulnerabilities in production software have renewed the narrative that AI will reshape offensive and defensive security. Headlines emphasize capability; they rarely interrogate costs and incentives. This paper examines LLM-driven vulnerability discovery through a bugonomics lens: the operational economics of producing, proving, prioritizing, and fixing security-relevan
Full text archived locally
✦ AI Summary· Claude Sonnet
--> Computer Science > Cryptography and Security arXiv:2605.24632 (cs) [Submitted on 23 May 2026] Title: Demystifying the Mythos or Disrupting Bugonomics? From Zero-Day Asymmetry to Defender Remediation Throughput Authors: Alfredo Pesoli , Herman Errico , Lorenzo Cavallaro View a PDF of the paper titled Demystifying the Mythos or Disrupting Bugonomics? From Zero-Day Asymmetry to Defender Remediation Throughput, by Alfredo Pesoli and 2 other authors View PDF HTML (experimental) Abstract: Recent demonstrations of large language models producing candidate and confirmed vulnerabilities in production software have renewed the narrative that AI will reshape offensive and defensive security. Headlines emphasize capability; they rarely interrogate costs and incentives. This paper examines LLM-driven vulnerability discovery through a bugonomics lens: the operational economics of producing, proving, prioritizing, and fixing security-relevant defects. Historically, the most visible high-end bugonomics was offense-priced because production-grade zero-days and exploit chains were expensive specialist outputs for governments, brokers, and offensive vendors. Defender-side bugonomics already existed in vulnerability research, reward programs, and vendor remediation work; LLM-assisted systems change its scale and distribution. They make candidate generation, code comprehension, harness construction, proof-of-impact drafting, and report preparation cheaper at codebase scale. Exploits and proofs of concept remain important, but in defender workflows they primarily prove impact, guide prioritization, and justify remediation. The resulting bottleneck is not only finding more bugs; it is absorbing, validating, triaging, patching, and shipping a larger stream of reports. Using public data from Anthropic's Mythos Preview and Mozilla Firefox collaborations, along with public exploit-market price anchors and vulnerability reward programs, we argue that the near-term shift is not simply more zero-days. It is a move toward broader defender remediation throughput: low-signal candidates become cheaper, evidence-rich remediation become more important, and scarce capacity shifts toward maintainer review and release work. The effect is acute in open source, where LLM-assisted discovery can increase report volume while maintainer-side validation, triage, funding, and release capacity may not scale. Subjects: Cryptography and Security (cs.CR) ; Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Machine Learning (cs.LG) Cite as: arXiv:2605.24632 [cs.CR] (or arXiv:2605.24632v1 [cs.CR] for this version) https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2605.24632 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration) Submission history From: Lorenzo Cavallaro [ view email ] [v1] Sat, 23 May 2026 15:43:45 UTC (24 KB) Full-text links: Access Paper: View a PDF of the paper titled Demystifying the Mythos or Disrupting Bugonomics? From Zero-Day Asymmetry to Defender Remediation Throughput, by Alfredo Pesoli and 2 other authors View PDF HTML (experimental) TeX Source view license Current browse context: cs.CR < prev | next > new | recent | 2026-05 Change to browse by: cs cs.AI cs.LG References & Citations NASA ADS Google Scholar Semantic Scholar export BibTeX citation Loading... BibTeX formatted citation × loading... Data provided by: Bookmark Bibliographic Tools Bibliographic and Citation Tools Bibliographic Explorer Toggle Bibliographic Explorer ( What is the Explorer? ) Connected Papers Toggle Connected Papers ( What is Connected Papers? ) Litmaps Toggle Litmaps ( What is Litmaps? ) scite.ai Toggle scite Smart Citations ( What are Smart Citations? ) Code, Data, Media Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article alphaXiv Toggle alphaXiv ( What is alphaXiv? ) Links to Code Toggle CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers ( What is CatalyzeX? ) DagsHub Toggle DagsHub ( What is DagsHub? ) GotitPub Toggle Gotit.pub ( What is GotitPub? ) Huggingface Toggle Hugging Face ( What is Huggingface? ) ScienceCast Toggle ScienceCast ( What is ScienceCast? ) Demos Demos Replicate Toggle Replicate ( What is Replicate? ) Spaces Toggle Hugging Face Spaces ( What is Spaces? ) Spaces Toggle TXYZ.AI ( What is TXYZ.AI? ) Related Papers Recommenders and Search Tools Link to Influence Flower Influence Flower ( What are Influence Flowers? ) Core recommender toggle CORE Recommender ( What is CORE? ) Author Venue Institution Topic About arXivLabs arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website. Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them. Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs . Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax ( What is MathJax? )