"While individual productivity is soaring, overall throughput, meaning the rate at which secure, stable, production-ready code is deployed, is stagnating or even declining in many cases. The reason is a simple but costly equation: a significant percentage of AI-generated code contains vulnerabilities."
"AI-assisted code always looks correct on the surface (a hallmark of generative AI, which is trained first and foremost to appear correct, whether or not it is correct). But hard-to-detect vulnerabilities in AI-assisted code create bottlenecks in the CI/CD pipeline where the time saved in writing the code is lost or even outweighed by the ensuing security-driven regressions, failed builds, and remediation cycles."
"In some organizations, the initial reaction has been to restrict or tightly control AI tool usage. The benefits are too compelling for developers to ignore, and they will simply use AI on their own, regardless of whatever policy their organization sets. This is the worst of all possible worlds."
Organizations have adopted generative AI coding assistants for significant productivity gains, with developers completing tasks faster and writing more code. However, a paradox emerges: while individual productivity increases, overall throughput of secure, production-ready code stagnates or declines. AI-generated code contains vulnerabilities that appear correct superficially but create bottlenecks in CI/CD pipelines. Security teams face overwhelming alerts from AI-generated vulnerabilities, while developers experience frustration as their velocity decreases. Restricting AI tool usage proves ineffective, as developers adopt shadow AI solutions independently, creating an uncontrolled environment with insecure code.
#ai-coding-assistants #security-vulnerabilities #technical-debt #cicd-pipeline #developer-productivity
Read at DevOps.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]