The claim

“Code written with AI assistants contains more security vulnerabilities than code written without them.”

Began as a single source, before casesByPsamiKoinovera teamPublished 4 Oct 2026
Disputes

Lost at C: A User Study on the Security Implications of Large Language Model Code Assistants

A C-programming user study did not find a substantial increase in critical security bugs from AI assistance. Challenges generalisation from other experiments.[1]

[1] Lost at C: A User Study on the Security Implications of Large Language Model Code AssistantsAcademic Paper

arXiv.org · 27 Feb 2023

Passage from the sourceOur results indicate that the security impact in this setting (low-level C with pointer and array manipulations) is small: AI-assisted users produce critical security bugs at a rate no greater than 10% more than the control, indicating the use of LLMs does not introduce new security risks.

Rate or review this source

How readers rated the reasoning

These rate the argument. Each source is rated separately, on the source. Neither is a verdict on the claim.

No one has rated this case yet.

Review notes

Short, specific corrections to this case’s reasoning. A full opposing argument belongs in a case of its own.

Sign in to add note

Loading review notes…

Gathering the latest community-submitted evidence.