Glasswing维护七个月后发现有限

VulnCheck Community gives you free access to VulnCheck KEV, NVD++, Initial Access Community, and VulnCheck XDB

Join Now

Key Takeaways:

· ul]:my-0">Seven months into Project Glasswing, VulnCheck has tracked 442 CVEs attributable to Anthropic, roughly 0.5% of all CVEs published this year, with only two identified as exploited in the wild.

Of Anthropic’s 37,966 reported findings, only 7,349 (19.4%) have been made public and just 217 have been marked fixed.

· ul]:my-0">Since September, Anthropic has added nearly 12,000 findings while recording just 15 additional fixes, widening the gap between discovery and remediation.

· ul]:my-0">Roughly 1,654 findings (4.4%) have been marked as duplicates, nearly eight times the number fixed, and another 419 have been withdrawn.

· ul]:my-0">Anthropic’s claimed true positive rate has risen from 90.8% to 94.2%, raising questions about how it accounts for duplicates and withdrawn findings.

· ul]:my-0">Anthropic’s OSS Scanner shifts validation work to maintainers, with curl rejecting 19 of 34 published reports as vulnerabilities, confirming six as low severity and leaving nine awaiting assessment. Also putting Anthropic's true positive rates into question.

We're seven months into Anthropic's flagship Project Glasswing, and it's time for another update on the results. I've been tracking the project to see whether its claims are overhyped or grounded in reality.

As we all recall, Anthropic launched Project Glasswing on April 7th, claiming, "We have identified thousands of additional high- and critical-severity vulnerabilities that we are working on responsibly disclosing to open source maintainers." What surprised me was how little evidence the project offered, which made me wonder whether this was more of an overhyped marketing campaign.

That said, we shouldn't overlook that AI is an effective tool for finding vulnerabilities. But that story goes well beyond any single frontier model's capabilities.

If you're just catching up, this builds on my earlier posts:

· ul]:my-0">code]:outline-0 [&>code]:border-dashed [&>code]:outline-primary/25 focus-visible:[&>code]:outline-3 hover:[&>code]:border-primary hover:[&>code]:text-primary focus-visible:[&>code]:border-primary focus-visible:[&>code]:text-primary transition-colors [&>code]:transition-colors">Tracking CVEs Attributed to Anthropic Researchers and Project Glasswing - April 15

· ul]:my-0">code]:outline-0 [&>code]:border-dashed [&>code]:outline-primary/25 focus-visible:[&>code]:outline-3 hover:[&>code]:border-primary hover:[&>code]:text-primary focus-visible:[&>code]:border-primary focus-visible:[&>code]:text-primary transition-colors [&>code]:transition-colors">Observations on Anthropic's Vulnerability Disclosure Ledger - June 9

· ul]:my-0">code]:outline-0 [&>code]:border-dashed [&>code]:outline-primary/25 focus-visible:[&>code]:outline-3 hover:[&>code]:border-primary hover:[&>code]:text-primary focus-visible:[&>code]:border-primary focus-visible:[&>code]:text-primary transition-colors [&>code]:transition-colors">The Anthropic Glasswing Receipts Are Starting to Trickle In - September 8

So let's look at the results…

a]:rounded-sm [&>a]:outline-primary/25 [&>a]:focus-visible:outline-3 [&>a>code]:border-dashed hover:[&>a>code]:border-primary hover:[&>a>code]:text-primary [&>a>code]:text-xl/7 [&>a>code]:font-bold [&>a>code]:transition-colors">Tracking Anthropic-Discovered Vulnerabilities

I started tracking Anthropic's discovered vulnerabilities on April 17th, shortly after launch, in an open source repo called code]:outline-0 [&>code]:border-dashed [&>code]:outline-primary/25 focus-visible:[&>code]:outline-3 hover:[&>code]:border-primary hover:[&>code]:text-primary focus-visible:[&>code]:border-primary focus-visible:[&>code]:text-primary transition-colors [&>code]:transition-colors">Anthropic Credited CVEs. The goal was to see whether Anthropic's claims lived up to the hype. This was before Anthropic launched its own code]:outline-0 [&>code]:border-dashed [&>code]:outline-primary/25 focus-visible:[&>code]:outline-3 hover:[&>code]:border-primary hover:[&>code]:text-primary focus-visible:[&>code]:border-primary focus-visible:[&>code]:text-primary transition-colors [&>code]:transition-colors">disclosure ledger, which is only updated in infrequent bulk batches.

My repo tracks every vulnerability attributable to Anthropic using CVE records, GHSAs, Linux kernel commits, and Anthropic's own ledger. I also manually audit advisories to catch CVEs that might otherwise get overlooked.

After seven months, I've tracked 442 CVEs attributable to Anthropic. That's an average of just 63 per month. Out of the 93,450 CVEs published this year, that's only about 0.5% of all CVEs.

For comparison, Anthropic's own public ledger lists just 217 fixed vulnerabilities, so I've tracked more than twice as many as Anthropic has disclosed itself.

You may recall that Glasswing launched with the message that we'd entered the Mythos era of vulnerability discovery. But are these vulnerabilities actually useful to attackers? To find out, I've been tracking Anthropic-discovered CVEs against VulnCheck KEV. So far, only 2 of the 442 have been exploited in the wild, just 0.45%. (CVE-2026-61500 and CVE-2026-26980)

When Anthropic first launched its ledger in May, it reported 23,019 findings and a 90.8% true positive rate. As of its most recent update on November 2nd, there are 37,966 findings and just 217 fixes. That looks like a staggering failure to me, but let's take a closer look.

Of the 37,966 findings Anthropic reports, only 7,349 (19.4%) have been made public. Just 217 of those have been marked fixed. The more glaring number is that 4.4% (1,654) of the project's findings have already been marked as duplicates, 7.5x more duplicates than fixes. On top of that, 419 findings have been withdrawn. It seems odd that the ledger now claims a 94.2% true positive rate, up from 90.8% at launch, when more findings have been withdrawn or marked as duplicates than fixed, likely a feedback loop missing to the triage rates listed as “True Positives”.

The trend since my September update is even more telling:

th:first-child]:rounded-ss-md [&:first-child>th:last-child]:rounded-se-md [&:last-child>td:first-child]:rounded-es-md [&:last-child>td:last-child]:rounded-ee-md">September 8November 2Change

th:first-child]:rounded-ss-md [&:first-child>th:last-child]:rounded-se-md [&:last-child>td:first-child]:rounded-es-md [&:last-child>td:last-child]:rounded-ee-md">Total findings26,15337,966+11,813

th:first-child]:rounded-ss-md [&:first-child>th:last-child]:rounded-se-md [&:last-child>td:first-child]:rounded-es-md [&:last-child>td:last-child]:rounded-ee-md">Made public2,736 (10.5%)7,349 (19.4%)+4,613

th:first-child]:rounded-ss-md [&:first-child>th:last-child]:rounded-se-md [&:last-child>td:first-child]:rounded-es-md [&:last-child>td:last-child]:rounded-ee-md">Fixed202217+15

th:first-child]:rounded-ss-md [&:first-child>th:last-child]:rounded-se-md [&:last-child>td:first-child]:rounded-es-md [&:last-child>td:last-child]:rounded-ee-md">Withdrawn245419+174

Evidence