Re: [PATCH RFC] coding-assistants: simplify attribution

[David Disseldorp]

On Wed, 01 Jul 2026 10:08:11 -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:

> > Why precisely do we require all this detailed information about what
> > specific coding assistant was used?  
> 
> From my memory of the discussions:
> 
> - If a specific LLM turns out to be in a bad position with regard to
>   some copyright ruling, we can identify the commits that might have
>   been tainted by it.
> 
> - Similarly should an LLM prove to have an inclination toward specific
>   types of security issues.
> 
> Whether either of these would ever actually prove useful is not
> something I can hazard a guess for.

In https://lwn.net/Articles/854645/ (An update on the UMN affair) you
documented a case where an organization acted maliciously, resulting in
the need to audit (and revert) numerous commits based on git authorship
metadata. IMO the existing Assisted-by tags, although far from perfect,
will be useful for audits when a specific LLM coding assistant is
similarly found to be generating malicious output.

Thanks, David