zlacker

I think you're underestimating (1) how bad most B2B is (from a bug and security vulnerability perspective) & (2) how little B2B companies' engineers understand about how their customers are using their products.

The frequency of mind-bogglingly stupid 1+1=3 errors (where 1+1 is a specific well-known problem in a business domain and 3 is the known answer) cuts against your 'professional SaaS can do it better' argument.

And to be clear: I'm talking about 'outsourced dev to lowest-cost resources' B2B SaaS, not 'have a team of shit-hot developers' SaaS.

The former of which, sadly, comprises the bulk of the industry. Especially after PE acquisition of products.

Furthermore, I'm not convinced that coding LLMs + scanning aren't capable of surpassing the average developer in code security. Especially since it's a brute force problem: 'ensure there's no gap by meticulously checking each of 500 things.'

Auto code scanning for security hasn't been a significant area of investment because the benefits are nebulous. If you already must have human developers writing code, then why not have them also review it?

In contrast, scanning being a requirement to enabling fast-path citizen-developer LLM app creation changes the value proposition (and thus incentive to build good, quality products).

It's been mentioned in other threads, but Fire/Supabase-style 'bolt-on security-critical components' is the short term solution I'd expect to evolve. There's no reason from-scratch auth / object storage / RBAC needs to be built most of the time.

>>ethbr1+(OP)
I’m just imagining the sweat on the poor IT managers’ brow.

They already lock down everything enterprise wide and hate low-code apps and services.

But in this day and age, who knows. The cynical take is that it doesn’t matter and nobody cares. Have your remaining handful of employees generate the software they need from the magic box. If there’s a security breach and they expose customer data again… who cares?

>>agentu+Xa
That sweat doesn't lessen dealing with nightmare fly-by-night vendors for whatever business application a department wants.

Sometimes, the devil you know is preferable -- at least then you control the source.

Folks fail to realize the status quo is often the status quo because it's optimal for a historical set of conditions.

Previously... what would your average business user be able to do productively with an IDE? Weighed against security risks? And so the point that was established.

If suddenly that business user can add substantial amounts of value to the org, I'd be very surprised if that point doesn't shift.

It matters AND...

>>ethbr1+te1
Yeah. I used to manage a team that built a kind of low-code SaaS solution to several big enterprise clients. I sat in on several calls with our sales people and the customer’s IT department.

They liked buying SAP or M$ because it was fully integrated and turnkey. Every SaaS vendor they added had to be SOC2, authenticate with SAML, and each integration had to be audited… it was a lot of work for them.

And we were highly trained, certified developers. I had to sign documents and verify our stack with regulatory consultants.

I just don’t see that fear going away with agents and LLM prompts from frontline workers who have no training in IT security, management, etc. There’s a reason why AI tech needs humans in the loop: to take the blame when they thumbs up what it outputs.