Why Engine-Plus-LLM Beats Pure-LLM: Griffin vs Mythos
The structural case for engine-plus-LLM security reasoning — and why pure-LLM products in the Mythos class hit a ceiling that no parameter count can raise.
Deep dives, practical guides, and incident analyses from engineers who build Safeguard. No fluff, no vendor FUD — just what you need to ship secure software.
The structural case for engine-plus-LLM security reasoning — and why pure-LLM products in the Mythos class hit a ceiling that no parameter count can raise.
Retrieval context poisoning scales differently than direct prompt injection. The attacker's leverage grows with the RAG ingest surface.
An architectural comparison of Griffin AI's engine-grounded reasoning stack against the pure-LLM pattern that Mythos-class products rely on.
LLM selection is ultimately a cost-quality optimisation under workflow constraints. The curve is not smooth, and the right point on it depends on where errors land in your pipeline.
A function whose output space is finite and enumerable can be secured by testing. A function whose output space is every string of tokens up to some length cannot. That difference quietly invalidates most classical security contracts.
The first enforcement window under the EU AI Act has closed. The actual pattern of enforcement looks different from the one vendors and advocacy groups predicted.
A senior engineer's side-by-side look at Griffin AI and Mythos — why engine-grounded reasoning beats pure-LLM security intuition when the audit clock starts.
Reasoning models have arrived in security tooling. Evaluating them requires different methodology from evaluating classification or generation models. Here is what good evaluation looks like.
When an agent can call tools, the permission boundary is no longer between the user and the system. It is between the model's current beliefs and everything the model can reach. That is a much harder boundary to defend.
Weekly insights on software supply chain security, delivered to your inbox.