<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Debugging on vnykmshr</title><link>https://blog.vnykmshr.com/writing/tags/debugging/</link><description>Recent content in Debugging on vnykmshr</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://blog.vnykmshr.com/writing/tags/debugging/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Reading code</title><link>https://blog.vnykmshr.com/writing/reading-code/</link><pubDate>Fri, 27 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://blog.vnykmshr.com/writing/reading-code/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;Scanners find what&amp;rsquo;s syntactically wrong. The interesting issues live in assumptions &amp;ndash; and assumptions don&amp;rsquo;t have signatures.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Not scanning, not fuzzing. Just reading code the way you&amp;rsquo;d read it if you were about to own it in production. Entry points, data flows, where input meets trust.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Missing headers, outdated dependencies &amp;ndash; that&amp;rsquo;s the baseline, scanners handle it fine. The interesting issues live a layer deeper. A path that&amp;rsquo;s protected in one subsystem but wide open in another. A parse-time operation that nobody thought to bound. Code that was correct when it was written but the system grew around it.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>