Unverified50% confidenceFactExact time
Vulnerability fixed in 3.0.1: claims comparing ASTs or bytecode could still pass via the comment canary; subsequently the canary added no-op assignments to change the syntax tree and bytecode, but this was a partial fix, and claims that read only a smaller fragment of the syntax tree could still pass.
1
Sources
50%
Confidence
Medium-term (~90 days)
Relevance
10/15/2026
First Seen
Valid until: 1/13/2027
Sources
Related Entities
Related Claims
UnverifiedWhen Tree-sitter modifies a line of code, it only updates the affected nodes in the syntax tree rather than re-parsing the entire file.66% similarUnverifiedPlacing the run number at the beginning of the prompt rather than the end can break Ollama's prefix cache hits, forcing full processing of the input from scratch.65% similarUnverifiedv1.4.0 fixes an abnormal merge logic for custom-code in the messages resource.65% similarUnverifiedWhether prompt caching hits depends on byte-for-byte consistency of the request prefix; if even one character at the beginning differs, the entire cache is invalidated.65% similarUnverifiedAST校验关注代码的结构语义而非文本表面形式，能正确识别功能等价但文本不同的代码64% similar
Cite This Claim
Stable URI
https://kongchang.com/claim/1033566API
curl https://kongchang.com/api/v1/knowledge/claims/1033566MCP
get_claim(id=1033566)