As far as I can tell, the only connection between those is, that CISA released this alert which mentions multiple unrelated advisories in one post. Which happens to be the Siemens Palo Alto and another unrelated Hitachi advisory in RTU500: https://www.cisa.gov/news-events/alerts/2024/04/25/cisa-rele...
Isn't the tool doing its job in that case? I wouldn't generally expect it to independently determine that an otherwise reliable source made a mistake. In fact I feel like that would be a really bad idea.
Imagine if a relatively clueless intern left something out of a report because the textbook "seemed wrong".
Saying that the input data is wrong and the AI didn't hallucinate that data is also kind of a "trust me bro" statement.
The Mandiant feed is not public, so I cannot check what was fed to it.
I don't really care why its wrong. It is wrong. And using that as the example prompt in your announcement is an interesting choice.
As far as I can tell, the only connection between those is, that CISA released this alert which mentions multiple unrelated advisories in one post. Which happens to be the Siemens Palo Alto and another unrelated Hitachi advisory in RTU500: https://www.cisa.gov/news-events/alerts/2024/04/25/cisa-rele...