Our CTO Built an AI Gateway Processing $2.8B. It Took Me 8 Months to Prove It Would Approve Illegal Loans. Then the Regulators Called.
The article discusses the challenges faced by a QA lead in a company that developed an AI gateway processing $2.8 billion. Despite the system being formally verified as safe, the author uncovered issues related to input distribution drift and semantic drift that could lead to regulatory scrutiny. The narrative highlights the tension between formal verification and real-world performance in AI systems.
- ▪The AI gateway was built by a co-founder and has processed over $2.8 billion in transactions.
- ▪The QA lead spent eight months proving that the system could approve illegal loans despite its formal verification.
- ▪Three incidents occurred post-deployment that highlighted issues not covered by formal verification.
Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand
try { if(localStorage) { let currentUser = localStorage.getItem('current_user'); if (currentUser) { currentUser = JSON.parse(currentUser); if (currentUser.id === 3941526) { document.getElementById('article-show-container').classList.add('current-user-is-article-author'); } } } } catch (e) { console.error(e); } xulingfeng Posted on Jun 3 Our CTO Built an AI Gateway Processing $2.8B. It Took Me 8 Months to Prove It Would Approve Illegal Loans. Then the Regulators Called. A story about formal verification and adversarial testing. About systems that are mathematically safe, and systems that don't fail in the real world — and which one regulators actually care about. Has your company ever made a decision using AI that just felt wrong? A loan that got approved when it shouldn't have.
…
Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at DEV.to (Top).
Discussion
0 commentsMore from DEV.to (Top)
