Chinese coding models write less secure code for Beijing's adversaries. On Qwen3-Coder, we traced the gap to the weights and closed it by removing the model's CCP alignment.
I’m not sure I believe the article… And the model is quite old. Posing here to hear your opinions.
I suppose the reality is that we can’t fully trust any open weight or closed model. It’s worth checking the code for any open source harness or runner you’re using with open weight models for any data collection or other potential problems and being careful about what permissions agents have.
Of course, LLMs can write bad, insecure code in general, so it’s always unwise to trust the output of any model in production without thoroughly vetting it.
That being said, I trust Qwen 3.8 27B running in llama.cpp with OpenCode more than I trust anything from Anthropic or OpenAI, mainly because I’ve seen the code for llama.cpp and a OpenCode and I’ve never seen Qwen do anything suspicious, whereas I know Anthropic and OpenAI would be collecting my data and training their models on it, along with who knows what else.
I suppose the reality is that we can’t fully trust any open weight or closed model. It’s worth checking the code for any open source harness or runner you’re using with open weight models for any data collection or other potential problems and being careful about what permissions agents have.
Of course, LLMs can write bad, insecure code in general, so it’s always unwise to trust the output of any model in production without thoroughly vetting it.
That being said, I trust Qwen 3.8 27B running in llama.cpp with OpenCode more than I trust anything from Anthropic or OpenAI, mainly because I’ve seen the code for llama.cpp and a OpenCode and I’ve never seen Qwen do anything suspicious, whereas I know Anthropic and OpenAI would be collecting my data and training their models on it, along with who knows what else.