Verification of 39 REA reverse-engineering cases: 26 confirmed in use
Understand this story
AIshihzong published a verification checklist, comparing project READMEs, author posts, and official demonstrations one by one, to verify 39 AI reverse-engineering cases claiming to be "built with REA." The conclusion: 26 confirmed using REA, 3 only partially using it, 4 unverified, and another 6 actually used Claude Code, Codex with tools such as Ghidra or IDA, or even manual reverse engineering. The verifier said that because X posts could not be opened from its environment, cases involving X posts were instead based on third-party case records listed in the table.
AI overview based on source reports · Updated 2 days ago
Coverage timeline
Follow the coverage to explore different perspectives.
- Hacker News AIDid it use REA? Checking viral AI reverse-engineering demos
A verification page checks 39 cases described as "built with REA" against each project's README, agent files, author posts or official showcase, finding 26 confirmed, 3 partial, 4 unverified and 6 not REA (mostly Claude Code or Codex with Ghidra or IDA, or manual work). The README column was re-checked on 2026-11-10 with no changes, and X posts could not be opened from the authors' environment. It notes that two small controlled comparisons, rea-lab (482 preregistered runs) and leanrea (36 runs), found no significant gain in solve rate from REA at higher time and cost.
Activity for this story
- Current comparable activity
- 3
- Peak comparable activity
- 10Nov 13 00:00
- Change in the past 24 hours
- -49%
Trends compare the same fully observed participants, which may cover fewer participants than current activity. Move the pointer or tap the chart to inspect hourly activity; use the left and right arrow keys with a keyboard.