What to you are the foundational ones? Perhaps CL has them already, or if it's actually a C lib that every other lang uses, CL can use that too. If not, the feedback would at least give people ideas.
From the parent's security standpoint I'm more sympathetic, there's been a lot fewer eyes on CL code, there's no central place to keep track of discovered security issues, and perhaps more vigilance is required against untrusted input compared to other languages. At the same time, every time I've exposed a CL-powered website I've noticed various attempts at e.g. wordpress endpoint discovery and I sleep soundly knowing a wordpress deployment is something I'll never have to worry about or take extra precautions against. Every time I hear about a supply chain attack I also am happy about the choice of CL. (Though in truth it's not to say that such attacks aren't possible, but for various reasons, one of them rather quite embarrassing to the overall ecosystem, pulling a big one off is going to be more difficult.)
Like asn1, relational DB drivers, Redis, protobuf, XML/YAML/JSON parsing, web client/server, and SDKs for stuff like AWS. Not saying Common Lisp lacks well-maintained versions of those, cause I don't know, just that those are the foundational things I wouldn't want LLM-coded.
Also anything that does image/video processing or cryptography. Both are susceptible to severe security vulnerabilities the average programmer wouldn't think about, e.g. https://heif-heist.com
