REVIEW 3 cited by
Can LLMs Patch Security Issues?
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown impressive proficiency in code generation. Unfortunately, these models share a weakness with their human counterparts: producing code that inadvertently has security vulnerabilities. These vulnerabilities could allow unauthorized attackers to access sensitive data or systems, which is unacceptable for safety-critical applications. In this work, we propose Feedback-Driven Security Patching (FDSP), where LLMs automatically refine generated, vulnerable code. Our approach leverages automatic static code analysis to empower the LLM to generate and implement potential solutions to address vulnerabilities. We address the research communitys needs for safe code generation by introducing a large-scale dataset, PythonSecurityEval, covering the diversity of real-world applications, including databases, websites and operating systems. We empirically validate that FDSP outperforms prior work that uses self-feedback from LLMs by up to 17.6% through our procedure that injects targeted, external feedback. Code and data are available at \url{https://github.com/Kamel773/LLM-code-refine}
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
Leveraging GPT-4 for Vulnerability-Witnessing Unit Test Generation
GPT-4 generated syntactically valid vulnerability-witnessing unit tests in 66.5% of runs, semantically valid tests in 7.5%, and useful templates in 68.5%, suggesting a semi-automated role.
-
Static Analysis as a Feedback Loop: Enhancing LLM-Generated Code Beyond Correctness
Feeding static-analysis warnings back to GPT-4o over ten iterations cut security issues from over 40% to about 13%, readability issues from over 80% to about 11%, and reliability warnings from over 50% to about 11%.
-
Large Language Models in Cybersecurity: Applications, Vulnerabilities, and Defense Techniques
A survey that maps LLM applications, vulnerabilities, and defenses across eight cybersecurity domains, but with significant citation and rigor problems.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.