Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 cited by

AutoSafeCoder: A Multi-Agent Framework for Securing LLM Code Generation through Static Analysis and Fuzz Testing

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

arxiv 2409.10737 v2 pith:XLGSWIVS submitted 2024-09-16 cs.SE cs.AI

classification cs.SEcs.AI
keywords codegenerationagentdynamicframeworkllmsmulti-agentsecurity
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Recent advancements in automatic code generation using large language models (LLMs) have brought us closer to fully automated secure software development. However, existing approaches often rely on a single agent for code generation, which struggles to produce secure, vulnerability-free code. Traditional program synthesis with LLMs has primarily focused on functional correctness, often neglecting critical dynamic security implications that happen during runtime. To address these challenges, we propose AutoSafeCoder, a multi-agent framework that leverages LLM-driven agents for code generation, vulnerability analysis, and security enhancement through continuous collaboration. The framework consists of three agents: a Coding Agent responsible for code generation, a Static Analyzer Agent identifying vulnerabilities, and a Fuzzing Agent performing dynamic testing using a mutation-based fuzzing approach to detect runtime errors. Our contribution focuses on ensuring the safety of multi-agent code generation by integrating dynamic and static testing in an iterative process during code generation by LLM that improves security. Experiments using the SecurityEval dataset demonstrate a 13% reduction in code vulnerabilities compared to baseline LLMs, with no compromise in functionality.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Spec2RTL-Agent: Automated Hardware Code Generation from Complex Specifications Using LLM Agent Systems

    cs.AR 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    On three NIST crypto standards (AES, DSS, HMAC), Spec2RTL-Agent generates RTL via a multi-agent pipeline from pseudocode to Python to synthesizable C++, reporting 3/3 correct designs with about 4.3 human interventions...

  2. SCGAgent: Recreating the Benefits of Reasoning Models for Secure Code Generation with Agentic Workflows

    cs.CR 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    An agentic workflow with security guidelines and LLM-generated unit tests improves secure code generation on CWEval C tasks from 61% to 76% Func-Sec@1 with Sonnet-3.7, at roughly 98% of its original functionality.

  3. The Illusion of Secure LLM Code: Closing the Security Gap via Iterative Reprompting

    cs.CR 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.5 of 10

    Across five coding assistants, authentication code is insecure under basic or generic-secure prompts; single-shot NIST help improves it, but only iterative reprompting approaches defense-in-depth.

  4. Vibe Coding vs. Agentic Coding: Fundamentals and Practical Implications of Agentic AI

    cs.SE 2025-05 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

    A qualitative taxonomy positions vibe coding and agentic coding as complementary paradigms rather than rivals in AI-assisted software development.

Pith tools