Pith. sign in

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

arxiv 2312.00024 v5 pith:VUILQ6BE submitted 2023-11-13 cs.CR cs.LG

classification cs.CRcs.LG
keywords codellmssecurityvulnerabilitiesaddressapplicationsdatafdsp
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
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}

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Leveraging GPT-4 for Vulnerability-Witnessing Unit Test Generation

    cs.SE 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    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.

  2. Static Analysis as a Feedback Loop: Enhancing LLM-Generated Code Beyond Correctness

    cs.SE 2025-08 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    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%.

  3. Large Language Models in Cybersecurity: Applications, Vulnerabilities, and Defense Techniques

    cs.CR 2025-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A survey that maps LLM applications, vulnerabilities, and defenses across eight cybersecurity domains, but with significant citation and rigor problems.

Pith tools