Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Black-Box Adversarial Attacks on LLM-Based Code Completion

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 2408.02509 v2 pith:FEWLH4GA submitted 2024-08-05 cs.CR cs.LGcs.PLcs.SE

classification cs.CRcs.LGcs.PLcs.SE
keywords codeinseccompletionattackblack-boxllm-basedcopilotdemonstrate
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Modern code completion engines, powered by large language models (LLMs), assist millions of developers with their strong capabilities to generate functionally correct code. Due to this popularity, it is crucial to investigate the security implications of relying on LLM-based code completion. In this work, we demonstrate that state-of-the-art black-box LLM-based code completion engines can be stealthily biased by adversaries to significantly increase their rate of insecure code generation. We present the first attack, named INSEC, that achieves this goal. INSEC works by injecting an attack string as a short comment in the completion input. The attack string is crafted through a query-based optimization procedure starting from a set of carefully designed initialization schemes. We demonstrate INSEC's broad applicability and effectiveness by evaluating it on various state-of-the-art open-source models and black-box commercial services (e.g., OpenAI API and GitHub Copilot). On a diverse set of security-critical test cases, covering 16 CWEs across 5 programming languages, INSEC increases the rate of generated insecure code by more than 50%, while maintaining the functional correctness of generated code. We consider INSEC practical -- it requires low resources and costs less than 10 US dollars to develop on commodity hardware. Moreover, we showcase the attack's real-world deployability, by developing an IDE plug-in that stealthily injects INSEC into the GitHub Copilot extension.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. MOCHA: Are Code Language Models Robust Against Multi-Turn Malicious Coding Prompts?

    cs.CL 2025-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    MOCHA is a benchmark of 10.5K malicious coding prompts, including multi-turn decomposition attacks, showing code LLMs reject these incremental attacks at much lower rates and that fine-tuning on the benchmark improves...

Pith tools