REVIEW 3 cited by
Reasoning with LLMs for Zero-Shot Vulnerability Detection
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
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
Automating software vulnerability detection (SVD) remains a critical challenge in an era of increasingly complex and interdependent software systems. Despite significant advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) for code analysis, prevailing evaluation methodologies often lack the \textbf{context-aware robustness} necessary to capture real-world intricacies and cross-component interactions. To address these limitations, we present \textbf{VulnSage}, a comprehensive evaluation framework and a dataset curated from diverse, large-scale open-source system software projects developed in C/C++. Unlike prior datasets, it leverages a heuristic noise pre-filtering approach combined with LLM-based reasoning to ensure a representative and minimally noisy spectrum of vulnerabilities. The framework supports multi-granular analysis across function, file, and inter-function levels and employs four diverse zero-shot prompt strategies: Baseline, Chain-of-Thought, Think, and Think & Verify. Through this evaluation, we uncover that structured reasoning prompts substantially improve LLM performance, with Think & Verify reducing ambiguous responses from 20.3% to 9.1% while increasing accuracy. We further demonstrate that code-specialized models consistently outperform general-purpose alternatives, with performance varying significantly across vulnerability types, revealing that no single approach universally excels across all security contexts. Link to dataset and codes: https://github.com/Erroristotle/VulnSage.git
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
How Reasoning Shapes Social Bias in LLM-Generated Code?
Reasoning before code generation lowers the average bias rate in LLM-generated code from 0.64 to 0.40, and a new probe-based method (ProbeDebias) cuts bias by about 84% while keeping quality nearly unchanged.
-
Everything You Wanted to Know About LLM-based Vulnerability Detection But Were Afraid to Ask
With context-rich prompts that include CWE hints and marked potential vulnerability sites, LLM detectors beat random baselines, but the evaluation may leak the answer.
-
Detecting Zero-Day Web Attacks with an Ensemble of LSTM, GRU, and Stacked Autoencoders
An ensemble of LSTM, GRU, and stacked autoencoders trained only on normal web requests is reported to detect zero-day web attacks with 97.58 percent accuracy and a 0.2 percent false-positive rate on CSIC2012.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.