Pith. sign in

REVIEW 8 cited by

Everything You Wanted to Know About LLM-based Vulnerability Detection But Were Afraid to Ask

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 2504.13474 v1 pith:JFMCL4L2 submitted 2025-04-18 cs.CR

Everything You Wanted to Know About LLM-based Vulnerability Detection But Were Afraid to Ask

classification cs.CR
keywords detectionllmscodellm-basedmodelvulnerabilityacrossbeliefs
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Large Language Models are a promising tool for automated vulnerability detection, thanks to their success in code generation and repair. However, despite widespread adoption, a critical question remains: Are LLMs truly effective at detecting real-world vulnerabilities? Current evaluations, which often assess models on isolated functions or files, ignore the broader execution and data-flow context essential for understanding vulnerabilities. This oversight leads to two types of misleading outcomes: incorrect conclusions and flawed rationales, collectively undermining the reliability of prior assessments. Therefore, in this paper, we challenge three widely held community beliefs: that LLMs are (i) unreliable, (ii) insensitive to code patches, and (iii) performance-plateaued across model scales. We argue that these beliefs are artifacts of context-deprived evaluations. To address this, we propose CORRECT (Context-Rich Reasoning Evaluation of Code with Trust), a new evaluation framework that systematically incorporates contextual information into LLM-based vulnerability detection. We construct a context-rich dataset of 2,000 vulnerable-patched program pairs spanning 99 CWEs and evaluate 13 LLMs across four model families. Our framework elicits both binary predictions and natural-language rationales, which are further validated using LLM-as-a-judge techniques. Our findings overturn existing misconceptions. When provided with sufficient context, SOTA LLMs achieve significantly improved performance (e.g., 0.7 F1-score on key CWEs), with 0.8 precision. We show that most false positives stem from reasoning errors rather than misclassification, and that while model and test-time scaling improve performance, they introduce diminishing returns and trade-offs in recall. Finally, we uncover new flaws in current LLM-based detection systems, such as limited generalization and overthinking biases.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 8 Pith papers

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

  1. ALIBI: Adaptive Agentic Attacks on LLM-Based Vulnerability Detectors via Adversarial Code Comments

    cs.CR 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0

    Adaptive adversarial source-code comments evade four LLM vulnerability detectors at >90% success on 125 real null-pointer bugs without altering program behavior.

  2. DREA: Decoupled Reasoning and Exploration Agents for Repository-Level Vulnerability Detection

    cs.CR 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0

    DREA improves repository-level vulnerability detection by coupling an LLM planner that forms hypotheses with a cheap local explorer that gathers cross-file evidence, lifting paired accuracy from 19-26% to 30-42% at mu...

  3. Antaeus: Hunting Repository-Level Logic Vulnerabilities via Context-Grounded LLM Reasoning

    cs.CR 2026-07 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Antaeus detects 15 logic vulnerabilities across 28 repositories via a pipeline of function prioritization, repository-level LLM reasoning, and comparative validation, outperforming baselines at similar cost.

  4. FuzzingBrain V2: A Multi-Agent LLM System for Automated Vulnerability Discovery and Reproduction

    cs.CR 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    FuzzingBrain V2, a multi-agent LLM system with a novel Suspicious Point abstraction and dual-layer fuzzing, reports 90% detection on a C/C++ benchmark and 29 confirmed zero-day vulnerabilities in real open-source projects.

  5. Three Heads Are Better Than One: A Multi-perspective Reasoning Framework for Enhanced Vulnerability Detection

    cs.SE 2026-05 conditional novelty 6.0

    ReasonVul deploys three LLM agents with independent analysis and structured debate to achieve 40% PairAcc and 72.52% F1 on PrimeVul, outperforming baselines by 81% in PairAcc.

  6. Teaching LLMs Program Semantics via Symbolic Execution Traces

    cs.SE 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Training Qwen3-8B on symbolic execution traces from Soteria improves violation detection in C programs by over 17 points, transfers across five property types, and shows superadditive gains with chain-of-thought.

  7. Do Fine-Tuned LLMs Understand Vulnerabilities? An Investigation into the Semantic Trap

    cs.CR 2026-01 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Fine-tuned decoder-only LLMs fall into a Semantic Trap on vulnerability detection, achieving high scores on unpaired normal code but failing on paired vulnerable-patched code, semantic perturbations, and gap analysis,...

  8. VULPO: Context-Aware Vulnerability Detection via On-Policy LLM Optimization

    cs.CR 2025-11 conditional novelty 6.0

    A 4B LLM trained with judge-scored, difficulty-scaled on-policy RL reaches F1 70.45 on context-aware C/C++ vulnerability detection, comparable to DeepSeek-V3.1, with the caveat that the same judge provided the trainin...