REVIEW 1 cited by
AgenticSCR: An Autonomous Agentic Secure Code Review for Immature Vulnerabilities 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
read the original abstract
Secure code review is critical during pre-integration, where Atlassian developers rely on lightweight analysis tools, while deep security assessment is deferred to later stages, delaying feedback and increasing remediation costs. Existing static analyzers are often noisy and struggle with context-dependent or partially manifested vulnerabilities, while static large language model (LLM) reviewers are constrained by context windows and lack tool interaction. Agentic AI, which combines LLMs with code navigation, shows promise; however, its effectiveness for early-stage secure code review remains underexplored. We present AgenticSCR, an agentic secure code reviewer augmented with security-focused semantic memory that grounds reasoning in structured security knowledge to detect vulnerabilities before they fully manifest. AgenticSCR achieves at least 153% relative improvement in generating comments with correct localization, vulnerability type, and relevance over static LLM baseline, multi-agent reviewer, and SAST tools. In a shadow deployment, 54% of its comments were validated by security engineers for developer reporting, demonstrating practical utility while underscoring the difficulty of the task. These findings position the security-focused semantic memory as a promising direction for agentic secure code review, enabling early-stage vulnerability identification. Our approach builds an important step toward reliable localization, detection, and explanation in shift-left security practices
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
PRWeaver: Evaluating LLM-Based Code Auditors against Long-Horizon Malicious Pull Requests
A benchmark of 832 matched attack renderings shows long-horizon malicious pull requests evade LLM code auditors most when benign and malicious changes share the active review window.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.