Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Large Language Model (LLM) for Software Security: Code Analysis, Malware Analysis, Reverse Engineering

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 2504.07137 v1 pith:3RWL7XTD submitted 2025-04-07 cs.CR cs.AI

classification cs.CRcs.AI
keywords malwareanalysiscybersecuritycodedetectionmodelsautomateddatasets
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) have recently emerged as powerful tools in cybersecurity, offering advanced capabilities in malware detection, generation, and real-time monitoring. Numerous studies have explored their application in cybersecurity, demonstrating their effectiveness in identifying novel malware variants, analyzing malicious code structures, and enhancing automated threat analysis. Several transformer-based architectures and LLM-driven models have been proposed to improve malware analysis, leveraging semantic and structural insights to recognize malicious intent more accurately. This study presents a comprehensive review of LLM-based approaches in malware code analysis, summarizing recent advancements, trends, and methodologies. We examine notable scholarly works to map the research landscape, identify key challenges, and highlight emerging innovations in LLM-driven cybersecurity. Additionally, we emphasize the role of static analysis in malware detection, introduce notable datasets and specialized LLM models, and discuss essential datasets supporting automated malware research. This study serves as a valuable resource for researchers and cybersecurity professionals, offering insights into LLM-powered malware detection and defence strategies while outlining future directions for strengthening cybersecurity resilience.

Discussion (0). Sign in 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. Weakest Link in the Chain: Security Vulnerabilities in Advanced Reasoning Models

    cs.AI 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Reasoning-augmented LLMs are on average about 3 points more robust to prompt attacks, but category-level results flip this, including a 32-point higher success rate for tree-of-attacks jailbreaks.

  2. TraceRAG: A LLM-Based Framework for Explainable Android Malware Detection and Behavior Analysis

    cs.SE 2025-09 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    An LLM-based RAG framework that retrieves method-level Java code snippets to explain and detect malicious behavior in Android apps.

  3. Can Small GenAI Language Models Rival Large Language Models in Understanding Application Behavior?

    cs.SE 2025-11 reject novelty 3.0 of 10

    A five-model benchmark on a self-built malware dataset shows the smallest strong model, Phi-4-mini, outperforming 7-8B models, contradicting the paper's own 'larger models win' framing.

Pith tools