Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Towards Effective Complementary Security Analysis using Large Language Models

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 2506.16899 v2 pith:BAPGYIHS submitted 2025-06-20 cs.CR cs.AI

Towards Effective Complementary Security Analysis using Large Language Models

classification cs.CR cs.AI
keywords llmssecuritysastanalysisdetectiontoolsweaknessesapproximately
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

A key challenge in security analysis is the manual evaluation of potential security weaknesses generated by static application security testing (SAST) tools. Numerous false positives (FPs) in these reports reduce the effectiveness of security analysis. We propose using Large Language Models (LLMs) to improve the assessment of SAST findings. We investigate the ability of LLMs to reduce FPs while trying to maintain a perfect true positive rate, using datasets extracted from the OWASP Benchmark (v1.2) and a real-world software project. Our results indicate that advanced prompting techniques, such as Chain-of-Thought and Self-Consistency, substantially improve FP detection. Notably, some LLMs identified approximately 62.5% of FPs in the OWASP Benchmark dataset without missing genuine weaknesses. Combining detections from different LLMs would increase this FP detection to approximately 78.9%. Additionally, we demonstrate our approach's generalizability using a real-world dataset covering five SAST tools, three programming languages, and infrastructure files. The best LLM detected 33.85% of all FPs without missing genuine weaknesses, while combining detections from different LLMs would increase this detection to 38.46%. Our findings highlight the potential of LLMs to complement traditional SAST tools, enhancing automation and reducing resources spent addressing false alarms.

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Using LLMs to Adjudicate Static-Analysis Alerts with Error Reduction Techniques

    cs.SE 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.5

    Mid-tier reasoning LLMs with consistency checks and LLM reasoning evaluation adjudicate static-analysis alerts at ≥98% recall and ≥94.8% specificity across Juliet, FormAI, and SV-COMP.