arXiv:2511. 20709v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) and LLM-based coding agents are now used to generate code from natural-language specifications, yet ensuring such code is both functionally correct and secure remains a challenge.
By Rupam Patir, Keyan Guo, Suvadra Barua, Abhijeet Pathak, Dinesh Gudimetla, Jiawei Guo, Hongxin Hu, Haipeng Cai
arXiv:2606. 31159v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are rapidly transforming software development, yet their use in security-critical contexts raises a key question: do models know when their generated code is insecure?
By Mohammed Latif Siddiq, Md. Nafiu Rahman, Joanna C. S. Santos
arXiv:2607. 23088v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are widely used for code generation, yet their security behavior in realistic development workflows remains underexplored.
By Lixun Ma, Ruolong Ma, Bei Wang, Feng Wei, Zhenguang Liu, Lorenzo Cavallaro, Wentao Chen
arXiv:2601. 19138v2 Announce Type: replace-cross 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.
By Wachiraphan Charoenwet, Kla Tantithamthavorn, Patanamon Thongtanunam, Hong Yi Lin, Minwoo Jeong, Ming Wu
arXiv:2509. 22097v5 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language model-powered code agents are rapidly transforming software engineering, yet the security risks of their generated code have become a critical concern.
By Junkai Chen, Huihui Huang, Yunbo Lyu, Junwen An, Jieke Shi, Chengran Yang, Ting Zhang, Haoye Tian, Yikun Li, Zhenhao Li, Xin Zhou, Xing Hu, David Lo
The paper introduces the Static‑Pass Dynamic‑Fail (SPDF) phenomenon, showing that static analysis can miss vulnerabilities that are exploitable at runtime. Using a three‑stage pipeline—static scanning, LLM‑driven CWE reasoning, and autonomous exploit verification—it evaluated 1,355 Python samples and found that 14.53% of samples that passed static checks were actually exploitable. The study highlights that static‑analysis success and runtime security are distinct assurance layers, especially for AI‑generated and security‑sensitive code.
By Jessica Pourleyli, Maitreyee Das Urmi, Glaucia Melo
arXiv:2607. 07881v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used for code generation, but they struggle to generate functional code free of security vulnerabilities.
By Felix Wang, Anudeep Das, Mei Nagappan, N. Asokan
SecureVibe is a training recipe designed to enhance the security of vibe coding by explicitly targeting planning and testing for code security. It combines supervised fine‑tuning on a security suite with post‑training methods (SECUREVIBE_rl and SECUREVIBE_hg) that use verifiable execution feedback and hint‑based self‑supervision. The approach outperforms baselines on multiple security coding benchmarks, improving security pass@1 by up to 6.9 points on BaxBench and 11.5 points on SusVibes, while also boosting functionality pass@1 on both security and generic coding tasks.
By Danqing Wang, Baolin Peng, Zhepei Wei, Isadora White, Wenlin Yao, Hao Cheng, Qianhui Wu, Minseon Kim, Xingdi Yuan, Lei Li, Jianfeng Gao
arXiv:2608. 15092v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: In this work, we introduce WeSCE, a benchmark for quantifying security drift in code editing under weak-security constraints, where tasks specify only functional objectives without explicit security requirements.
By Zhiyu Zhang, Tingyue Wen, Senke Sun, Dengxiang Liang, Enhao Huang
The paper introduces CodeScan, a black-box, vulnerability-oriented scanning framework designed to detect data poisoning and backdoor attacks in code generation large language models (LLMs). CodeScan operates by analyzing structural similarities across multiple code generations, normalizing them with abstract syntax tree (AST) techniques, and then applying LLM-based vulnerability analysis to identify recurring insecure patterns. Evaluations on 117 models across three architectures and multiple sizes show over 97% detection accuracy with fewer false positives compared to prior methods.
By Shenao Yan, Shan Jin, Shimaa Ahmed, Sunpreet Singh Arora, Yiwei Cai, Yizhen Wang, Yuan Hong
arXiv:2610.40735v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Evaluating approaches that improve the security of LLM code generation requires datasets that jointly assess security and functionality and remain ad...
By Zacharie Chenail-Larcher, Daniele Lunghi, Melissa Tessa, Quentin Sti\'evenart, Jacques Klein, Tegawend\'e F. Bissyand\'e, Florent Avellaneda, Naouel Moha
SpecCloak investigates how presenting coding tasks as engineering specifications—via the PseudoSpec template—affects large language models’ refusal to generate harmful code. Experiments on five open-weight models show that specification prompting significantly lowers refusal rates even when risk keywords remain, shifting internal representations toward code-output contexts. Building on this, SpecCloak combines PseudoSpec with discriminator-guided optimization to achieve a 28.91% attack success rate, while SpecReveal offers a defense that detects such attacks with 96.88% accuracy without fine‑tuning the target model.
By Wenbin Chen, Jiexin Wang, Guanting Wu, Jiaxi Liang, Yi Cai