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:2509. 14335v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Automated malware classifiers achieve strong detection performance, but auditing requires more than flagging a sample: analysts must explain malicious behaviors and justify them with code evidence.
By Xinran Zheng, Xingzhi Qian, Yiling He, Shuo Yang, Lorenzo Cavallaro
arXiv:2609.39902v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Large language models have achieved remarkable capabilities across diverse domains, yet their safety alignment remains vulnerable to jailbreak attack...
By Zhen Liang, Hai Huang, Wentao Chen
The paper investigates whether code large language models (CodeLLMs) inadvertently reproduce proprietary or sensitive code by evaluating seven state‑of‑the‑art training data detection (TDD) methods on eight CodeLLMs. It introduces CodeSnitch, a benchmark of 9,000 function‑level code samples across three languages, each labeled as included or excluded from training data, and applies mutation strategies based on the Type‑1 to Type‑4 code clone taxonomy to test TDD robustness. The study offers a systematic assessment of current TDD techniques for code and suggests directions for developing more effective detection methods.
By Tianlin Li, Yunxiang Wei, Zhiming Li, Aishan Liu, Qing Guo, Xianglong Liu, Dongning Sun, Yang Liu
arXiv:2608. 14303v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used for code generation, yet they remain vulnerable to prompts that elicit insecure implementations.
By Francesco Quinzan, Noor Munir, Yishun Lu, Stephen Roberts
arXiv:2408. 16028v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Supervised-learning-based vulnerability detectors often fall short due to limited labelled training data.
By Weizhou Wang, Eric Liu, Xiangyu Guo, Xiao Hu, Ilya Grishchenko, David Lie
arXiv:2607. 15970v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The flourishing code hosting platforms and coding agents enable even beginners with private data to build tailored Machine Learning (ML) models using available code quickly.
By Xukun Luan, Yuhui Gong, Gang Zhang, Zixuan Huang, Yuanguo Bi, Xuesong Li, Jinyan Liu
arXiv:2606. 20436v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Malware analysts often inspect compiled binaries through decompiled pseudo-C, when source code is unavailable.
By Bercan Turkmen, Vyas Raina
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:2605. 26595v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are often fine-tuned on uncurated text datasets that adversaries can poison.
By Zedian Shao, Charles Fleming, Teodora Baluta
SCRIPTIOC-BENCH is a benchmark designed to evaluate how well large language models can statically extract indicators of compromise (IOCs) from script-based malware. It contains 634 manually verified JavaScript, PowerShell, and VBScript samples and covers four IOC types—URLs, domains, IP addresses, and filesystem artifacts—while distinguishing between directly exposed and encoded indicators. Experiments show that even the best models achieve only 65.4 F1, and a false‑positive taxonomy is introduced to analyze error patterns, with two mitigations (deterministic string utilities and task‑specific adaptation) improving precision and shifting errors toward sample‑grounded mismatches.
By Hanna Kim, Jian Cui, Minkyoo Song, Hwanjo Heo, Seungwon Shin, Kimin Lee, Xiaojing Liao
arXiv:2606. 18619v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The advent of agentic vulnerability detection is already becoming a watershed moment for software security.
By Zhengxiong Luo, Mehtab Zafar, Dylan Wolff, Abhik Roychoudhury