LLM4Vuln: A Unified Evaluation Framework for Decoupling and Enhancing LLMs' Vulnerability Reasoning

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2401.16185v2
• Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2024 15:03:51 GMT
• Title: LLM4Vuln: A Unified Evaluation Framework for Decoupling and Enhancing LLMs' Vulnerability Reasoning
• Authors: Yuqiang Sun, Daoyuan Wu, Yue Xue, Han Liu, Wei Ma, Lyuye Zhang, Yang Liu, Yingjiu Li,
• Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated significant potential in various tasks, including vulnerability detection. This paper aims to isolate LLMs' vulnerability reasoning from other capabilities, such as vulnerability knowledge adoption. We conducted experiments with 97 ground-truth vulnerabilities and 97 non-vulnerable cases in Solidity and Java.
• Score: 20.463200377413255
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated significant potential in various tasks, including vulnerability detection. However, current efforts in this area are preliminary, lacking clarity on whether LLMs' vulnerability reasoning capabilities stem from the models themselves or external aids such as knowledge retrieval and tooling support. This paper aims to isolate LLMs' vulnerability reasoning from other capabilities, such as vulnerability knowledge adoption, context information retrieval, and structured output generation. We introduce LLM4Vuln, a unified evaluation framework that separates and assesses LLMs' vulnerability reasoning capabilities and examines improvements when combined with other enhancements. We conducted controlled experiments with 97 ground-truth vulnerabilities and 97 non-vulnerable cases in Solidity and Java, testing them in a total of 9,312 scenarios across four LLMs (GPT-4, GPT-3.5, Mixtral, and Llama 3). Our findings reveal the varying impacts of knowledge enhancement, context supplementation, prompt schemes, and models. Additionally, we identified 14 zero-day vulnerabilities in four pilot bug bounty programs, resulting in \$3,576 in bounties.

Related papers

• Iterative Self-Tuning LLMs for Enhanced Jailbreaking Capabilities [63.603861880022954]
  We introduce ADV-LLM, an iterative self-tuning process that crafts adversarial LLMs with enhanced jailbreak ability. Our framework significantly reduces the computational cost of generating adversarial suffixes while achieving nearly 100% ASR on various open-source LLMs. It exhibits strong attack transferability to closed-source models, achieving 99% ASR on GPT-3.5 and 49% ASR on GPT-4, despite being optimized solely on Llama3.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-24T06:36:12Z)
• Can LLMs be Fooled? Investigating Vulnerabilities in LLMs [4.927763944523323]
  The advent of Large Language Models (LLMs) has garnered significant popularity and wielded immense power across various domains within Natural Language Processing (NLP) This paper will synthesize the findings from each vulnerability section and propose new directions of research and development. By understanding the focal points of current vulnerabilities, we can better anticipate and mitigate future risks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-30T04:08:00Z)
• Exploring Automatic Cryptographic API Misuse Detection in the Era of LLMs [60.32717556756674]
  This paper introduces a systematic evaluation framework to assess Large Language Models in detecting cryptographic misuses. Our in-depth analysis of 11,940 LLM-generated reports highlights that the inherent instabilities in LLMs can lead to over half of the reports being false positives. The optimized approach achieves a remarkable detection rate of nearly 90%, surpassing traditional methods and uncovering previously unknown misuses in established benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-23T15:31:26Z)
• AutoDetect: Towards a Unified Framework for Automated Weakness Detection in Large Language Models [95.09157454599605]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are becoming increasingly powerful, but they still exhibit significant but subtle weaknesses. Traditional benchmarking approaches cannot thoroughly pinpoint specific model deficiencies. We introduce a unified framework, AutoDetect, to automatically expose weaknesses in LLMs across various tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-24T15:16:45Z)
• SORRY-Bench: Systematically Evaluating Large Language Model Safety Refusal Behaviors [64.9938658716425]
  Existing evaluations of large language models' (LLMs) ability to recognize and reject unsafe user requests face three limitations. First, existing methods often use coarse-grained of unsafe topics, and are over-representing some fine-grained topics. Second, linguistic characteristics and formatting of prompts are often overlooked, like different languages, dialects, and more -- which are only implicitly considered in many evaluations. Third, existing evaluations rely on large LLMs for evaluation, which can be expensive.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-20T17:56:07Z)
• Towards Effectively Detecting and Explaining Vulnerabilities Using Large Language Models [17.96542494363619]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities in comprehending complex contexts. In this paper, we conduct a study to investigate the capabilities of LLMs in both detecting and explaining vulnerabilities. Under specialized fine-tuning for vulnerability explanation, our LLMVulExp not only detects the types of vulnerabilities in the code but also analyzes the code context to generate the cause, location, and repair suggestions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-14T04:01:25Z)
• Unveiling the Misuse Potential of Base Large Language Models via In-Context Learning [61.2224355547598]
  Open-sourcing of large language models (LLMs) accelerates application development, innovation, and scientific progress. Our investigation exposes a critical oversight in this belief. By deploying carefully designed demonstrations, our research demonstrates that base LLMs could effectively interpret and execute malicious instructions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-16T13:22:54Z)
• How Far Have We Gone in Vulnerability Detection Using Large Language Models [15.09461331135668]
  We introduce a comprehensive vulnerability benchmark VulBench. This benchmark aggregates high-quality data from a wide range of CTF challenges and real-world applications. We find that several LLMs outperform traditional deep learning approaches in vulnerability detection.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-21T08:20:39Z)
• Understanding the Effectiveness of Large Language Models in Detecting Security Vulnerabilities [12.82645410161464]
  We evaluate the effectiveness of 16 pre-trained Large Language Models on 5,000 code samples from five diverse security datasets. Overall, LLMs show modest effectiveness in detecting vulnerabilities, obtaining an average accuracy of 62.8% and F1 score of 0.71 across datasets. We find that advanced prompting strategies that involve step-by-step analysis significantly improve performance of LLMs on real-world datasets in terms of F1 score (by upto 0.18 on average)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-16T13:17:20Z)
• Do-Not-Answer: A Dataset for Evaluating Safeguards in LLMs [59.596335292426105]
  This paper collects the first open-source dataset to evaluate safeguards in large language models. We train several BERT-like classifiers to achieve results comparable with GPT-4 on automatic safety evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-25T14:02:12Z)
• Can Large Language Models Find And Fix Vulnerable Software? [0.0]
  GPT-4 identified approximately four times the vulnerabilities than its counterparts. It provided viable fixes for each vulnerability, demonstrating a low rate of false positives. GPT-4's code corrections led to a 90% reduction in vulnerabilities, requiring only an 11% increase in code lines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-20T19:33:12Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.