An Empirical Study of Automated Vulnerability Localization with Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2404.00287v1
• Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2024 08:42:10 GMT
• Title: An Empirical Study of Automated Vulnerability Localization with Large Language Models
• Authors: Jian Zhang, Chong Wang, Anran Li, Weisong Sun, Cen Zhang, Wei Ma, Yang Liu,
• Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown potential in various domains, yet their effectiveness in vulnerability localization remains underexplored. Our investigation encompasses 10+ leading LLMs suitable for code analysis, including ChatGPT and various open-source models. We explore the efficacy of these LLMs using 4 distinct paradigms: zero-shot learning, one-shot learning, discriminative fine-tuning, and generative fine-tuning.
• Score: 21.84971967029474
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Recently, Automated Vulnerability Localization (AVL) has attracted much attention, aiming to facilitate diagnosis by pinpointing the lines of code responsible for discovered vulnerabilities. Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown potential in various domains, yet their effectiveness in vulnerability localization remains underexplored. In this work, we perform the first comprehensive study of LLMs for AVL. Our investigation encompasses 10+ leading LLMs suitable for code analysis, including ChatGPT and various open-source models, across three architectural types: encoder-only, encoder-decoder, and decoder-only, with model sizes ranging from 60M to 16B parameters. We explore the efficacy of these LLMs using 4 distinct paradigms: zero-shot learning, one-shot learning, discriminative fine-tuning, and generative fine-tuning. Our evaluation framework is applied to the BigVul-based dataset for C/C++, and an additional dataset comprising smart contract vulnerabilities. The results demonstrate that discriminative fine-tuning of LLMs can significantly outperform existing learning-based methods for AVL, while other paradigms prove less effective or unexpectedly ineffective for the task. We also identify challenges related to input length and unidirectional context in fine-tuning processes for encoders and decoders. We then introduce two remedial strategies: the sliding window and the right-forward embedding, both of which substantially enhance performance. Furthermore, our findings highlight certain generalization capabilities of LLMs across Common Weakness Enumerations (CWEs) and different projects, indicating a promising pathway toward their practical application in vulnerability localization.

Related papers

• EVOLvE: Evaluating and Optimizing LLMs For Exploration [76.66831821738927]
  Large language models (LLMs) remain under-studied in scenarios requiring optimal decision-making under uncertainty. We measure LLMs' (in)ability to make optimal decisions in bandits, a state-less reinforcement learning setting relevant to many applications. Motivated by the existence of optimal exploration algorithms, we propose efficient ways to integrate this algorithmic knowledge into LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-08T17:54:03Z)
• Outside the Comfort Zone: Analysing LLM Capabilities in Software Vulnerability Detection [9.652886240532741]
  This paper thoroughly analyses large language models' capabilities in detecting vulnerabilities within source code. We evaluate the performance of six open-source models that are specifically trained for vulnerability detection against six general-purpose LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-29T10:00:57Z)
• CoMMIT: Coordinated Instruction Tuning for Multimodal Large Language Models [68.64605538559312]
  In this paper, we analyze the MLLM instruction tuning from both theoretical and empirical perspectives. Inspired by our findings, we propose a measurement to quantitatively evaluate the learning balance. In addition, we introduce an auxiliary loss regularization method to promote updating of the generation distribution of MLLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-29T23:18:55Z)
• What's Wrong with Your Code Generated by Large Language Models? An Extensive Study [80.18342600996601]
  Large language models (LLMs) produce code that is shorter yet more complicated as compared to canonical solutions. We develop a taxonomy of bugs for incorrect codes that includes three categories and 12 sub-categories, and analyze the root cause for common bug types. We propose a novel training-free iterative method that introduces self-critique, enabling LLMs to critique and correct their generated code based on bug types and compiler feedback.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-08T17:27:17Z)
• Security Vulnerability Detection with Multitask Self-Instructed Fine-Tuning of Large Language Models [8.167614500821223]
  We introduce MSIVD, multitask self-instructed fine-tuning for vulnerability detection, inspired by chain-of-thought prompting and LLM self-instruction. Our experiments demonstrate that MSIVD achieves superior performance, outperforming the highest LLM-based vulnerability detector baseline (LineVul) with a F1 score of 0.92 on the BigVul dataset, and 0.48 on the PreciseBugs dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-09T19:18:05Z)
• Characterization of Large Language Model Development in the Datacenter [55.9909258342639]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have presented impressive performance across several transformative tasks. However, it is non-trivial to efficiently utilize large-scale cluster resources to develop LLMs. We present an in-depth characterization study of a six-month LLM development workload trace collected from our GPU datacenter Acme.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-12T13:31:14Z)
• Supervised Knowledge Makes Large Language Models Better In-context Learners [94.89301696512776]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit emerging in-context learning abilities through prompt engineering. The challenge of improving the generalizability and factuality of LLMs in natural language understanding and question answering remains under-explored. We propose a framework that enhances the reliability of LLMs as it: 1) generalizes out-of-distribution data, 2) elucidates how LLMs benefit from discriminative models, and 3) minimizes hallucinations in generative tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-26T07:24:46Z)
• 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)
• Knowledge Plugins: Enhancing Large Language Models for Domain-Specific Recommendations [50.81844184210381]
  We propose a general paradigm that augments large language models with DOmain-specific KnowledgE to enhance their performance on practical applications, namely DOKE. This paradigm relies on a domain knowledge extractor, working in three steps: 1) preparing effective knowledge for the task; 2) selecting the knowledge for each specific sample; and 3) expressing the knowledge in an LLM-understandable way.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-16T07:09:38Z)

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.