DLAP: A Deep Learning Augmented Large Language Model Prompting Framework for Software Vulnerability Detection

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2405.01202v1
• Date: Thu, 2 May 2024 11:44:52 GMT
• Title: DLAP: A Deep Learning Augmented Large Language Model Prompting Framework for Software Vulnerability Detection
• Authors: Yanjing Yang, Xin Zhou, Runfeng Mao, Jinwei Xu, Lanxin Yang, Yu Zhangm, Haifeng Shen, He Zhang,
• Abstract summary: This paper contributes textbfDLAP, a framework that combines the best of both deep learning (DL) models and Large Language Models (LLMs) to achieve exceptional vulnerability detection performance. Experiment results confirm that DLAP outperforms state-of-the-art prompting frameworks, including role-based prompts, auxiliary information prompts, chain-of-thought prompts, and in-context learning prompts.
• Score: 12.686480870065827
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Software vulnerability detection is generally supported by automated static analysis tools, which have recently been reinforced by deep learning (DL) models. However, despite the superior performance of DL-based approaches over rule-based ones in research, applying DL approaches to software vulnerability detection in practice remains a challenge due to the complex structure of source code, the black-box nature of DL, and the domain knowledge required to understand and validate the black-box results for addressing tasks after detection. Conventional DL models are trained by specific projects and, hence, excel in identifying vulnerabilities in these projects but not in others. These models with poor performance in vulnerability detection would impact the downstream tasks such as location and repair. More importantly, these models do not provide explanations for developers to comprehend detection results. In contrast, Large Language Models (LLMs) have made lots of progress in addressing these issues by leveraging prompting techniques. Unfortunately, their performance in identifying vulnerabilities is unsatisfactory. This paper contributes \textbf{\DLAP}, a \underline{\textbf{D}}eep \underline{\textbf{L}}earning \underline{\textbf{A}}ugmented LLMs \underline{\textbf{P}}rompting framework that combines the best of both DL models and LLMs to achieve exceptional vulnerability detection performance. Experimental evaluation results confirm that \DLAP outperforms state-of-the-art prompting frameworks, including role-based prompts, auxiliary information prompts, chain-of-thought prompts, and in-context learning prompts, as well as fine-turning on multiple metrics.

Related papers

• VulnLLMEval: A Framework for Evaluating Large Language Models in Software Vulnerability Detection and Patching [0.9208007322096533]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown promise in tasks like code translation. This paper introduces VulnLLMEval, a framework designed to assess the performance of LLMs in identifying and patching vulnerabilities in C code. Our study includes 307 real-world vulnerabilities extracted from the Linux kernel.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-16T22:00:20Z)
• 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)
• Towards Explainable Vulnerability Detection with Large Language Models [17.96542494363619]
  Software vulnerabilities pose significant risks to the security and integrity of software systems. The advent of large language models (LLMs) has introduced transformative potential due to their advanced generative capabilities. In this paper, we propose LLMVulExp, an automated framework designed to specialize LLMs for the dual tasks of vulnerability detection and explanation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-14T04:01:25Z)
• On the Worst Prompt Performance of Large Language Models [93.13542053835542]
  Performance of large language models (LLMs) is acutely sensitive to the phrasing of prompts. We introduce RobustAlpacaEval, a new benchmark that consists of semantically equivalent case-level queries. Experiments on RobustAlpacaEval with ChatGPT and six open-source LLMs from the Llama, Mistral, and Gemma families uncover substantial variability in model performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-08T13:40:38Z)
• To Err is Machine: Vulnerability Detection Challenges LLM Reasoning [8.602355712876815]
  We present a challenging code reasoning task: vulnerability detection. State-of-the-art (SOTA) models reported only 54.5% Balanced Accuracy in our vulnerability detection evaluation. New models, new training methods, or more execution-specific pretraining data may be needed to conquer vulnerability detection.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-25T21:47:36Z)
• Analyzing Adversarial Inputs in Deep Reinforcement Learning [53.3760591018817]
  We present a comprehensive analysis of the characterization of adversarial inputs, through the lens of formal verification. We introduce a novel metric, the Adversarial Rate, to classify models based on their susceptibility to such perturbations. Our analysis empirically demonstrates how adversarial inputs can affect the safety of a given DRL system with respect to such perturbations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-07T21:58:40Z)
• Benchmarking and Defending Against Indirect Prompt Injection Attacks on Large Language Models [79.0183835295533]
  We introduce the first benchmark for indirect prompt injection attacks, named BIPIA, to assess the risk of such vulnerabilities. Our analysis identifies two key factors contributing to their success: LLMs' inability to distinguish between informational context and actionable instructions, and their lack of awareness in avoiding the execution of instructions within external content. We propose two novel defense mechanisms-boundary awareness and explicit reminder-to address these vulnerabilities in both black-box and white-box settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-21T01:08:39Z)
• 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)
• Evaluating the Instruction-Following Robustness of Large Language Models to Prompt Injection [70.28425745910711]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated exceptional proficiency in instruction-following. This capability brings with it the risk of prompt injection attacks. We evaluate the robustness of instruction-following LLMs against such attacks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-17T06:21:50Z)
• Learning to Quantize Vulnerability Patterns and Match to Locate Statement-Level Vulnerabilities [19.6975205650411]
  A vulnerability codebook is learned, which consists of quantized vectors representing various vulnerability patterns. During inference, the codebook is iterated to match all learned patterns and predict the presence of potential vulnerabilities. Our approach was extensively evaluated on a real-world dataset comprising more than 188,000 C/C++ functions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-26T04:13:31Z)
• CodeLMSec Benchmark: Systematically Evaluating and Finding Security Vulnerabilities in Black-Box Code Language Models [58.27254444280376]
  Large language models (LLMs) for automatic code generation have achieved breakthroughs in several programming tasks. Training data for these models is usually collected from the Internet (e.g., from open-source repositories) and is likely to contain faults and security vulnerabilities. This unsanitized training data can cause the language models to learn these vulnerabilities and propagate them during the code generation procedure.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-08T11:54:07Z)

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.