Leveraging Large Language Models for Command Injection Vulnerability Analysis in Python: An Empirical Study on Popular Open-Source Projects
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2505.15088v1
- Date: Wed, 21 May 2025 04:14:35 GMT
- Title: Leveraging Large Language Models for Command Injection Vulnerability Analysis in Python: An Empirical Study on Popular Open-Source Projects
- Authors: Yuxuan Wang, Jingshu Chen, Qingyang Wang,
- Abstract summary: Command injection vulnerabilities are a significant security threat in dynamic languages like Python.<n>With the proven effectiveness of Large Language Models (LLMs) in code-related tasks, such as testing, researchers have explored their potential for vulnerabilities analysis.<n>This study evaluates the potential of large language models (LLMs), such as GPT-4, as an alternative approach for automated testing for vulnerability detection.
- Score: 5.997074223480274
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: Command injection vulnerabilities are a significant security threat in dynamic languages like Python, particularly in widely used open-source projects where security issues can have extensive impact. With the proven effectiveness of Large Language Models(LLMs) in code-related tasks, such as testing, researchers have explored their potential for vulnerabilities analysis. This study evaluates the potential of large language models (LLMs), such as GPT-4, as an alternative approach for automated testing for vulnerability detection. In particular, LLMs have demonstrated advanced contextual understanding and adaptability, making them promising candidates for identifying nuanced security vulnerabilities within code. To evaluate this potential, we applied LLM-based analysis to six high-profile GitHub projects-Django, Flask, TensorFlow, Scikit-learn, PyTorch, and Langchain-each with over 50,000 stars and extensive adoption across software development and academic research. Our analysis assesses both the strengths and limitations of LLMs in detecting command injection vulnerabilities, evaluating factors such as detection accuracy, efficiency, and practical integration into development workflows. In addition, we provide a comparative analysis of different LLM tools to identify those most suitable for security applications. Our findings offer guidance for developers and security researchers on leveraging LLMs as innovative and automated approaches to enhance software security.
Related papers
- Large Language Models for Multilingual Vulnerability Detection: How Far Are We? [13.269680075539135]
We evaluate the effectiveness of pre-trained language models (PLMs) and large language models (LLMs) for multilingual vulnerability detection.<n>Using over 30,000 real-world vulnerability-fixing patches across seven programming languages, we assess model performance at both the function-level and line-level.<n>Our key findings indicate that GPT-4o, enhanced through instruction tuning and few-shot prompting, significantly outperforms all other evaluated models.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-06-09T07:27:49Z) - Large Language Models for In-File Vulnerability Localization Can Be "Lost in the End" [6.6389862916575275]
New development practice requires researchers to investigate whether commonly used LLMs can effectively analyze large file-sized inputs.<n>This paper is to evaluate the effectiveness of several state-of-the-art chat-based LLMs, including the GPT models, in detecting in-file vulnerabilities.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-02-09T14:51:15Z) - Navigating the Risks: A Survey of Security, Privacy, and Ethics Threats in LLM-Based Agents [67.07177243654485]
This survey collects and analyzes the different threats faced by large language models-based agents.
We identify six key features of LLM-based agents, based on which we summarize the current research progress.
We select four representative agents as case studies to analyze the risks they may face in practical use.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-11-14T15:40:04Z) - 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) - 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) - CodeAttack: Revealing Safety Generalization Challenges of Large Language Models via Code Completion [117.178835165855]
This paper introduces CodeAttack, a framework that transforms natural language inputs into code inputs.
Our studies reveal a new and universal safety vulnerability of these models against code input.
We find that a larger distribution gap between CodeAttack and natural language leads to weaker safety generalization.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-03-12T17:55:38Z) - LLbezpeky: Leveraging Large Language Models for Vulnerability Detection [10.330063887545398]
Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown tremendous potential in understanding semnatics in human as well as programming languages.
We focus on building an AI-driven workflow to assist developers in identifying and rectifying vulnerabilities.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-01-02T16:14:30Z) - 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) - Safety Assessment of Chinese Large Language Models [51.83369778259149]
Large language models (LLMs) may generate insulting and discriminatory content, reflect incorrect social values, and may be used for malicious purposes.
To promote the deployment of safe, responsible, and ethical AI, we release SafetyPrompts including 100k augmented prompts and responses by LLMs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-04-20T16:27:35Z) - 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.