A Multi-Dataset Evaluation of Models for Automated Vulnerability Repair

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2506.04987v1
• Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2025 13:00:19 GMT
• Title: A Multi-Dataset Evaluation of Models for Automated Vulnerability Repair
• Authors: Zanis Ali Khan, Aayush Garg, Qiang Tang,
• Abstract summary: This study investigates pre-trained language models, CodeBERT and CodeT5, for automated vulnerability patching across six datasets and four languages.<n>We evaluate their accuracy and generalization to unknown vulnerabilities.<n>Results show that while both models face challenges with fragmented or sparse context, CodeBERT performs comparatively better in such scenarios, whereas CodeT5 excels in capturing complex vulnerability patterns.
• Score: 2.7674959824386858
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Software vulnerabilities pose significant security threats, requiring effective mitigation. While Automated Program Repair (APR) has advanced in fixing general bugs, vulnerability patching, a security-critical aspect of APR remains underexplored. This study investigates pre-trained language models, CodeBERT and CodeT5, for automated vulnerability patching across six datasets and four languages. We evaluate their accuracy and generalization to unknown vulnerabilities. Results show that while both models face challenges with fragmented or sparse context, CodeBERT performs comparatively better in such scenarios, whereas CodeT5 excels in capturing complex vulnerability patterns. CodeT5 also demonstrates superior scalability. Furthermore, we test fine-tuned models on both in-distribution (trained) and out-of-distribution (unseen) datasets. While fine-tuning improves in-distribution performance, models struggle to generalize to unseen data, highlighting challenges in robust vulnerability detection. This study benchmarks model performance, identifies limitations in generalization, and provides actionable insights to advance automated vulnerability patching for real-world security applications.

Related papers

• Secure Tug-of-War (SecTOW): Iterative Defense-Attack Training with Reinforcement Learning for Multimodal Model Security [63.41350337821108]
  We propose Secure Tug-of-War (SecTOW) to enhance the security of multimodal large language models (MLLMs)<n>SecTOW consists of two modules: a defender and an auxiliary attacker, both trained iteratively using reinforcement learning (GRPO)<n>We show that SecTOW significantly improves security while preserving general performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-29T17:39:48Z)
• White-Basilisk: A Hybrid Model for Code Vulnerability Detection [50.49233187721795]
  We introduce White-Basilisk, a novel approach to vulnerability detection that demonstrates superior performance.<n>White-Basilisk achieves results in vulnerability detection tasks with a parameter count of only 200M.<n>This research establishes new benchmarks in code security and provides empirical evidence that compact, efficiently designed models can outperform larger counterparts in specialized tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-11T12:39:25Z)
• Breaking Focus: Contextual Distraction Curse in Large Language Models [68.4534308805202]
  We investigate a critical vulnerability in Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>This phenomenon arises when models fail to maintain consistent performance on questions modified with semantically coherent but irrelevant context.<n>We propose an efficient tree-based search methodology to automatically generate CDV examples.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-03T18:43:36Z)
• Evaluating Pre-Trained Models for Multi-Language Vulnerability Patching [3.220818227251765]
  This paper investigates the potential of pre-trained language models, CodeBERT and CodeT5, for automated vulnerability patching.<n>We evaluate these models on their accuracy, computational efficiency, and how the length of vulnerable code patches impacts performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-13T13:51:05Z)
• Improving Data Curation of Software Vulnerability Patches through Uncertainty Quantification [6.916509590637601]
  We propose an approach employing Uncertainty Quantification (UQ) to curate datasets of publicly-available software vulnerability patches. Model Ensemble and heteroscedastic models are the best choices for vulnerability patch datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-18T15:37:28Z)
• 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)
• Generalization-Enhanced Code Vulnerability Detection via Multi-Task Instruction Fine-Tuning [16.54022485688803]
  VulLLM is a novel framework that integrates multi-task learning with Large Language Models (LLMs) to effectively mine deep-seated vulnerability features. The experiments conducted on six large datasets demonstrate that VulLLM surpasses seven state-of-the-art models in terms of effectiveness, generalization, and robustness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-06T03:29:05Z)
• Vulnerability Detection with Code Language Models: How Far Are We? [40.455600722638906]
  PrimeVul is a new dataset for training and evaluating code LMs for vulnerability detection. It incorporates a novel set of data labeling techniques that achieve comparable label accuracy to human-verified benchmarks. It also implements a rigorous data de-duplication and chronological data splitting strategy to mitigate data leakage issues.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-27T14:34:29Z)
• Model Stealing Attack against Graph Classification with Authenticity, Uncertainty and Diversity [80.16488817177182]
  GNNs are vulnerable to the model stealing attack, a nefarious endeavor geared towards duplicating the target model via query permissions. We introduce three model stealing attacks to adapt to different actual scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-18T05:42:31Z)
• ASSERT: Automated Safety Scenario Red Teaming for Evaluating the Robustness of Large Language Models [65.79770974145983]
  ASSERT, Automated Safety Scenario Red Teaming, consists of three methods -- semantically aligned augmentation, target bootstrapping, and adversarial knowledge injection. We partition our prompts into four safety domains for a fine-grained analysis of how the domain affects model performance. We find statistically significant performance differences of up to 11% in absolute classification accuracy among semantically related scenarios and error rates of up to 19% absolute error in zero-shot adversarial settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-14T17:10:28Z)
• 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)
• VELVET: a noVel Ensemble Learning approach to automatically locate VulnErable sTatements [62.93814803258067]
  This paper presents VELVET, a novel ensemble learning approach to locate vulnerable statements in source code. Our model combines graph-based and sequence-based neural networks to successfully capture the local and global context of a program graph. VELVET achieves 99.6% and 43.6% top-1 accuracy over synthetic data and real-world data, respectively.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-12-20T22:45:27Z)

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.