JsDeObsBench: Measuring and Benchmarking LLMs for JavaScript Deobfuscation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2506.20170v1
• Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2025 06:50:13 GMT
• Title: JsDeObsBench: Measuring and Benchmarking LLMs for JavaScript Deobfuscation
• Authors: Guoqiang Chen, Xin Jin, Zhiqiang Lin,
• Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) have recently shown promise in automating the deobfuscation process.<n>We present JsDeObsBench, a benchmark designed to rigorously evaluate the effectiveness of LLMs in the context of JS deobfuscation.
• Score: 34.88009582470047
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Deobfuscating JavaScript (JS) code poses a significant challenge in web security, particularly as obfuscation techniques are frequently used to conceal malicious activities within scripts. While Large Language Models (LLMs) have recently shown promise in automating the deobfuscation process, transforming detection and mitigation strategies against these obfuscated threats, a systematic benchmark to quantify their effectiveness and limitations has been notably absent. To address this gap, we present JsDeObsBench, a dedicated benchmark designed to rigorously evaluate the effectiveness of LLMs in the context of JS deobfuscation. We detail our benchmarking methodology, which includes a wide range of obfuscation techniques ranging from basic variable renaming to sophisticated structure transformations, providing a robust framework for assessing LLM performance in real-world scenarios. Our extensive experimental analysis investigates the proficiency of cutting-edge LLMs, e.g., GPT-4o, Mixtral, Llama, and DeepSeek-Coder, revealing superior performance in code simplification despite challenges in maintaining syntax accuracy and execution reliability compared to baseline methods. We further evaluate the deobfuscation of JS malware to exhibit the potential of LLMs in security scenarios. The findings highlight the utility of LLMs in deobfuscation applications and pinpoint crucial areas for further improvement.

Related papers

• Phishing Detection in the Gen-AI Era: Quantized LLMs vs Classical Models [1.4999444543328293]
  Phishing attacks are becoming increasingly sophisticated, underscoring the need for detection systems that strike a balance between high accuracy and computational efficiency.<n>This paper presents a comparative evaluation of traditional Machine Learning (ML), Deep Learning (DL), and quantized small- parameter Large Language Models (LLMs) for phishing detection.<n>We show that while LLMs currently underperform compared to ML and DL methods in terms of raw accuracy, they exhibit strong potential for identifying subtle, context-based phishing cues.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-10T04:01:52Z)
• Guiding AI to Fix Its Own Flaws: An Empirical Study on LLM-Driven Secure Code Generation [16.29310628754089]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have become powerful tools for automated code generation.<n>LLMs often overlook critical security practices, which can result in the generation of insecure code.<n>This paper examines their inherent tendencies to produce insecure code, their capability to generate secure code when guided by self-generated vulnerability hints, and their effectiveness in repairing vulnerabilities when provided with different levels of feedback.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-28T23:24:33Z)
• ObscuraCoder: Powering Efficient Code LM Pre-Training Via Obfuscation Grounding [60.37988508851391]
  Language models (LMs) have become a staple of the code-writing toolbox.<n>Research exploring modifications to Code-LMs' pre-training objectives, geared towards improving data efficiency and better disentangling between syntax and semantics, has been noticeably sparse.<n>In this work, we examine grounding on obfuscated code as a means of helping Code-LMs look beyond the surface-form syntax and enhance their pre-training sample efficiency.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-27T23:08:53Z)
• What You See Is Not Always What You Get: An Empirical Study of Code Comprehension by Large Language Models [0.5735035463793009]
  We investigate the vulnerability of large language models (LLMs) to imperceptible attacks, where hidden character manipulation in source code misleads LLMs' behaviour while remaining undetectable to human reviewers.<n>These attacks include coding reordering, invisible coding characters, code deletions, and code homoglyphs.<n>Our findings confirm the susceptibility of LLMs to imperceptible coding character attacks, while different LLMs present different negative correlations between perturbation magnitude and performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-11T04:52:41Z)
• Evaluating and Improving the Robustness of Security Attack Detectors Generated by LLMs [6.936401700600395]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used in software development to generate functions, such as attack detectors, that implement security requirements.<n>This is most likely due to the LLM lacking knowledge about some existing attacks and to the generated code being not evaluated in real usage scenarios.<n>We propose a novel approach integrating Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) and Self-Ranking into the LLM pipeline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-27T10:48:37Z)
• 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)
• Exploring LLMs for Malware Detection: Review, Framework Design, and Countermeasure Approaches [0.24578723416255752]
  The rising use of Large Language Models to create and disseminate malware poses a significant cybersecurity challenge. This paper provides a comprehensive overview of LLMs and their role in malware detection from diverse sources. We examine five specific applications of LLMs: Malware honeypots, identification of text-based threats, code analysis for detecting malicious intent, trend analysis of malware, and detection of non-standard disguised malware.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-11T19:33:44Z)
• 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)
• SORRY-Bench: Systematically Evaluating Large Language Model Safety Refusal [64.9938658716425]
  SORRY-Bench is a proposed benchmark for evaluating large language models' (LLMs) ability to recognize and reject unsafe user requests.<n>First, existing methods often use coarse-grained taxonomy of unsafe topics, and are over-representing some fine-grained topics.<n>Second, linguistic characteristics and formatting of prompts are often overlooked, like different languages, dialects, and more -- which are only implicitly considered in many evaluations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-20T17:56:07Z)
• Optimization-based Prompt Injection Attack to LLM-as-a-Judge [78.20257854455562]
  LLM-as-a-Judge uses a large language model (LLM) to select the best response from a set of candidates for a given question.<n>We propose JudgeDeceiver, an optimization-based prompt injection attack to LLM-as-a-Judge.<n>Our evaluation shows that JudgeDeceive is highly effective, and is much more effective than existing prompt injection attacks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-26T13:58:00Z)
• Can Large Language Models be Trusted for Evaluation? Scalable Meta-Evaluation of LLMs as Evaluators via Agent Debate [74.06294042304415]
  We propose ScaleEval, an agent-debate-assisted meta-evaluation framework. We release the code for our framework, which is publicly available on GitHub.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-30T07:03:32Z)
• 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)
• Red Teaming Language Model Detectors with Language Models [114.36392560711022]
  Large language models (LLMs) present significant safety and ethical risks if exploited by malicious users. Recent works have proposed algorithms to detect LLM-generated text and protect LLMs. We study two types of attack strategies: 1) replacing certain words in an LLM's output with their synonyms given the context; 2) automatically searching for an instructional prompt to alter the writing style of the generation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-31T10:08:37Z)

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.