TOSSS: a CVE-based Software Security Benchmark for Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.10969v2
• Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2026 10:16:20 GMT
• Title: TOSSS: a CVE-based Software Security Benchmark for Large Language Models
• Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) are now used across many industries.<n>Are LLMs good at software security?<n>We introduce TOSSS, a benchmark that measures the ability of LLMs to choose between secure and vulnerable code snippets.
• Score: 0.28734453162509355
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: With their increasing capabilities, Large Language Models (LLMs) are now used across many industries. They have become useful tools for software engineers and support a wide range of development tasks. As LLMs are increasingly used in software development workflows, a critical question arises: are LLMs good at software security? At the same time, organizations worldwide invest heavily in cybersecurity to reduce exposure to disruptive attacks. The integration of LLMs into software engineering workflows may introduce new vulnerabilities and weaken existing security efforts. We introduce TOSSS (Two-Option Secure Snippet Selection), a benchmark that measures the ability of LLMs to choose between secure and vulnerable code snippets. Existing security benchmarks for LLMs cover only a limited range of vulnerabilities. In contrast, TOSSS relies on the CVE database and provides an extensible framework that can integrate newly disclosed vulnerabilities over time. Our benchmark gives each model a security score between 0 and 1 based on its behavior; a score of 1 indicates that the model always selects the secure snippet, while a score of 0 indicates that it always selects the vulnerable one. We evaluate 14 widely used open-source and closed-source models on C/C++ and Java code and observe scores ranging from 0.48 to 0.89. LLM providers already publish many benchmark scores for their models, and TOSSS could become a complementary security-focused score to include in these reports.

Related papers

• Towards Demystifying and Repairing LLM-in-the-Loop Vulnerabilities [22.313168715963315]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have been actively integrated into modern software systems as critical components.<n>LLMs-in-the-loop vulnerabilities, where vulnerabilities are introduced by LLMs and their dependent downstream components, such as frameworks, introduce new risks.<n>These vulnerabilities are more challenging to precisely fix, especially for those involving prompt injections where the Pass@1 rate is only 28.57%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-27T08:11:37Z)
• SecPI: Secure Code Generation with Reasoning Models via Security Reasoning Internalization [50.71047638695205]
  Reasoning language models (RLMs) are increasingly used in programming.<n>Yet, even state-of-the-art RLMs frequently introduce critical security vulnerabilities in generated code.<n>We present SecPI, a fine-tuning pipeline that teaches RLMs to internalize structured security reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-04T04:29:11Z)
• RealSec-bench: A Benchmark for Evaluating Secure Code Generation in Real-World Repositories [58.32028251925354]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities in code generation, but their proficiency in producing secure code remains a critical, under-explored area.<n>We introduce RealSec-bench, a new benchmark for secure code generation meticulously constructed from real-world, high-risk Java repositories.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-30T08:29:01Z)
• A.S.E: A Repository-Level Benchmark for Evaluating Security in AI-Generated Code [49.009041488527544]
  A.S.E is a repository-level evaluation benchmark for assessing the security of AI-generated code.<n>Current large language models (LLMs) still struggle with secure coding.<n>A larger reasoning budget does not necessarily lead to better code generation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-25T15:11:11Z)
• Are AI-Generated Fixes Secure? Analyzing LLM and Agent Patches on SWE-bench [9.229310642804036]
  We present the first large-scale security analysis of LLM-generated patches using 20,000+ issues from the SWE-bench dataset.<n>We evaluate patches produced by a standalone LLM (Llama 3.3) and compare them to developer-written patches.<n>We also assess the security of patches generated by three top-performing agentic frameworks (OpenHands, AutoCodeRover, HoneyComb) on a subset of our data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-30T21:10:19Z)
• SafeGenBench: A Benchmark Framework for Security Vulnerability Detection in LLM-Generated Code [7.209766132478914]
  We introduce SafeGenBench, a benchmark specifically designed to assess the security of LLM-generated code.<n>The dataset encompasses a wide range of common software development scenarios and vulnerability types.<n>Through the empirical evaluation of state-of-the-art LLMs on SafeGenBench, we reveal notable deficiencies in their ability to produce vulnerability-free code.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-06T02:48:02Z)
• Unveiling the Landscape of LLM Deployment in the Wild: An Empirical Study [7.5198516000202105]
  Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed through open-source and commercial frameworks.<n>As LLM deployments become prevalent, particularly in industry, ensuring their secure and reliable operation has become a critical issue.<n>Insecure defaults and misconfigurations often expose LLM services to the public internet, posing serious security and system engineering risks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-05T09:30:19Z)
• Global Challenge for Safe and Secure LLMs Track 1 [57.08717321907755]
  The Global Challenge for Safe and Secure Large Language Models (LLMs) is a pioneering initiative organized by AI Singapore (AISG) and the CyberSG R&D Programme Office (CRPO) This paper introduces the Global Challenge for Safe and Secure Large Language Models (LLMs), a pioneering initiative organized by AI Singapore (AISG) and the CyberSG R&D Programme Office (CRPO) to foster the development of advanced defense mechanisms against automated jailbreaking attacks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-21T08:20:31Z)
• ALERT: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Assessing Large Language Models' Safety through Red Teaming [64.86326523181553]
  ALERT is a large-scale benchmark to assess safety based on a novel fine-grained risk taxonomy. It aims to identify vulnerabilities, inform improvements, and enhance the overall safety of the language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-06T15:01:47Z)
• 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)
• Can LLMs Patch Security Issues? [1.3299507495084417]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown impressive proficiency in code generation. LLMs share a weakness with their human counterparts: producing code that inadvertently has security vulnerabilities. We propose Feedback-Driven Security Patching (FDSP), where LLMs automatically refine generated, vulnerable code.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-13T08:54:37Z)
• Do-Not-Answer: A Dataset for Evaluating Safeguards in LLMs [59.596335292426105]
  This paper collects the first open-source dataset to evaluate safeguards in large language models. We train several BERT-like classifiers to achieve results comparable with GPT-4 on automatic safety evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-25T14:02:12Z)

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.