mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

How Effective Are Neural Networks for Fixing Security Vulnerabilities

arXiv 2305.18607 ↗First posted 29 May 2023cs.SE cs.AI cs.CRcited by 50

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Security vulnerability repair is a difficult task that is in dire need of automation. Two groups of techniques have shown promise: (1) large code language models (LLMs) that have been pre-trained on source code for tasks such as code completion, and (2) automated program repair (APR) techniques that use deep learning (DL) models to automatically fix software bugs. This paper is the first to study and compare Java vulnerability repair capabilities of LLMs and DL-based APR models. The contributions include that we (1) apply and evaluate five LLMs (Codex, CodeGen, CodeT5, PLBART and InCoder), four fine-tuned LLMs, and four DL-based APR techniques on two real-world Java vulnerability benchmarks (Vul4J and VJBench), (2) design code transformations to address the training and test data overlapping threat to Codex, (3) create a new Java vulnerability repair benchmark VJBench, and its transformed version VJBench-trans and (4) evaluate LLMs and APR techniques on the transformed vulnerabilities in VJBench-trans. Our findings include that (1) existing LLMs and APR models fix very few Java vulnerabilities. Codex fixes 10.2 (20.4%), the most number of vulnerabilities. (2) Fine-tuning with general APR data improves LLMs' vulnerability-fixing capabilities. (3) Our new VJBench reveals that LLMs and APR models fail to fix many Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE) types, such as CWE-325 Missing cryptographic step and CWE-444 HTTP request smuggling. (4) Codex still fixes 8.3 transformed vulnerabilities, outperforming all the other LLMs and APR models on transformed vulnerabilities. The results call for innovations to enhance automated Java vulnerability repair such as creating larger vulnerability repair training data, tuning LLMs with such data, and applying code simplification transformation to facilitate vulnerability repair.

Key facts. Cited by 50 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 29 of its 77 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 May 2023.

Builds on

29 of 77 references.

References · 29

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 59,932
  2. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  3. 2019Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformercited by 14,491
  4. 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,053
  5. 2020CodeBERT: A Pre-Trained Model for Programming and Natural Languagescited by 1,286
  6. 2021CodeT5: Identifier-aware Unified Pre-trained Encoder-Decoder Models for Code Understanding and Generationcited by 890
  7. 2020GraphCodeBERT: Pre-training Code Representations with Data Flowcited by 600
  8. 2022InCoder: A Generative Model for Code Infilling and Synthesiscited by 492
  9. 2021Unified Pre-training for Program Understanding and Generationcited by 361
  10. 2022GitHub Copilot AI pair programmer: Asset or Liability?cited by 150
  11. 2018SequenceR: Sequence-to-Sequence Learning for End-to-End Program Repaircited by 144
  12. 2021Examining Zero-Shot Vulnerability Repair with Large Language Modelscited by 105
17 more
  1. 2021CVEfixes: Automated Collection of Vulnerabilities and Their Fixes from Open-Source Softwarecited by 89
  2. 2021CURE: Code-Aware Neural Machine Translation for Automatic Program Repaircited by 85
  3. 2023Impact of Code Language Models on Automated Program Repaircited by 85
  4. 2022Is GitHub's Copilot as Bad as Humans at Introducing Vulnerabilities in Code?cited by 63
  5. 2019Do We Train on Test Data? Purging CIFAR of Near-Duplicatescited by 61
  6. 2021A Syntax-Guided Edit Decoder for Neural Program Repaircited by 57
  7. 2021Neural Program Repair with Execution-based Backpropagationcited by 50
  8. 2021Applying CodeBERT for Automated Program Repair of Java Simple Bugscited by 44
  9. 2021Neural Transfer Learning for Repairing Security Vulnerabilities in C Codecited by 36
  10. 2019A Manually-Curated Dataset of Fixes to Vulnerabilities of Open-Source Softwarecited by 28
  11. 2021Trust Enhancement Issues in Program Repaircited by 22
  12. 2021DeepDebug: Fixing Python Bugs Using Stack Traces, Backtranslation, and Code Skeletonscited by 17
  13. 2022AI-driven Development Is Here: Should You Worry?cited by 15
  14. 2019Bears: An Extensible Java Bug Benchmark for Automatic Program Repair Studiescited by 13
  15. 2023KNOD: Domain Knowledge Distilled Tree Decoder for Automated Program Repaircited by 13
  16. 2022The Race to the Vulnerable: Measuring the Log4j Shell Incidentcited by 3
  17. 2018IntRepair: Informed Repairing of Integer Overflowscited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2023: 6; 2024: 13; 2025: 17; 2026: 14.

50 papers.

Sort:

By area:

  1. 2023Large Language Models for Software Engineering: A Systematic Literature Reviewcited by 389
  2. 2024When LLMs Meet Cybersecurity: A Systematic Literature Reviewcited by 70
  3. 2024Large Language Models for Cyber Security: A Systematic Literature Reviewcited by 65
  4. 2023Large Language Model-Powered Smart Contract Vulnerability Detection: New Perspectivescited by 48
  5. 2025LLMs in Software Security: A Survey of Vulnerability Detection Techniques and Insightscited by 44
  6. 2024LeDex: Training LLMs to Better Self-Debug and Explain Codecited by 39
  7. 2025LessLeak-Bench: A First Investigation of Data Leakage in LLMs Across 83 Software Engineering Benchmarkscited by 34
  8. 2024How secure is AI-generated Code: A Large-Scale Comparison of Large Language Modelscited by 23
  9. 2023LLM for SoC Security: A Paradigm Shiftcited by 22
  10. 2024CigaR: Cost-efficient Program Repair with LLMscited by 14
  11. 2023Nova: Generative Language Models for Assembly Code with Hierarchical Attention and Contrastive Learningcited by 12
  12. 2024Enhanced Automated Code Vulnerability Repair using Large Language Modelscited by 10
38 more
  1. 2023Pitfalls in Language Models for Code Intelligence: A Taxonomy and Surveycited by 9
  2. 2024From Vulnerabilities to Remediation: A Systematic Literature Review of LLMs in Code Securitycited by 9
  3. 2025Large Language Models for Security Operations Centers: A Comprehensive Surveycited by 9
  4. 2026SGAgent: Suggestion-Guided LLM-Based Multi-Agent Framework for Repository-Level Software Repaircited by 9
  5. 2024CodeArt: Better Code Models by Attention Regularization When Symbols Are Lackingcited by 7
  6. 2024How Well Do Large Language Models Serve as End-to-End Secure Code Agents for Python?cited by 7
  7. 2025Validating Network Protocol Parsers with Traceable RFC Document Interpretationcited by 7
  8. 2023ZeroLeak: Using LLMs for Scalable and Cost Effective Side-Channel Patchingcited by 6
  9. 2025Large Language Models for Validating Network Protocol Parserscited by 5
  10. 2026CVE-Factory: Scaling Expert-Level Agentic Tasks for Code Security Vulnerabilitycited by 5
  11. 2024RealVul: Can We Detect Vulnerabilities in Web Applications with LLM?cited by 3
  12. 2025Benchmarking AI Models in Software Engineering: A Review, Search Tool, and Unified Approach for Elevating Benchmark Qualitycited by 3
  13. 2025PerfCoder: Large Language Models for Interpretable Code Performance Optimizationcited by 3
  14. 2024Code Vulnerability Repair with Large Language Model using Context-Aware Prompt Tuningcited by 2
  15. 2024CODECLEANER: Elevating Standards with A Robust Data Contamination Mitigation Toolkitcited by 2
  16. 2025Identifying Helpful Context for LLM-based Vulnerability Repair: A Preliminary Studycited by 2
  17. 2026SVRepair: Structured Visual Reasoning for Automated Program Repaircited by 2
  18. 2026FailureMem: A Failure-Aware Multimodal Framework for Autonomous Software Repaircited by 2
  19. 2024Synergizing LLMs and Knowledge Graphs: A Novel Approach to Software Repository-Related Question Answeringcited by 1
  20. 2025Using ML filters to help automated vulnerability repairs: when it helps and when it doesn'tcited by 1
  21. 2025A Blueprint for AI-Driven Software Quality: Integrating LLMs with Established Standardscited by 1
  22. 2025A Multi-Dataset Evaluation of Models for Automated Vulnerability Repaircited by 1
  23. 2025Repairing vulnerabilities without invisible hands. A differentiated replication study on LLMscited by 1
  24. 2026RAVEN: Agentic RAG for Automated Vulnerability Repaircited by 1
  25. 2026RustMizan: A Compilable, Contamination-Aware Benchmarking Framework for Rust Vulnerabilitiescited by 1
  26. 2026Change2Task: From Repository Changes to Executable Coding Agent Tasks and Environmentscited by 1
  27. 2025Large Language Models in Cybersecurity: Applications, Vulnerabilities, and Defense Techniquescited by 0
  28. 2025BitsAI-Fix: LLM-Driven Approach for Automated Lint Error Resolution in Practicecited by 0
  29. 2025Teaching Code Refactoring Using LLMscited by 0
  30. 2025A Systematic Evaluation of Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuning Methods for the Security of Code LLMscited by 0
  31. 2025Evaluating LLMs for One-Shot Patching of Real and Artificial Vulnerabilitiescited by 0
  32. 2026Fine-grained Approaches for Confidence Calibration of LLMs in Automated Code Revisioncited by 0
  33. 2026Helpful or Harmful? Evaluating LLM-Assisted Vulnerability Patching via a Human Studycited by 0
  34. 2026Knowledge-Enhanced Agentic Vulnerability Repaircited by 0
  35. 2026JavaVulBench: A Java Vulnerability Benchmark with Realistic Splits, a Unified Multi-Backend Harness, and a Leakage-Aware Evaluation Modecited by 0
  36. 2026VICBench: A Multi-Language Benchmark for Code Vulnerability Detectioncited by 0
  37. 2026WeSCE: A Benchmark for Measuring Security Drift in LLM-Driven Code Editingcited by 0
  38. 2026When Passing Tests Hides Vulnerabilities: An Empirical Study of Silent Failures in Agentic Systemscited by 0