REEF: A Framework for Collecting Real-World Vulnerabilities and Fixes
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Software plays a crucial role in our daily lives, and therefore the quality and security of software systems have become increasingly important. However, vulnerabilities in software still pose a significant threat, as they can have serious consequences. Recent advances in automated program repair have sought to automatically detect and fix bugs using data-driven techniques. Sophisticated deep learning methods have been applied to this area and have achieved promising results. However, existing benchmarks for training and evaluating these techniques remain limited, as they tend to focus on a single programming language and have relatively small datasets. Moreover, many benchmarks tend to be outdated and lack diversity, focusing on a specific codebase. Worse still, the quality of bug explanations in existing datasets is low, as they typically use imprecise and uninformative commit messages as explanations. To address these issues, we propose an automated collecting framework REEF to collect REal-world vulnErabilities and Fixes from open-source repositories. We develop a multi-language crawler to collect vulnerabilities and their fixes, and design metrics to filter for high-quality vulnerability-fix pairs. Furthermore, we propose a neural language model-based approach to generate high-quality vulnerability explanations, which is key to producing informative fix messages. Through extensive experiments, we demonstrate that our approach can collect high-quality vulnerability-fix pairs and generate strong explanations. The dataset we collect contains 4,466 CVEs with 30,987 patches (including 236 CWE) across 7 programming languages with detailed related information, which is superior to existing benchmarks in scale, coverage, and quality. Evaluations by human experts further confirm that our framework produces high-quality vulnerability explanations.
Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 15 Sep 2023.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 2; 2024: 2; 2025: 4.
8 papers.
- 2023Split and Merge: Aligning Position Biases in LLM-based Evaluatorscited by 71
- 2025IP Leakage Attacks Targeting LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systemscited by 8
- 2023VRPTEST: Evaluating Visual Referring Prompting in Large Multimodal Modelscited by 6
- 2024Enhancing Source Code Security with LLMs: Demystifying The Challenges and Generating Reliable Repairscited by 4
- 2025RAG or Fine-tuning? A Comparative Study on LCMs-based Code Completion in Industrycited by 4
- 2024An Empirical Study on Large Language Models in Accuracy and Robustness under Chinese Industrial Scenarioscited by 3
- 2025TREAT: A Code LLMs Trustworthiness / Reliability Evaluation and Testing Frameworkcited by 1
- 2025MulVuln: Enhancing Pre-trained LMs with Shared and Language-Specific Knowledge for Multilingual Vulnerability Detectioncited by 0
- 2025TREAT: A Code LLMs Trustworthiness / Reliability Evaluation and Testing Framework20 Oct 2025
- 2025MulVuln: Enhancing Pre-trained LMs with Shared and Language-Specific Knowledge for Multilingual Vulnerability Detection5 Oct 2025
- 2025RAG or Fine-tuning? A Comparative Study on LCMs-based Code Completion in Industry21 May 2025
- 2025IP Leakage Attacks Targeting LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems18 May 2025
- 2024Enhancing Source Code Security with LLMs: Demystifying The Challenges and Generating Reliable Repairs1 Sep 2024
- 2024An Empirical Study on Large Language Models in Accuracy and Robustness under Chinese Industrial Scenarios27 Jan 2024
- 2023VRPTEST: Evaluating Visual Referring Prompting in Large Multimodal Models7 Dec 2023
- 2023Split and Merge: Aligning Position Biases in LLM-based Evaluators29 Sep 2023