Exploring ChatGPT's Capabilities on Vulnerability Management
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Recently, ChatGPT has attracted great attention from the code analysis domain. Prior works show that ChatGPT has the capabilities of processing foundational code analysis tasks, such as abstract syntax tree generation, which indicates the potential of using ChatGPT to comprehend code syntax and static behaviors. However, it is unclear whether ChatGPT can complete more complicated real-world vulnerability management tasks, such as the prediction of security relevance and patch correctness, which require an all-encompassing understanding of various aspects, including code syntax, program semantics, and related manual comments. In this paper, we explore ChatGPT's capabilities on 6 tasks involving the complete vulnerability management process with a large-scale dataset containing 70,346 samples. For each task, we compare ChatGPT against SOTA approaches, investigate the impact of different prompts, and explore the difficulties. The results suggest promising potential in leveraging ChatGPT to assist vulnerability management. One notable example is ChatGPT's proficiency in tasks like generating titles for software bug reports. Furthermore, our findings reveal the difficulties encountered by ChatGPT and shed light on promising future directions. For instance, directly providing random demonstration examples in the prompt cannot consistently guarantee good performance in vulnerability management. By contrast, leveraging ChatGPT in a self-heuristic way -- extracting expertise from demonstration examples itself and integrating the extracted expertise in the prompt is a promising research direction. Besides, ChatGPT may misunderstand and misuse the information in the prompt. Consequently, effectively guiding ChatGPT to focus on helpful information rather than the irrelevant content is still an open problem.
Key facts. Cited by 19 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 21 of its 53 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 Nov 2023.
Builds on
21 of 53 references.
References · 21
- 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 59,932
- 2022Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasonerscited by 4,323
- 2019PEGASUS: Pre-training with Extracted Gap-sentences for Abstractive Summarizationcited by 1,100
- 2019Not Enough Data? Deep Learning to the Rescue!cited by 174
- 2023Is ChatGPT A Good Translator? Yes With GPT-4 As The Enginecited by 172
- 2022Practical Program Repair in the Era of Large Pre-trained Language Modelscited by 133
- 2023Exploring the Limits of ChatGPT for Query or Aspect-based Text Summarizationcited by 122
- 2023An Analysis of the Automatic Bug Fixing Performance of ChatGPTcited by 108
- 2021Examining Zero-Shot Vulnerability Repair with Large Language Modelscited by 105
- 2023Is ChatGPT the Ultimate Programming Assistant -- How far is it?cited by 72
- 2023What Makes Good In-context Demonstrations for Code Intelligence Tasks with LLMs?cited by 47
- 2022Membership Inference via Backdooringcited by 24
9 more
- 2022DEAR: A Novel Deep Learning-based Approach for Automated Program Repaircited by 22
- 2023Large Language Models in the Workplace: A Case Study on Prompt Engineering for Job Type Classificationcited by 17
- 2023Invalidator: Automated Patch Correctness Assessment via Semantic and Syntactic Reasoningcited by 11
- 2023Gotcha! This Model Uses My Code! Evaluating Membership Leakage Risks in Code Modelscited by 11
- 2023CP-BCS: Binary Code Summarization Guided by Control Flow Graph and Pseudo Codecited by 11
- 2022The Best of Both Worlds: Combining Learned Embeddings with Engineered Features for Accurate Prediction of Correct Patchescited by 9
- 2022Is this Change the Answer to that Problem? Correlating Descriptions of Bug and Code Changes for Evaluating Patch Correctnesscited by 7
- 2019PatchNet: Hierarchical Deep Learning-Based Stable Patch Identification for the Linux Kernelcited by 5
- 2022iTiger: An Automatic Issue Title Generation Toolcited by 4
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 3; 2025: 10; 2026: 6.
19 papers.
Sort:
By area:
- 2025VulnBot: Autonomous Penetration Testing for A Multi-Agent Collaborative Frameworkcited by 30
- 2025Incident Response Planning Using a Lightweight Large Language Model with Reduced Hallucinationcited by 10
- 2024From Vulnerabilities to Remediation: A Systematic Literature Review of LLMs in Code Securitycited by 9
- 2025AI Agent Smart Contract Exploit Generationcited by 8
- 2024AutoPT: How Far Are We from the End2End Automated Web Penetration Testing?cited by 7
- 2025One Bug, Hundreds Behind: LLMs for Large-Scale Bug Discoverycited by 6
- 2025Adaptive Plan-Execute Framework for Smart Contract Security Auditingcited by 2
- 2025CAT: Can Trust be Predicted with Context-Awareness in Dynamic Heterogeneous Networks?cited by 2
- 2026Hallucination-Resistant Security Planning with a Large Language Modelcited by 1
- 2026HIDBench: Benchmarking Large Language Models for Host-Based Intrusion Detectioncited by 1
- 2024Beyond Static Tools: Evaluating Large Language Models for Cryptographic Misuse Detectioncited by 0
- 2025To Patch or Not to Patch: Motivations, Challenges, and Implications for Cybersecuritycited by 0
7 more
- 2025Retrofit: Continual Learning with Controlled Forgetting for Binary Security Detection and Analysiscited by 0
- 2025Progressive Code Integration for Abstractive Bug Report Summarizationcited by 0
- 2025Software Vulnerability Management in the Era of Artificial Intelligence: An Industry Perspectivecited by 0
- 2026LogicEval: A Systematic Framework for Evaluating Automated Repair Techniques for Logical Vulnerabilities in Real-World Softwarecited by 0
- 2026Security of LLM-generated Code: A Comparative Analysiscited by 0
- 2026Transferable Self-Evolving Playbooks for Agentic Security Auditingcited by 0
- 2026LLM4Trust: Exploring the Capabilities of Large Language Models for Trust Evaluationcited by 0
- 2026LLM4Trust: Exploring the Capabilities of Large Language Models for Trust Evaluation27 Sep 2026
- 2026Transferable Self-Evolving Playbooks for Agentic Security Auditing15 Jun 2026
- 2026Security of LLM-generated Code: A Comparative Analysis21 May 2026
- 2026HIDBench: Benchmarking Large Language Models for Host-Based Intrusion Detection20 May 2026
- 2026LogicEval: A Systematic Framework for Evaluating Automated Repair Techniques for Logical Vulnerabilities in Real-World Software14 Apr 2026
- 2026Hallucination-Resistant Security Planning with a Large Language Model5 Feb 2026
- 2025Software Vulnerability Management in the Era of Artificial Intelligence: An Industry Perspective20 Dec 2025
- 2025CAT: Can Trust be Predicted with Context-Awareness in Dynamic Heterogeneous Networks?12 Dec 2025
- 2025Progressive Code Integration for Abstractive Bug Report Summarization29 Nov 2025
- 2025Retrofit: Continual Learning with Controlled Forgetting for Binary Security Detection and Analysis14 Nov 2025
- 2025One Bug, Hundreds Behind: LLMs for Large-Scale Bug Discovery15 Oct 2025
- 2025Incident Response Planning Using a Lightweight Large Language Model with Reduced Hallucination7 Aug 2025
7 more
- 2025AI Agent Smart Contract Exploit Generation8 Jul 2025
- 2025Adaptive Plan-Execute Framework for Smart Contract Security Auditing21 May 2025
- 2025To Patch or Not to Patch: Motivations, Challenges, and Implications for Cybersecurity24 Feb 2025
- 2025VulnBot: Autonomous Penetration Testing for A Multi-Agent Collaborative Framework23 Jan 2025
- 2024From Vulnerabilities to Remediation: A Systematic Literature Review of LLMs in Code Security19 Dec 2024
- 2024Beyond Static Tools: Evaluating Large Language Models for Cryptographic Misuse Detection14 Nov 2024
- 2024AutoPT: How Far Are We from the End2End Automated Web Penetration Testing?2 Nov 2024
- 2025Incident Response Planning Using a Lightweight Large Language Model with Reduced Hallucinationcited by 10
- 2024From Vulnerabilities to Remediation: A Systematic Literature Review of LLMs in Code Securitycited by 9
- 2024AutoPT: How Far Are We from the End2End Automated Web Penetration Testing?cited by 7
- 2025One Bug, Hundreds Behind: LLMs for Large-Scale Bug Discoverycited by 6
- 2025Adaptive Plan-Execute Framework for Smart Contract Security Auditingcited by 2
- 2025CAT: Can Trust be Predicted with Context-Awareness in Dynamic Heterogeneous Networks?cited by 2
- 2026Hallucination-Resistant Security Planning with a Large Language Modelcited by 1
- 2026HIDBench: Benchmarking Large Language Models for Host-Based Intrusion Detectioncited by 1
- 2024Beyond Static Tools: Evaluating Large Language Models for Cryptographic Misuse Detectioncited by 0
- 2025To Patch or Not to Patch: Motivations, Challenges, and Implications for Cybersecuritycited by 0
- 2025Retrofit: Continual Learning with Controlled Forgetting for Binary Security Detection and Analysiscited by 0
- 2025Progressive Code Integration for Abstractive Bug Report Summarizationcited by 0
12 most cited of 16 All 16 (JSON)
- 2026LLM4Trust: Exploring the Capabilities of Large Language Models for Trust Evaluation27 Sep 2026
- 2026Security of LLM-generated Code: A Comparative Analysis21 May 2026
- 2026HIDBench: Benchmarking Large Language Models for Host-Based Intrusion Detection20 May 2026
- 2026LogicEval: A Systematic Framework for Evaluating Automated Repair Techniques for Logical Vulnerabilities in Real-World Software14 Apr 2026
- 2026Hallucination-Resistant Security Planning with a Large Language Model5 Feb 2026
- 2025Software Vulnerability Management in the Era of Artificial Intelligence: An Industry Perspective20 Dec 2025
- 2025CAT: Can Trust be Predicted with Context-Awareness in Dynamic Heterogeneous Networks?12 Dec 2025
- 2025Progressive Code Integration for Abstractive Bug Report Summarization29 Nov 2025
- 2025Retrofit: Continual Learning with Controlled Forgetting for Binary Security Detection and Analysis14 Nov 2025
- 2025One Bug, Hundreds Behind: LLMs for Large-Scale Bug Discovery15 Oct 2025
- 2025Incident Response Planning Using a Lightweight Large Language Model with Reduced Hallucination7 Aug 2025
- 2025Adaptive Plan-Execute Framework for Smart Contract Security Auditing21 May 2025
12 newest of 16 All 16 (JSON)