# Transfer Attacks and Defenses for Large Language Models on Coding Tasks

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2311.13445 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.13445/

## Key facts

- Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 36 of its 48 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 22 Nov 2023.

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 36)

- [Attention Is All You Need](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.03762/) (2017)
- [BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.04805/) (2018)
- [Language Models are Few-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.14165/) (2020)
- [Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.02155/) (2022)
- [Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Code](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.03374/) (2021)
- [Explaining and Harnessing Adversarial Examples](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1412.6572/) (2014)
- [Towards Deep Learning Models Resistant to Adversarial Attacks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.06083/) (2017)
- [Intriguing properties of neural networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1312.6199/) (2013)
- [Program Synthesis with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.07732/) (2021)
- [Universal and Transferable Adversarial Attacks on Aligned Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.15043/) (2023)
- [Sequence to Sequence Learning with Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1409.3215/) (2014)
- [Code Llama: Open Foundation Models for Code](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.12950/) (2023)
- [Language Models (Mostly) Know What They Know](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2207.05221/) (2022)
- [Competition-Level Code Generation with AlphaCode](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.07814/) (2022)
- [Is Your Code Generated by ChatGPT Really Correct? Rigorous Evaluation of Large Language Models for Code Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.01210/) (2023)
- [CodeBERT: A Pre-Trained Model for Programming and Natural Languages](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2002.08155/) (2020)
- [Large Language Models Are Human-Level Prompt Engineers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.01910/) (2022)
- [Just Ask for Calibration: Strategies for Eliciting Calibrated Confidence Scores from Language Models Fine-Tuned with Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14975/) (2023)
- [Automatic Prompt Optimization with "Gradient Descent" and Beam Search](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.03495/) (2023)
- [Baseline Defenses for Adversarial Attacks Against Aligned Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.00614/) (2023)
- [SmoothLLM: Defending Large Language Models Against Jailbreaking Attacks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.03684/) (2023)
- [Generalizing from a Few Examples: A Survey on Few-Shot Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1904.05046/) (2019)
- [Generating Natural Language Adversarial Examples](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1804.07998/) (2018)
- [Certifying LLM Safety against Adversarial Prompting](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.02705/) (2023)
- [code2vec: Learning Distributed Representations of Code](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.09473/) (2018)
- [Learning to Represent Programs with Graphs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1711.00740/) (2017)
- [code2seq: Generating Sequences from Structured Representations of Code](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1808.01400/) (2018)
- [A Convolutional Attention Network for Extreme Summarization of Source Code](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1602.03001/) (2016)
- [Improved Code Summarization via a Graph Neural Network](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.02843/) (2020)
- [DeepBugs: A Learning Approach to Name-based Bug Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1805.11683/) (2018)

## Built on by (most cited first, 2 of 2)

- [Smaller = Weaker? Benchmarking Robustness of Quantized LLMs in Code Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.22776/) (2025)
- [On the Lexical Superstition of Large Language Models for Code Comprehension: Re-evaluation on Code of Low Lexical Quality](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.26388/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Modern large language models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT, have demonstrated impressive capabilities for coding tasks including writing and reasoning about code. They improve upon previous neural network models of code, such as code2seq or seq2seq, that already demonstrated competitive results when performing tasks such as code summarization and identifying code vulnerabilities. However, these previous code models were shown vulnerable to adversarial examples, i.e. small syntactic perturbations that do not change the program's semantics, such as the inclusion of "dead code" through false conditions or the addition of inconsequential print statements, designed to "fool" the models. LLMs can also be vulnerable to the same adversarial perturbations but a detailed study on this concern has been lacking so far. In this paper we aim to investigate the effect of adversarial perturbations on coding tasks with LLMs. In particular, we study the transferability of adversarial examples, generated through white-box attacks on smaller code models, to LLMs. Furthermore, to make the LLMs more robust against such adversaries without incurring the cost of retraining, we propose prompt-based defenses that involve modifying the prompt to include additional information such as examples of adversarially perturbed code and explicit instructions for reversing adversarial perturbations. Our experiments show that adversarial examples obtained with a smaller code model are indeed transferable, weakening the LLMs' performance. The proposed defenses show promise in improving the model's resilience, paving the way to more robust defensive solutions for LLMs in code-related applications.