mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

BaxBench: Can LLMs Generate Correct and Secure Backends?

arXiv 2502.11844 ↗First posted 17 Feb 2025cs.CR cs.AI cs.LGcited by 38

Not on the map. Why?

Cited by 20 in LLM agents and tool use, but placed by its own abstract, which didn’t fit.

Abstract (arXiv)

Automatic program generation has long been a fundamental challenge in computer science. Recent benchmarks have shown that large language models (LLMs) can effectively generate code at the function level, make code edits, and solve algorithmic coding tasks. However, to achieve full automation, LLMs should be able to generate production-quality, self-contained application modules. To evaluate the capabilities of LLMs in solving this challenge, we introduce BaxBench, a novel evaluation benchmark consisting of 392 tasks for the generation of backend applications. We focus on backends for three critical reasons: (i) they are practically relevant, building the core components of most modern web and cloud software, (ii) they are difficult to get right, requiring multiple functions and files to achieve the desired functionality, and (iii) they are security-critical, as they are exposed to untrusted third-parties, making secure solutions that prevent deployment-time attacks an imperative. BaxBench validates the functionality of the generated applications with comprehensive test cases, and assesses their security exposure by executing end-to-end exploits. Our experiments reveal key limitations of current LLMs in both functionality and security: (i) even the best model, OpenAI o1, achieves a mere 62% on code correctness; (ii) on average, we could successfully execute security exploits on around half of the correct programs generated by each LLM; and (iii) in less popular backend frameworks, models further struggle to generate correct and secure applications. Progress on BaxBench signifies important steps towards autonomous and secure software development with LLMs.

Key facts. Cited by 38 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 33 of its 48 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 17 Feb 2025.

Builds on

33 of 48 references.

References · 33

  1. 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,192
  2. 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,053
  3. 2025DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learningcited by 6,146
  4. 2024Qwen2.5 Technical Reportcited by 4,713
  5. 2024GPT-4o System Cardcited by 4,467
  6. 2021Program Synthesis with Large Language Modelscited by 3,509
  7. 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,193
  8. 2024Qwen2.5-Coder Technical Reportcited by 1,151
  9. 2024OpenHands: An Open Platform for AI Software Developers as Generalist Agentscited by 956
  10. 2021Measuring Coding Challenge Competence With APPScited by 879
  11. 2024BigCodeBench: Benchmarking Code Generation with Diverse Function Calls and Complex Instructionscited by 527
  12. 2022DS-1000: A Natural and Reliable Benchmark for Data Science Code Generationcited by 442
21 more
  1. 2021Asleep at the Keyboard? Assessing the Security of GitHub Copilot's Code Contributionscited by 417
  2. 2023RepoBench: Benchmarking Repository-Level Code Auto-Completion Systemscited by 346
  3. 2023OctoPack: Instruction Tuning Code Large Language Modelscited by 178
  4. 2024Cybench: A Framework for Evaluating Cybersecurity Capabilities and Risks of Language Modelscited by 156
  5. 2023Large Language Models for Code: Security Hardening and Adversarial Testingcited by 149
  6. 2023Purple Llama CyberSecEval: A Secure Coding Benchmark for Language Modelscited by 130
  7. 2024SWT-Bench: Testing and Validating Real-World Bug-Fixes with Code Agentscited by 129
  8. 2024IRIS: LLM-Assisted Static Analysis for Detecting Security Vulnerabilitiescited by 100
  9. 2024NYU CTF Bench: A Scalable Open-Source Benchmark Dataset for Evaluating LLMs in Offensive Securitycited by 90
  10. 2022Execution-Based Evaluation for Open-Domain Code Generationcited by 89
  11. 2024RedCode: Risky Code Execution and Generation Benchmark for Code Agentscited by 87
  12. 2024Instruction Tuning for Secure Code Generationcited by 63
  13. 2025CWEval: Outcome-driven Evaluation on Functionality and Security of LLM Code Generationcited by 55
  14. 2023CodeLMSec Benchmark: Systematically Evaluating and Finding Security Vulnerabilities in Black-Box Code Language Modelscited by 52
  15. 2024Constrained Decoding for Secure Code Generationcited by 35
  16. 2024Automatic Programming: Large Language Models and Beyondcited by 35
  17. 2024Sketch2Code: Evaluating Vision-Language Models for Interactive Web Design Prototypingcited by 29
  18. 2024ProSec: Fortifying Code LLMs with Proactive Security Alignmentcited by 24
  19. 2024Comparison of Static Application Security Testing Tools and Large Language Models for Repo-level Vulnerability Detectioncited by 18
  20. 2024Black-Box Adversarial Attacks on LLM-Based Code Completioncited by 13
  21. 2023"False negative -- that one is going to kill you": Understanding Industry Perspectives of Static Analysis based Security Testingcited by 8

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 14; 2026: 24.

38 papers.

Sort:

By area:

  1. 2025SWE-PolyBench: A multi-language benchmark for repository level evaluation of coding agentscited by 80
  2. 2025RealMath: A Continuous Benchmark for Evaluating Language Models on Research-Level Mathematicscited by 30
  3. 2026ExploitGym: Can AI Agents Turn Security Vulnerabilities into Real Attacks?cited by 24
  4. 2025Frontier AI's Impact on the Cybersecurity Landscapecited by 21
  5. 2026Evaluating AGENTS.md: Are Repository-Level Context Files Helpful for Coding Agents?cited by 19
  6. 2025Is Vibe Coding Safe? Benchmarking Vulnerability of Agent-Generated Code in Real-World Taskscited by 18
  7. 2025Nex-N1: Agentic Models Trained via a Unified Ecosystem for Large-Scale Environment Constructioncited by 17
  8. 2025Constrained Decoding of Diffusion LLMs with Context-Free Grammarscited by 13
  9. 2025A.S.E: A Repository-Level Benchmark for Evaluating Security in AI-Generated Codecited by 12
  10. 2025SecureVibeBench: Benchmarking Secure Vibe Coding of AI Agents via Reconstructing Vulnerability-Introducing Scenarioscited by 11
  11. 2026DevOps-Gym: Benchmarking AI Agents in Software DevOps Cyclecited by 9
  12. 2025Benchmarking Correctness and Security in Multi-Turn Code Generationcited by 4
26 more
  1. 2025AutoBaxBuilder: Bootstrapping Code Security Benchmarkingcited by 4
  2. 2026MOSAIC-Bench: Measuring Compositional Vulnerability Induction in Coding Agentscited by 3
  3. 2026Constraint Decay: The Fragility of LLM Agents in Backend Code Generationcited by 3
  4. 2025When "Correct" Is Not Safe: Can We Trust Functionally Correct Patches Generated by Code Agents?cited by 2
  5. 2025DualGauge: Automated Joint Security-Functionality Benchmarking of Specification-Only Code Generation by LLMs and Coding Agentscited by 1
  6. 2026Enhancing Reliability in LLM-Based Secure Code Generationcited by 1
  7. 2026Honeyval: A Comprehensive Evaluation Framework for LLM-powered HTTP Honeypotscited by 1
  8. 2026SEVRA-BENCH: Social Engineering of Vulnerabilities in Review Agentscited by 1
  9. 2026Snyk VulnBench JS 1.0: Can LLMs Find the Same Bugs Twice?cited by 1
  10. 2026Architecture as Capability Equalizer for Coding Agentscited by 1
  11. 2025Grounded AI for Code Review: Resource-Efficient Large-Model Serving in Enterprise Pipelinescited by 0
  12. 2025TypePilot: Leveraging the Scala Type System for Secure LLM-generated Codecited by 0
  13. 2026From Abstract to Contextual: What LLMs Still Cannot Do in Mathematicscited by 0
  14. 2026A Quasi-Experimental Developer Study of Security Training in LLM-Assisted Web Application Developmentcited by 0
  15. 2026SecureForge: Finding and Preventing Vulnerabilities in LLM-Generated Code via Prompt Optimizationcited by 0
  16. 2026CRAB-Bench: Evaluating LLM Agents under Complex Task Dependencies and Human-aligned User Simulationcited by 0
  17. 2026Activating Latent Security Knowledge through LLM-Guided Risk Analysis for Secure Code Generationcited by 0
  18. 2026SoK: AI Secure Code Generation: Progress, Pitfalls, and Paths Forwardcited by 0
  19. 2026The Patchwork Problem in LLM-Generated Codecited by 0
  20. 2026BackendForge: Benchmarking Agentic End-to-End Code Generation with Backend Servicescited by 0
  21. 2026Generative Compilation: On-the-Fly Compiler Feedback as AI Generates Codecited by 0
  22. 2026Vibe Coding and Web Application Security: A Twin-Prompt Studycited by 0
  23. 2026MACGen: Toward Functionally Correct and Secure Code Generation via Multi-Agent Collaborationcited by 0
  24. 2026MAGS: Multi-agent Auto-formalization Guarantees Safety for Agentic Outputscited by 0
  25. 2026SecureVibe: Making Vibe Coding More Securecited by 0
  26. 2026AuraForge: Scaling Security Supervision for Training Coding Agentscited by 0