mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Large Language Models Cannot Reliably Detect Vulnerabilities in JavaScript: The First Systematic Benchmark and Evaluation

arXiv 2512.01255 ↗First posted 1 Dec 2025cs.CR cs.CL cs.SEcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Researchers have proposed numerous methods to detect vulnerabilities in JavaScript, especially those assisted by Large Language Models (LLMs). However, the actual capability of LLMs in JavaScript vulnerability detection remains questionable, necessitating systematic evaluation and comprehensive benchmarks. Unfortunately, existing benchmarks suffer from three critical limitations: (1) incomplete coverage, such as covering a limited subset of CWE types; (2) underestimation of LLM capabilities caused by unreasonable ground truth labeling; and (3) overestimation due to unrealistic cases such as using isolated vulnerable files rather than complete projects. In this paper, we introduce, for the first time, three principles for constructing a benchmark for JavaScript vulnerability detection that directly address these limitations: (1) comprehensiveness, (2) no underestimation, and (3) no overestimation. Guided by these principles, we propose FORGEJS, the first automatic benchmark generation framework for evaluating LLMs' capability in JavaScript vulnerability detection. Then, we use FORGEJS to construct ARENAJS-the first systematic benchmark for LLM-based JavaScript vulnerability detection-and further propose JUDGEJS, an automatic evaluation framework. We conduct the first systematic evaluation of LLMs for JavaScript vulnerability detection, leveraging JUDGEJS to assess seven popular commercial LLMs on ARENAJS. The results show that LLMs not only exhibit limited reasoning capabilities, but also suffer from severe robustness defects, indicating that reliable JavaScript vulnerability detection with LLMs remains an open challenge.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 11 of its 63 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 Dec 2025.

Builds on

11 of 63 references.

References · 11

  1. 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,053
  2. 2019Devign: Effective Vulnerability Identification by Learning Comprehensive Program Semantics via Graph Neural Networkscited by 266
  3. 2024Vulnerability Detection with Code Language Models: How Far Are We?cited by 133
  4. 2022Taxonomy of Attacks on Open-Source Software Supply Chainscited by 57
  5. 2021Vulnerability Detection with Fine-grained Interpretationscited by 56
  6. 2022VulBERTa: Simplified Source Code Pre-Training for Vulnerability Detectioncited by 51
  7. 2019A Manually-Curated Dataset of Fixes to Vulnerabilities of Open-Source Softwarecited by 28
  8. 2019BugSwarm: Mining and Continuously Growing a Dataset of Reproducible Failures and Fixescited by 12
  9. 2025SV-TrustEval-C: Evaluating Structure and Semantic Reasoning in Large Language Models for Source Code Vulnerability Analysiscited by 8
  10. 2017Ghera: A Repository of Android App Vulnerability Benchmarkscited by 3
  11. 2022Silent Spring: Prototype Pollution Leads to Remote Code Execution in Node.jscited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Exploring Automated Vulnerability Identification in JavaScript Code Using Large Language Models
  2. 2025A Systematic Study on Generating Web Vulnerability Proof-of-Concepts Using Large Language Models
  3. 2025A Systematic Study of Code Obfuscation Against LLM-based Vulnerability Detection
  4. 2026Taint-Style Vulnerability Detection and Confirmation for Node.js Packages Using LLM Agent Reasoning
  5. 2026Revisiting Vul-RAG: Reproducibility and Replicability of RAG-based Vulnerability Detection with Open-Weight Models
  6. 2024LLM4Vuln: A Unified Evaluation Framework for Decoupling and Enhancing LLMs' Vulnerability Reasoning
  7. 2025VulInstruct: Teaching LLMs Root-Cause Reasoning for Vulnerability Detection via Security Specifications
  8. 2025When Code Crosses Borders: A Security-Centric Study of LLM-based Code Translation ↗