Software Vulnerability Management in the Era of Artificial Intelligence: An Industry Perspective
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Artificial Intelligence (AI) has revolutionized software development, particularly by automating repetitive tasks and improving developer productivity. While these advancements are well-documented, the use of AI-powered tools for Software Vulnerability Management (SVM), such as vulnerability detection and repair, remains underexplored in industry settings. To bridge this gap, our study aims to determine the extent of the adoption of AI-powered tools for SVM, identify barriers and facilitators to the use, and gather insights to help improve the tools to meet industry needs better. We conducted a survey study involving 60 practitioners from diverse industry sectors across 27 countries. The survey incorporates both quantitative and qualitative questions to analyze the adoption trends, assess tool strengths, identify practical challenges, and uncover opportunities for improvement. Our findings indicate that AI-powered tools are used throughout the SVM life cycle, with 69% of users reporting satisfaction with their current use. Practitioners value these tools for their speed, coverage, and accessibility. However, concerns about false positives, missing context, and trust issues remain prevalent. We observe a socio-technical adoption pattern in which AI outputs are filtered through human oversight and organizational governance. To support safe and effective use of AI for SVM, we recommend improvements in explainability, contextual awareness, integration workflows, and validation practices. We assert that these findings can offer practical guidance for practitioners, tool developers, and researchers seeking to enhance secure software development through the use of AI.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 34 of its 78 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 Dec 2025.
Builds on
34 of 78 references.
References · 34
- 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
- 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,053
- 2020CodeBERT: A Pre-Trained Model for Programming and Natural Languagescited by 1,286
- 2020Deep Learning based Vulnerability Detection: Are We There Yet?cited by 142
- 2022Productivity Assessment of Neural Code Completioncited by 97
- 2023A Large-Scale Survey on the Usability of AI Programming Assistants: Successes and Challengescited by 75
- 2020Deep Learning for Source Code Modeling and Generation: Models, Applications and Challengescited by 55
- 2023A Survey of Learning-based Automated Program Repaircited by 55
- 2024Using AI-Based Coding Assistants in Practice: State of Affairs, Perceptions, and Ways Forwardcited by 44
- 2024Using AI Assistants in Software Development: A Qualitative Study on Security Practices and Concernscited by 27
- 2023Fixing Hardware Security Bugs with Large Language Modelscited by 24
- 2023Exploring ChatGPT's Capabilities on Vulnerability Managementcited by 19
22 more
- 2021A Survey on Data-driven Software Vulnerability Assessment and Prioritizationcited by 18
- 2023AIBugHunter: A Practical Tool for Predicting, Classifying and Repairing Software Vulnerabilitiescited by 17
- 2024An Empirical Study on Challenges for LLM Application Developerscited by 17
- 2023Pre-trained Model-based Automated Software Vulnerability Repair: How Far are We?cited by 15
- 2023Evaluating Diverse Large Language Models for Automatic and General Bug Reproductioncited by 12
- 2024An Investigation into Misuse of Java Security APIs by Large Language Modelscited by 11
- 2022Improving Automated Program Repair with Domain Adaptationcited by 10
- 2022The Best of Both Worlds: Combining Learned Embeddings with Engineered Features for Accurate Prediction of Correct Patchescited by 9
- 2024Are Latent Vulnerabilities Hidden Gems for Software Vulnerability Prediction? An Empirical Studycited by 9
- 2025LLMSecConfig: An LLM-Based Approach for Fixing Software Container Misconfigurationscited by 9
- 2025Chatbots for Data Collection in Surveys: A Comparison of Four Theory-Based Interview Probescited by 9
- 2023Safeguarding Crowdsourcing Surveys from ChatGPT with Prompt Injectioncited by 8
- 2024Revisiting the Performance of Deep Learning-Based Vulnerability Detection on Realistic Datasetscited by 6
- 2024Mitigating Data Imbalance for Software Vulnerability Assessment: Does Data Augmentation Help?cited by 6
- 2024Automated Code-centric Software Vulnerability Assessment: How Far Are We? An Empirical Study in C/C++cited by 6
- 2024Automatic Data Labeling for Software Vulnerability Prediction Models: How Far Are We?cited by 6
- 2024Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Tools for Smart Contracts: How Far Are We?cited by 5
- 2022Katana: Dual Slicing-Based Context for Learning Bug Fixescited by 4
- 2025Toward Realistic Evaluations of Just-In-Time Vulnerability Predictioncited by 3
- 2023Empirical Analysis of Software Vulnerabilities Causing Timing Side Channelscited by 2
- 2024A Qualitative Study on Using ChatGPT for Software Security: Perception vs. Practicalitycited by 2
- 2022Privacy Engineering in the Wild: Understanding the Practitioners' Mindset, Organisational Aspects, and Current Practicescited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.