# AutoBaxBuilder: Bootstrapping Code Security Benchmarking

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.21132 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.21132/

## Key facts

- Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Code and instruction data synthesis, one of 13 directions in Synthetic data and self-improvement for LLMs.
- Builds on 28 of its 57 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 24 Dec 2025.

## Placed in

- Synthetic data and self-improvement for LLMs / [Code and instruction data synthesis](https://mlsanity.com/synth/code-and-instruction-data-synthesis/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 28 of 28)

- [The Llama 3 Herd of Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21783/) (2024)
- [Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Code](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.03374/) (2021)
- [GPT-4o System Card](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.21276/) (2024)
- [Program Synthesis with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.07732/) (2021)
- [SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.06770/) (2023)
- [Qwen2.5-Coder Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.12186/) (2024)
- [Teaching Large Language Models to Self-Debug](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.05128/) (2023)
- [Measuring Coding Challenge Competence With APPS](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2105.09938/) (2021)
- [CRITIC: Large Language Models Can Self-Correct with Tool-Interactive Critiquing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.11738/) (2023)
- [Asleep at the Keyboard? Assessing the Security of GitHub Copilot's Code Contributions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.09293/) (2021)
- [CodeT: Code Generation with Generated Tests](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2207.10397/) (2022)
- [Cybench: A Framework for Evaluating Cybersecurity Capabilities and Risks of Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.08926/) (2024)
- [Purple Llama CyberSecEval: A Secure Coding Benchmark for Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.04724/) (2023)
- [SWT-Bench: Testing and Validating Real-World Bug-Fixes with Code Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.12952/) (2024)
- [REASONING GYM: Reasoning Environments for Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.24760/) (2025)
- [Large Language Models are Few-shot Testers: Exploring LLM-based General Bug Reproduction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2209.11515/) (2022)
- [IRIS: LLM-Assisted Static Analysis for Detecting Security Vulnerabilities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.17238/) (2024)
- [CVE-Bench: A Benchmark for AI Agents' Ability to Exploit Real-World Web Application Vulnerabilities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.17332/) (2025)
- [SEC-bench: Automated Benchmarking of LLM Agents on Real-World Software Security Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.11791/) (2025)
- [Instruction Tuning for Secure Code Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.09497/) (2024)
- [CWEval: Outcome-driven Evaluation on Functionality and Security of LLM Code Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.08200/) (2025)
- [CodeLMSec Benchmark: Systematically Evaluating and Finding Security Vulnerabilities in Black-Box Code Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.04012/) (2023)
- [EnIGMA: Interactive Tools Substantially Assist LM Agents in Finding Security Vulnerabilities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.16165/) (2024)
- [BaxBench: Can LLMs Generate Correct and Secure Backends?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.11844/) (2025)
- [Constrained Decoding for Secure Code Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.00218/) (2024)
- [Automated Benchmark Generation for Repository-Level Coding Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.07701/) (2025)
- [Comparison of Static Application Security Testing Tools and Large Language Models for Repo-level Vulnerability Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.16235/) (2024)
- ["False negative -- that one is going to kill you": Understanding Industry Perspectives of Static Analysis based Security Testing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.16325/) (2023)

## Built on by (most cited first, 5 of 5)

- [Honeyval: A Comprehensive Evaluation Framework for LLM-powered HTTP Honeypots](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.29963/) (2026)
- [SecProbe: Adaptive Evaluation of Coding Agents on Cybersecurity Vulnerabilities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.33763/) (2026)
- [SecureVibe: Making Vibe Coding More Secure](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.38606/) (2026)
- [AuraForge: Scaling Security Supervision for Training Coding Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.00850/) (2026)
- [Does AI Help Cyber Attackers or Defenders? Evidence from Nonpublic Vulnerabilities and Subsequent Attacks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.06584/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

As large language models (LLMs) see wide adoption in software engineering, the reliable assessment of the correctness and security of LLM-generated code is crucial. Notably, prior work showed that LLMs are prone to generating code with security vulnerabilities, highlighting that security is often overlooked. These insights were enabled by specialized benchmarks crafted by security experts through significant manual effort. However, benchmarks (i) inevitably end up contaminating training data, (ii) must extend to new tasks to provide a more complete picture, and (iii) must increase in difficulty to challenge more capable LLMs. In this work, we address these challenges and present AutoBaxBuilder, an automated pipeline that generates code security benchmarking tasks from scratch. It leverages the code-understanding capabilities of LLMs combined with robust reliability checks to construct functional tests and end-to-end security-probing exploits. The quality of the pipeline is quantitatively confirmed by aligning its predictions with an expert-written baseline and qualitatively validated through manual soundness verification. We use AutoBaxBuilder to construct a new benchmark and release it to the public as AutoBaxBench, together with a thorough evaluation on contemporary LLMs. AutoBaxBuilder generates new tasks in under 2 hours, for less than USD 4. Including a manual verification, this reduces the required human effort for benchmark construction by a factor of 12.