Extracting Recurring Vulnerabilities from Black-Box LLM-Generated Software
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
LLMs are increasingly used for code generation, but their outputs often follow recurring templates that can induce predictable vulnerabilities. We study vulnerability persistence in LLM-generated software and introduce Feature--Security Table (FSTab) with two components. First, FSTab enables a black-box attack that predicts likely backend vulnerabilities from observable frontend features and knowledge of the source LLM, without access to the backend or source code. Second, FSTab provides a model-centric evaluation that quantifies how consistently a model reproduces the same vulnerabilities across programs, semantics-preserving rephrasings, and application domains. We evaluate FSTab on state-of-the-art code LLMs, including GPT-5.2, Claude-4.5 Opus, and Gemini-3 Pro, across diverse application domains. Our results show strong cross-domain transfer: even when the target domain is excluded from training, FSTab achieves up to 94% attack success and 93% vulnerability coverage on Internal Tools (Claude-4.5 Opus). These findings expose an underexplored attack surface in LLM-generated software and highlight the security risks of code generation. Our code is available at https://github.com/fstabicml2026/FSTab
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 26 of its 31 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 Feb 2026.
Builds on
26 of 31 references.
References · 26
- 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,053
- 2020Extracting Training Data from Large Language Modelscited by 2,144
- 2023Code Llama: Open Foundation Models for Codecited by 2,105
- 2022Competition-Level Code Generation with AlphaCodecited by 1,427
- 2021CodeT5: Identifier-aware Unified Pre-trained Encoder-Decoder Models for Code Understanding and Generationcited by 890
- 2022CodeGen: An Open Large Language Model for Code with Multi-Turn Program Synthesiscited by 876
- 2023StarCoder: may the source be with you!cited by 790
- 2016Stealing Machine Learning Models via Prediction APIscited by 602
- 2022InCoder: A Generative Model for Code Infilling and Synthesiscited by 492
- 2021Asleep at the Keyboard? Assessing the Security of GitHub Copilot's Code Contributionscited by 417
- 2022UniXcoder: Unified Cross-Modal Pre-training for Code Representationcited by 355
- 2019High Accuracy and High Fidelity Extraction of Neural Networkscited by 208
14 more
- 2023Purple Llama CyberSecEval: A Secure Coding Benchmark for Language Modelscited by 130
- 2025WebGen-Bench: Evaluating LLMs on Generating Interactive and Functional Websites from Scratchcited by 66
- 2024Instructional Fingerprinting of Large Language Modelscited by 64
- 2023LLMSecEval: A Dataset of Natural Language Prompts for Security Evaluationscited by 58
- 2025CWEval: Outcome-driven Evaluation on Functionality and Security of LLM Code Generationcited by 55
- 2025The Price of Format: Diversity Collapse in LLMscited by 43
- 2024A Fingerprint for Large Language Modelscited by 26
- 2024Toward Secure Code Generation: Bridging Correctness and Security via Task-Adaptive Vulnerability Modeling and Execution-Based Benchmarkingcited by 26
- 2025SafeGenBench: A Benchmark Framework for Security Vulnerability Detection in LLM-Generated Codecited by 17
- 2025Who is using AI to code? Global diffusion and impact of generative AIcited by 17
- 2023LM-CPPF: Paraphrasing-Guided Data Augmentation for Contrastive Prompt-Based Few-Shot Fine-Tuningcited by 15
- 2025CASTLE: Benchmarking Dataset for Static Code Analyzers and LLMs towards CWE Detectioncited by 10
- 2025E2Edev: Benchmarking Large Language Models in End-to-End Software Development Taskcited by 6
- 2025LLMAP: LLM-Assisted Multi-Objective Route Planning with User Preferencescited by 5
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.
- 2026Unsupervised Features Mining via Activation Geometrycited by 0
- 2026Unsupervised Features Mining via Activation Geometry5 Jul 2026