# LLM-Based Agents for Software and Systems Security: Approaches, Applications, and Assessment

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.28490 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.28490/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Agent threats, guardrails and governance, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use.
- Builds on 8 of its 121 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 28 Aug 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM agents and tool use / [Agent threats, guardrails and governance](https://mlsanity.com/agents/agent-threats-guardrails-and-governance/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 8 of 8)

- [GPT-4 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.08774/) (2023)
- [LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.13971/) (2023)
- [A Survey of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.18223/) (2023)
- [Gemini: A Family of Highly Capable Multimodal Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.11805/) (2023)
- [DeepSeek LLM: Scaling Open-Source Language Models with Longtermism](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.02954/) (2024)
- [A Comprehensive Overview of Large Language Models (LLMs) for Cyber Defences: Opportunities and Directions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.14487/) (2024)
- [A Survey on Agentic Security: Applications, Threats and Defenses](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.06445/) (2025)
- [Forewarned is Forearmed: A Survey on Large Language Model-based Agents in Autonomous Cyberattacks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.12786/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Software and systems security workflows are typically procedural: analysts inspect heterogeneous artifacts, form hypotheses, invoke tools, interpret outputs, and revise plans. Large language model (LLM)-based agents, which can plan, use tools, retain state, and revise actions across multi-step workflows, are being rapidly adopted to automate this work. Given the consequences of delegating security decisions to autonomous systems, understanding how such agents are built, used, and assessed is crucial. Yet to this date, there remains a lack of systematic understanding of what has been done and how far we are in this field: the term "agent" is applied inconsistently, applications differ sharply in risk, and assessment protocols are often incomparable. To gain a comprehensive and coherent view of this area hence inform relevant future research, this paper provides a systematic literature review of the (1) technical approaches, including agent architecture, perception, memory, reasoning and planning, action space, orchestration, and self-improvement, (2) applications, with respect to the security tasks served, and (3) assessment, including the datasets, outcome and trajectory metrics, safety measures, and baselines considered, over the peer-reviewed literature spanning the emergence of this area (2023--2026). Our synthesis reveals a field that has built agents able to act but not yet agents whose authority is bounded or whose behavior is auditable. In addition to knowledge systematization, we also extend our insights into the limitations of and challenges faced by current approach, application, and assessment designs, which shed light on potentially promising future research directions.