arXiv preprint ·
On the Reliability of LLM-Based Vulnerability Patching Benchmarks
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
Large language models (LLMs) have shown strong potential for automated vulnerability patching, but current benchmarks can substantially distort reported performance. Drawing on extensive experience developing, running, and stress-testing such frameworks, we identify under-examined pitfalls across three dimensions: (1) agent-level factors, where prompting, tool availability, and detailed instructions can raise success rates without improving developer-aligned patch quality; (2) framework-level factors, where permission errors, infrastructure bugs, and timeout handling can silently suppress or inflate performance; and (3) dataset-level factors, where bug reports and single proof-of-concept (PoC) tests fail to capture whether patches address root causes or follow developer intent. We curate 112 historical bugs from 84 open-source C/C++, Go, and Rust projects, each with PoC tests, regression tests, and additional developer tests that assess alignment with the original developers' design principles. Through controlled experiments and case studies, we show that LLMs can achieve high PoC passing rates under ideal conditions, yet benchmark execution choices can materially change measured success. More importantly, developer-test passing rates remain low and improve only marginally with newer models, suggesting that models increasingly suppress symptoms without consistently producing upstream-quality fixes. These results show that benchmark scores are highly sensitive to evaluation design, and we provide practical guidelines for more rigorous, reliable, and reproducible evaluation.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Cryptography & Security
Adversarial Images Hijack Web Agents from Visual Grounding to Browser Execution
NOMOS: Compiling Written Policies into Statically Verified Tool-Call Gates for LLM Agents
Package Hallucination Attacks on Coding Agents through Prompt Injection in Rule Files
Language Modeling is Monotone Compression
Ask the Expert: LLM-Guided Reinforcement Learning for Autonomous Cyber Defense
Get the few papers worth your time in Cryptography & Security every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.