arXiv preprint ·
Humans vs. Machines: A Comparison With AI Agents in Software Reverse Engineering
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
Can an autonomous AI agent reverse engineer a binary as well as a skilled human analyst? Do they adopt the same strategy, and can agents scale to real-world programs? We compare human and LLM-based software reverse engineering (SRE): nine models tackle two compact static-analysis challenges previously solved by human analysts, scored with a common understanding rubric, and we record their complete interactions with IDA Pro. This lets us compare not only what humans and agents recover, but also how they investigate a binary. The best agents (GPT-5.5 Pro, Claude Opus 4.8, and Kimi K3) achieve statistically human-competitive understanding on both tasks, while weaker models remain far behind. Ablations show that the gap depends on code representation and workflow demands, not on model capability alone: open-weight models improve substantially with richer code representations, whereas frontier models show no significant change. Similar success rates hide different workflows. Humans repeatedly revisit functions and follow local program structure; strong agents jump across the binary, retrieve information broadly, and rarely return to inspected code, a behavior we call greedy fetching. This strategy is not fixed: given semantically richer code, agents fetch less without losing understanding. Because greedy fetching aggregates large amounts of code in the agent's context, we measure context-window saturation across 4,000 real-world binaries: large windows accommodate many programs, but larger applications and lower-level representations quickly exhaust them. Autonomous reverse engineering is becoming competitive, with a large speed advantage, but scaling it will require better navigation, selective retrieval, and persistent analysis state, not merely larger context windows.
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 Software Engineering
HoldSpec: A Machine-Checked Model and Conformance Suite for the Payment Authorization Hold Lifecycle
Verifying Autoware Controller Node by Combining Model Verification and Runtime Monitoring
Specification-Based Testing of Large Language Models
PassSum: Leveraging Paths of Abstract Syntax Trees and Self-Supervision for Code Summarization
Taylor-Approximation-Based Repair of High Floating-Point Errors
Get the few papers worth your time in Software Engineering 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.