From Lab to Reality: A Practical Evaluation of Deep Learning Models and LLMs for Vulnerability Detection

Supervised-learning-based vulnerability detectors often fall short due to limited labelled training data. In contrast, Large Language Models (LLMs) are trained on vast unlabelled code corpora, yet perform only marginally better than coin flips when directly prompted to detect vulnerabilities. In this paper, we reframe vulnerability detection as anomaly detection, based on the premise that vulnerable code is rare and thus anomalous relative to patterns learned by LLMs. We introduce ANVIL, which performs a masked code reconstruction task: The LLM reconstructs a masked line of code, and deviations from the original are scored as anomalies. We propose a hybrid anomaly score that combines exact match, cross-entropy loss, prediction confidence, and structural complexity. We evaluate our approach across multiple LLM families, scoring methods, and context sizes, and against vulnerabilities after the LLM's training cut-off. On the PrimeVul dataset, ANVIL outperforms state-of-the-art supervised detectors - LineVul, LineVD, and LLMAO - achieving up to 2x higher Top-3 accuracy, 75% better Normalized MFR, and a significant improvement on ROC-AUC. Finally, by integrating ANVIL with fuzzers, we uncover two previously unknown vulnerabilities, demonstrating the practical utility of anomaly-guided detection.

Automated vulnerability detection is a fundamental task in software security, yet existing learning-based methods still struggle to capture the structural dependencies, domain-specific vulnerability knowledge, and complex program semantics required for accurate detection. Recent Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown strong code understanding ability, but directly prompting them with raw source code often leads to missed vulnerabilities or false alarms, especially when vulnerable and benign functions differ only in subtle semantic details. To address this, we propose VulTriage, a triple-path context augmentation framework for LLM-based vulnerability detection. VulTriage enhances the LLM input through three complementary paths: a Control Path that extracts and verbalizes AST, CFG, and DFG information to expose control and data dependencies; a Knowledge Path that retrieves relevant CWE-derived vulnerability patterns and examples through hybrid dense--sparse retrieval; and a Semantic Path that summarizes the functional behavior of the code before the final judgment. These contexts are integrated into a unified instruction to guide the LLM toward more reliable vulnerability reasoning. Experiments on the PrimeVul pair test set show that VulTriage achieves state-of-the-art performance, outperforming existing deep learning and LLM-based baselines on key pair-wise and classification metrics. Further ablation studies verify the effectiveness of each path, and additional experiments on the Kotlin dataset demonstrate the generalization ability of VulTriage under low-resource and class-imbalanced settings. Our code is available at https://github.com/vinsontang1/VulTriage

Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as a promising tool for automated vulnerability detection, yet their effectiveness on web-specific vulnerabilities remains to be explored. This work benchmarks six frontier (Claude Opus 4.6, Codex GPT-5.4, Gemini 3.1-pro-preview) and open-weight models (Qwen 3.5, Qwen 3 Coder Next, MiniMax M2.5) on their ability to detect real-world web vulnerabilities using static analysis in WordPress plugins, including SQL injection, stored cross-site scripting, path traversal, and remote code execution. Using five prompt designs of varying structure, scope, and complexity across three experiment iterations, we aim to answer how model and prompt choice affects vulnerability detection. Our results show that all models are capable of detecting valid security issues, but the detection rate varies depending on the model and prompt. For example, Claude Opus 4.6 achieved the highest web vulnerability detection rate (63%), while open-weight MiniMax M2.5 performs on par with other frontier models (48%), and self-hosted Qwen 3.5 only achieved 35%. We show that scoped prompts that narrow the vulnerability scope outperform open-ended ones, whereas the prompt complexity has little impact. Surprisingly, no model achieved full reporting consistency across three experiment iterations, with some as low as 50%. Our experiments demonstrate the opportunities and limits of LLM-based vulnerability detection, as no model correctly identified one baseline vulnerability in one of the plugins. Additionally, we derive practical lessons learned for security practitioners and publish all code and data to support future research.