Vulnerability Detection & Repair

AI coding agents now read repositories, call tools, and execute shell commands with limited human oversight, and a fast-growing body of work studies whether the execution layer around them is actually safe. That literature is scattered. Papers on sandbox isolation, capability and access control, policy enforcement, time-of-check-to-time-of-use (TOCTOU) races, Model Context Protocol (MCP) threats, identity delegation, execution provenance, network egress control, and static analysis of agent-generated code are published independently and rarely cite one another. We systematize 39 papers published between 2023 and 2026 into 17 categories, each verified directly against its source. The same verification protocol also confirms four disclosed, patched CVEs directly affecting production agent harnesses. Reading across categories surfaces five cross-cutting gaps that no single paper addresses. (1) Isolation architectures and capability models are almost never evaluated against one another on a shared benchmark. (2) Policy-enforcement studies report failure rates from 69% to 98% of real denylists, yet no isolation paper re-evaluates its own defense under that adversarial setting. (3) TOCTOU and MCP threats are analyzed as separate literatures despite both being instances of the same state-validation problem. (4) Every enforcement mechanism assumes an honest policy author, leaving policy-authoring error itself unaddressed. (5) Benign but out-of-scope agent actions occurring at rates up to 17.1% under realistic prompting are addressed by no access-control or capability paper in the corpus. Existing broader surveys of agentic AI security discuss sandboxing only as one item among many defenses, leaving execution security without a dedicated systematization. This paper is written to fill that gap. We conclude with a research agenda directed at the five gaps.

LLM agents are increasingly applied to vulnerability analysis, but existing benchmarks have not kept pace. They typically rely on small non-compilable snippets, focus on binary classification (vulnerable or not), and do not account for the risk that publicly-released datasets are part of model training corpora. We introduce RustMizan, a benchmarking framework for Rust vulnerability analysis that addresses these gaps. RustMizan contains compilable code variants at the crate, file, and function levels, with annotations for binary vulnerability detection, CWE classification, and function- and line-level localization. A paired mutation framework produces semantics-preserving code mutants for contamination testing and robustness probing. Across four frontier models in an agentic setup with command-line access, binary classification sits in the 56-65% range, but line localization F1 stays near 20%, and adversarial cues drop line F1 by about 27%.

The increasing complexity and frequency of software vulnerabilities demand efficient methods to analyze and prioritize threats. Traditional approaches often fail to process the vast amount of unstructured textual data effectively, highlighting the need for advanced solutions. This study leverages state-of-the-art topic modeling techniques powered by large language models (LLMs) to extract meaningful insights from the 'Threat' feature of a software vulnerability dataset. Models such as BERTopic, Top2Vec, CombinedTM, Llama2 with BERTopic, and Mixtral are utilized, along with dimensionality reduction and clustering methods like UMAP, PCA, HDBSCAN, and DBSCAN. By uncovering latent patterns and generating interpretable clusters, this research enhances threat prioritization and decision-making in cybersecurity. The findings support scalable and automated solutions for vulnerability management, contributing to improved security practices.

While Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable success in Text-to-SQL tasks, their deployment in real-world environments is hindered by latent reliability issues. Identifying these latent weaknesses is critical for building trustworthy database interfaces, yet current diagnostic approaches rely heavily on static, expert-defined rules, which lack the capability for systematic and automated exploration. To bridge this gap, we propose SAGE (Systematic Automated Guided Exploration), a novel framework designed to autonomously uncover latent failure patterns in LLM-based Text-to-SQL generation. Specifically, SAGE generates vulnerability hypotheses for given samples and references a continuously evolving Vulnerability Codex to design targeted perturbations, thereby iteratively verifying and documenting potential defects. Extensive experiments on state-of-the-art open-source LLMs demonstrate that SAGE uncovers a substantial number of failure cases, highlighting the significant fragility of current models. Furthermore, our analysis reveals that the Vulnerability Codex exhibits strong cross-model transferability, indicating that the discovered patterns represent generalized structural weaknesses. Finally, we explore SAGE's potential for remediation. Although preliminary, lightweight fine-tuning on the generated samples yields promising improvements, suggesting a scalable pathway for closing the reliability loop in future work.

Multimodal diffusion transformers (MM-DiTs) have emerged as the prevalent backbone for modern text-to-image generation systems. However, they exhibit critical alignment vulnerabilities, systematically manifesting severe stereotype biases even under benign prompts. This poses a significant risk of algorithmic discrimination in deployed systems. Since most existing mitigation strategies were tailored for legacy U-Net architectures, the precise remediation of these vulnerabilities in MM-DiTs remains a critical open challenge. In this work, we first investigate the root cause of this vulnerability via mechanistic analysis. We reveal that bias representations in MM-DiTs are not uniformly distributed across depth, but are mediated by a sparse set of layers functioning as internal semantic binding hubs. These hubs exhibit a stage-wise propagation driving bias manifestation: early hubs establish the structural templates susceptible to bias, middle hubs actively extract core stereotypical concepts from textual conditioning, and late hubs globally solidify these biases through visual self-attention. Leveraging these architectural insights, we propose FairFlow, an intrinsic, mechanism-guided mitigation framework. FairFlow acts as an internal regulator by employing sparse steering: it learns attribute-specific fair directions and injects them exclusively at the identified semantic hubs within a constrained inference window. Evaluations on FLUX.1-dev and Stable Diffusion~3 demonstrate that FairFlow effectively neutralizes these stereotypical vulnerabilities across gender, race, and intersectional settings, achieving an optimal fairness-fidelity balance. With near-zero inference overhead and robustness to complex prompts, FairFlow provides a lightweight and practical bias mitigation for large-scale deployed MM-DiT systems. Code and datasets will be publicly released upon acceptance.

We release \textsc{JavaVulBench}, a benchmark dataset and evaluation harness for Java vulnerability detection. The dataset contains $\sim$30{,}600 Java methods spanning 1{,}740 CVEs and 700+ projects, labelled at both method and line granularity, with per-CVE publication dates and five realistic split strategies: random, project-disjoint, temporal, deduplicated, and unseen CWE-family. The harness provides a single \texttt{LlmPrediction} schema across three backend families (encoder classifiers, local generative models served by Ollama, and API-served LLMs routed through OpenRouter) so that twelve reference detectors CodeBERT, GraphCodeBERT, UniXcoder, DeepSeek-Coder-1.3B, and eight API/open-weight LLMs (GPT-4o, GPT-4.1-mini, Claude Sonnet~4, DeepSeek-v3, DeepSeek-Coder-v2, Qwen-2.5-Coder-14B/7B, CodeLlama-13B) are evaluated under identical conditions from a single command. A pre-training contamination audit is shipped alongside every model so users can separate genuinely unseen test CVEs from potentially memorised ones. Data, code, and fine-tuned checkpoints are archived on Zenodo [31] and short demonstration video is available on YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMTX\_hqkuoM) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMTX_hqkuoM.

Repository-level vulnerability reproduction is a demanding software engineering (SE) task: an agent must inspect a codebase, infer the input grammar that reaches a vulnerable path, construct a proof-of-conceptv(PoC), and verify that the crash disappears on the patched build. Recent LLM agents can often execute these steps when the approach is correct, yet they still fail by choosing the wrong strategy. This paper argues that strategy, rather than the full action trajectory, is the right learning unit for such SE agents: it is compact enough to optimize, concrete enough to guide execution, and stable enough to store and reuse across attempts. We present Mastermind, a dual-loop framework that separates transferable strategy learning from task-specific experience. A trainable planner learns reusable vulnerability-reproduction strategies through SFT and milestone-based GRPO, while an experience loop maintains task-local strategy records that guide subsequent attempts. The planner is trained independently of the executor, allowing strategy learning to improve multiple frozen executors without modifying their action-generation capability. We evaluate Mastermind on CyberGym using 260 training tasks and 200 held-out evaluation tasks. With GPT-5.5 as the frozen executor, Mastermind achieves an 84.5% pass rate, outperforming open-book PoC context (60.0%), Best-of-8 sampling (63.0%), and iterative improvement (77.0%). The same planner also improves GPT-5.4 mini and GLM~5.1 from 45.0% and 58.5% to 60.0% and 71.0%. These results demonstrate that learning high-level strategies is an effective and transferable mechanism for improving repository-scale SE agents.

Understanding how aligned LLMs internally represent safety is critical for diagnosing alignment vulnerabilities, as it explains why jailbreaks succeed and informs the design of robust alignment strategies. Prior work shows that aligned LLMs encode harmfulness and refusal as separable directions in the residual stream at prompt-side token positions. We show that jailbreaks succeed at prompt encoding by suppressing either the refusal or harmfulness direction before any token is generated, with distinct attack classes occupying separable regions of the harmfulness-refusal plane. Extending the analysis to response-token positions, we find that the model recognizes harmful content while it is generating that content, even when it failed to recognize the input as harmful at the prompt side. Motivated by our findings, we introduce HARC (Harmfulness-And-Refusal Coupling), a fine-tuning method that pairs the two directions across both prompt and response positions. Since the intervention is confined to the harmfulness-refusal subspace, it leaves the rest of the residual stream intact and does not degrade general capability or inflate over-refusal. Across extensive experiments, HARC achieves the strongest robustness-capability-usability trade-off among six baselines spanning the major training-time and inference-time safety methods. The harmfulness and refusal directions at prompt and response positions transfer across the five model families and two scales we tested without architecture-specific tuning.

Large language models are no longer only text generators. They are increasingly embedded in retrieval pipelines, enterprise assistants, coding environments, robotic systems, security-operation workflows, and autonomous agents that can read private data, call tools, write files, execute code, and act across organizational boundaries. This shift changes the security problem: risks do not arise from the model weights alone, but from the full lifecycle and application stack through which data, prompts, model outputs, tools, memories, and user authority interact. This paper systematizes the literature on vulnerabilities in large language model systems through a lifecycle and application-stack lens. We organize attacks across eight stages: data collection, pretraining, post-training alignment, model packaging and supply chain, retrieval and memory, prompting and inference, tool/agent execution, and deployment/maintenance. For each stage, we analyze attacker capabilities, affected security objectives, representative attacks, practical risks, evaluation practices, and defenses. We further map LLM-specific vulnerabilities to confidentiality, integrity, availability, safety, privacy, fairness, accountability, and agency-control objectives. Unlike taxonomies that list isolated attack names, the proposed systematization emphasizes where trust boundaries fail, how untrusted data becomes executable instruction, how delegated authority amplifies model errors, and why point defenses rarely compose. We close with a research agenda for secure LLM systems, including compositional security, provenance-aware retrieval, tool-call containment, long-horizon agent evaluation, privacy-preserving adaptation, realistic red teaming, and deployment-grade incident response.

In the evolving threat landscape, adversaries exploit software vulnerabilities to launch sophisticated attacks, challenging traditional defenses. Although databases like CVE and NVD provide detailed technical information, they often lack links to attacker behaviors such as tactics and techniques, limiting effective threat interpretation and response. This work bridges this gap by connecting vulnerabilities with behavioral patterns from the MITRE ATT&CK framework. We construct a CVE-TTP Knowledge Graph that links CVEs to tactics and techniques using classification and relation extraction. Transformer-based models are developed for behavior identification, with CySecBERT achieving macro F1-scores of 87.71% (techniques) and 96.16% (tactics). Also, we created an annotated dataset with 24,820 entities and 43,608 relations for entity and relation extraction. The pipeline-based approach achieves macro F1-scores of 0.86 (entity extraction) and 0.99 (relation extraction), while a span-based joint model achieves 0.78. These outputs are integrated into a Neo4j-based Cyber Threat Knowledge Graph, enabling structured visualization of vulnerabilities.

Researchers and practitioners increasingly apply Large Language Models (LLMs) for automated vulnerability detection. Recent work has shown that LLMs are susceptible to the same cognitive heuristics that bias human judgment. Yet, no work has investigated whether these heuristics affect a model's assessment of code vulnerabilities. In this paper, we present the first systematic exploration of cognitive heuristics in LLM-driven code vulnerability detection. We introduce a controlled framework that holds the code fixed and only varies the surrounding context to trigger three cognitive heuristics: the halo effect through author attribution, the framing effect through task objectives and consequences, and the anchoring effect through prior analysis results. Within this framework, we evaluate eight LLMs across three programming languages and perform both quantitative and code-level analyses. Our findings demonstrate that all evaluated models are susceptible to these heuristics. Cross-model average susceptibility is highest for framing at 33.2%, followed by anchoring at 23.5% and halo at 18.4%. Code-level analysis reveals that vulnerabilities that require semantic reasoning for detection are more susceptible to cognitive heuristics than those identifiable through pattern matching. Furthermore, models often change their verdict from safe to vulnerable based on the cognitive condition, without accurately identifying the actual vulnerability. To highlight the practical impact, we demonstrate a proof-of-concept black-box cognitive attack that can suppress up to 97% of previously detected vulnerabilities. These findings indicate that cognitive susceptibility is a consistent and exploitable property of LLM-based vulnerability detection.

The training-free integration of expert models via model merging has exposed significant security risks, enabling free-riders to combine specialized models without authorization. Recent works propose parameter-level defenses that employ linear parameter transformations to neutralize this threat. In this paper, we systematically analyze such defenses and reveal that their protected task vectors are inherently small in magnitude. Consequently, the protected weights remain overwhelmingly dominated by the pretrained model. Based on this observation, we designate the pretrained model as a static reference anchor and propose the Anchor-Guided Attack (AGA) to circumvent existing safeguards. Specifically, AGA aligns the protected model with this anchor to recover the transformation matrix analytically. Extensive evaluations validate that AGA consistently bypasses both individual and composite defenses under realistic defense-agnostic scenarios. Furthermore, we provide Anchor-Repulsive Fine-tuning (ARF), a defense method to mitigate the anchor dominance leveraged by AGA. Empirical results confirm that ARF effectively defeats the proposed attack. Our code is available at https://github.com/krumpguo/secure-merge-attack.

The structural vulnerabilities of point cloud-based 3D object detectors remain poorly understood. Prior work has studied adversarial robustness primarily on isolated 3D object models, while recent LiDAR spoofing attacks target richer and more realistic driving scenes but focus mainly on physical realizability rather than understanding detector behavior or attack efficiency. In this work, we investigate how LiDAR-based detectors rely on spatial evidence in complex scenes and whether these reliance patterns can be exploited to induce failures more efficiently. To this end, we propose an explainability-guided adversarial analysis methodology. We introduce the Saliency-LiDAR (SALL) method, which aggregates Integrated Gradient attributions across scenes to produce universal saliency maps for LiDAR-based 3D object detectors. Guided by these maps, we design the Explainability-aware Frustum Attack (EFA), which selectively perturbs only the most influential frustums rather than uniformly attacking entire object regions. Experiments on KITTI and nuScenes, across detectors such as PointPillars and SECOND, show that EFA reduces detection recall by more than 15 percentage points while requiring 25-50% fewer perturbed frustums than the state-of-the-art non-saliency-aware baseline. These findings reveal that modern 3D detectors concentrate discriminative evidence in a small subset of spatial regions, exposing a structural robustness vulnerability in current LiDAR perception systems. Our code is released at https://github.com/SecMindLab/Saliency_LiDAR.

Timely intensive care dictates survival, yet emergency infrastructure remains unevenly distributed across Sri Lanka. While pre-hospital services have expanded, the transition to definitive care remains a critical bottleneck. This study evaluates national emergency resilience by quantifying the gap between clinical demand and the availability of specialized resources across all 25 districts. Using the latest national epidemiological data and terrain-aware H3 hexagonal modeling, we analyzed accessibility for seven critical conditions based on spatial gaps, clinical need-gaps, lethality, coverage, and resource availability. Based on these metrics, unsupervised K-Means clustering was applied to categorize districts into four policy-actionable archetypes: Critical Structural Exclusion, Institutional Mirages, Operational Capacity Strain, and High-Resilience Benchmarks. Our study suggests that severe service deficits exist in the Northern and Eastern provinces, where spatial gaps exceed 70%, rendering the Golden Hour operationally impossible. Notably, specialist scarcity drives systemic pressure more than bed capacity; underserved regions effectively function as institutional mirages. This study suggests that improving accessibility by 25% in high-priority clusters would reduce the national need-gap by 9.65%, providing a roadmap for the strategic redistribution of specialists to ensure healthcare equity.

Deep learning models have achieved impressive performance across various fields but remain vulnerable to adversarial inputs, particularly in NLP, where such attacks can have significant real-world consequences. Adversarial attacks often involve small, semantically similar token replacements to fool NLP models, and recent methods have become more precise by targeting specific vulnerable words, often by exploiting some level of access to the model's internal structure. This paper proposes GAversary, a hybrid Genetic Algorithm (GA) to generate adversarial attacks on natural language models. The GA is able to treat the target model as a black box, requiring only the logit value output by the model to guide the search. GAversary differs from GAs previously proposed for this problem by using GloVe embeddings to propose word replacements (the mutation operator) to improve the semantic similarity of the adversarial examples. GAversary is applied to several benchmark data sets and well-known target models. GAversary is able to substantially reduce the target model's accuracy on test data compared to the BAE and A2T attacks compared against (in the best case, reducing a 76.8% accuracy to 5.8%, compared to BAE's 27.6%). The trade-off is that GAversary perturbs just under twice as many words as the other two methods, with a slightly lower semantic similarity to the original text and around a 5% increase in run-time.

LLMs fine-tuned for security classification are usually evaluated on held-out examples from the same distribution as their training data. We show that this can miss vulnerabilities introduced by fine-tuning itself: models can learn token-level indicator semantics that preserve canonical accuracy while failing under behavior-preserving transformations such as PowerShell alias substitution, command reconstruction, string construction, execution indirection, and case mutation. We study Foundation-Sec-8B-Instruct and its base model, Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct, on matched PowerShell classification cohorts. Causal interventions localize the classification circuit to a late-attention route inherited from Llama rather than created by fine-tuning. Fine-tuning concentrates and semantically specializes this inherited structure, improving baseline behavior while creating transformation-sensitive attack surfaces. A three-tier evasion benchmark finds Foundation-Sec misses on iwr substitution, Invoke-Expression reconstruction, and case-mutated Invoke-Expression/IEX variants that Llama does not share. We also derive a pre-deployment monitoring method: a linear probe at the classification boundary and an indicator-token sign test identify command families where canonical indicators change role after fine-tuning. These signals prioritize red-team variant generation using only canonical inputs, showing that security fine-tuning can improve task accuracy while expanding the evasion surface. These results caution against treating small task-specific fine-tunes as straightforwardly safer security classifiers: specialization can convert inherited model structure into brittle indicator rules that preserve held-out accuracy while expanding the evasion surface. Robust AI-enabled security will require specifying the full transformation space of the task and monitoring semantic drift through fine-tuning.

AI-assisted vulnerability discovery has proven effective for bug classes like memory safety, where instrumentation confirms memory violations and efficiently filters false positives. Many dangerous vulnerability classes, such as cryptographic misuse, however, lack any comparable instrumentation. In this work, we present Chai, an AI-based system that discovers and validates cryptographic misuse vulnerabilities through naturally occurring signals. To achieve this, Chai rethinks the classical technique of differential testing by leveraging AI to 1) improve precision for detecting real security issues in libraries, and 2) repurpose commonly overlooked discrepancies as leads for tangible vulnerabilities in downstream applications. In doing so, Chai inverts the prevailing paradigm of AI vulnerability discovery: instead of auditing one codebase for many flaws, it catalogs flaws at the library level and propagates them across a cryptographic dependency graph, delivering compounding efficiency gains. We evaluate Chai across X.509, JWT, and SAML libraries. Chai discovered a previously unknown critical vulnerability in an SSL library that powers billions of devices, along with security bugs in one library behind a major web browser and another in major Linux distributions. In total, these techniques surfaced over 100 vulnerabilities.

We present CyberChainBench, a benchmark for evaluating LLM-based agents on smart contract security across three complementary tasks: vulnerability detection, exploit generation, and patch synthesis. Built from 541 real-world exploit incidents from DeFiHackLabs spanning 9 EVM chains, the benchmark provides end-to-end on-chain evaluation where agents interact with historical blockchain state through isolated evaluation environments orchestrated by Harbor, using tools to read code, trace transactions, and validate exploits on mainnet forks. Each case is anchored to a specific block and includes structured ground truth covering vulnerability type, localization, and attacker profit. Exploits are graded by economic impact on historical forks; patches are validated by replaying historical attacks and legitimate transactions as fail-to-pass test oracles on a proxy-upgradeable subset. We define a five-type vulnerability taxonomy and evaluate multiple agent--model configurations. Results reveal a clear difficulty gradient: the best configuration scores 37.5% on detection, 43.7% on exploitation, but only 23.4% on patching, with the top agent (Codex with GPT-5.5) realizing $57.4M in total exploit profit across the 200-case exploit set at a cost of $2.39 per case.

The laser welding full-penetration is of critical importance, as it constitutes one of the fundamental factors in achieving defect-free welded joints. Accurate prediction of the penetration state is therefore essential for ensuring weld quality. To this end, this paper introduces SimPhysNet, a novel algorithm that achieves high classification accuracy in laser welding penetration prediction using only a limited number of labelled images. This approach effectively overcomes the limitations of supervised learning classification algorithms, which are hindered in industrial applications by their dependence on extensive, high-quality labelled data. The core of SimPhysNet is a unique self-supervised learning paradigm that embeds physical priors into a contrastive learning framework. By incorporating a physics-informed neural network (PINN), the model is guided to extract physically meaningful features of the molten pool and keyhole from a large set of unlabelled data, while three image augmentation tasks further enhance its generalization capabilities. Subsequently, a few-shot learning strategy, based on prototypical networks, enables robust classification by constructing class representations from a minimal set of labelled images. Experimental results demonstrate that SimPhysNet achieves a classification accuracy of 96.06% using only 200 labelled images (approximately 5% of the total labelled dataset), which is comparable to the performance of conventional supervised learning algorithms that utilize the entire labelled dataset. This work presents a new, efficient, and highly accurate method, providing the way for the intelligent automation of laser welding.

Software vulnerability remediation is a cognitively demanding task that requires specialized security expertise often lacking in general developers. In the meantime, Large Language Models (LLMs) assisted tools show potential in vulnerability detection, location, and repair tasks. [Hypothesis:] While LLM-assistance is hypothesized to accelerate patching, it also risks introducing hallucinations or insecure code, leading to a higher likelihood of generating superficial repairs that bypass the standard functionality checks but fail the security validation. [Objective:] We aim to present an empirical experiment, unveiling the capability of LLM-assisted vulnerability patching compared to manual debugging on human participants in real-world scenarios. [Method:] We plan to conduct a controlled experiment using a Balanced Crossover design. For that, we have developed a WebApp for code execution and integrated hidden Ghost Tests to verify patch integrity beyond visible functional requirements. The experiment involves training and evaluation scenarios. The remediation speed, remediation efficacy for both standard functionality tests and security tests, and participant perception will be evaluated. [Pilot Study:] A pilot experiment with a small sample of participants has been conducted, providing insights for the following study.

Vulnerability detection in C/C++ software remains a major security challenge due to code complexity, manual memory management, and the limitations of traditional static analysis. Reinforcement Learning (RL) has emerged as a promising approach, particularly for fuzzing, test generation, program exploration, and, more recently, vulnerability detection and localization. Following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, this work reviews RL techniques for software vulnerability analysis, focusing on C/C++ source code and static analysis. We identified 21 primary studies published between 2015 and 2026 from major scientific databases and complementary searches. We analyze the addressed tasks, algorithms, state-action-reward-environment formulations, code representations, datasets, and evaluation metrics. Results show that 15 studies focus on fuzzing and guided exploration, only 3 on direct vulnerability detection, and just 1 on statement-level localization. Moreover, statically extracted structural representations such as Control Flow Graphs (CFGs) and Abstract Syntax Trees (ASTs) are rarely used as agent states, and benchmarks lack comparability. We propose a task- and formulation-oriented taxonomy and identify a key research gap: the absence of RL agents that use source-code CFGs as states to detect and localize vulnerable nodes.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown promise for automated penetration testing, yet existing end-to-end black-box evaluations are highly susceptible to error cascading: failures in early reconnaissance can mask an agent's actual ability to exploit vulnerabilities. To more accurately characterize these capabilities, we propose a two-stage decoupled evaluation framework that separates exploit execution from reconnaissance. Using ground-truth injection and knowledge-driven ablation across 70 high-fidelity web vulnerability testbeds, our framework isolates exploitation performance from reconnaissance noise. We empirically evaluate five open-source penetration-testing agents, covering multiagent, monolithic, and graph-driven architectures, on a strictly aligned subset of 50 representative vulnerabilities. The results reveal a substantial capability gap. With accurate vulnerability context, agents achieve a functional success rate of up to 90.0%, whereas autonomous reconnaissance, measured by targeted vulnerability recall, plateaus at approximately 50.0%, primarily due to failures in parsing unstructured telemetry. Cross-architectural analysis further reveals distinct capability niches: multi-agent isolation is more effective for long-sequence interactions such as de-serialization, while monolithic and graph-driven designs perform better on short-chain injections and cross-session access-control vulnerabilities, respectively. This decoupled evaluation work provides a fine-grained benchmarking protocol and an empirical basis for designing next-generation automated offensive security agents.

The proliferation of IoT devices has fueled distributed edge systems to collect vast amounts of sensitive data, creating fertile ground for on-device machine learning applications. While federated learning (FL) mitigates privacy concerns by exchanging model parameters instead of raw data, we identify a critical blind spot in current research. We examine the most commonly used personalized federated learning (PFL) methods, which allow clients to maintain private, personalized models to address data heterogeneity across clients. Through systematic analysis, we reveal that PFL methods exhibit heightened vulnerability to transfer-based adversarial attacks compared to centralized learning paradigms. Wherein, malicious clients can exploit local model knowledge to craft adversarial examples that can compromise peer clients' personalized models. We establish this vulnerability through both theoretical analysis and empirical evaluation across multiple benchmark datasets, demonstrating significant accuracy drops across various PFL methods. To address this challenge, we propose a defense framework combining stochastic input noise, input-scaled trace regularization, and parameter sensitivity maximization to improve FL's robustness. Our findings establish the first systematic study of adversarial threats in PFL systems, providing both diagnostic tools and practical countermeasures.

Automated vulnerability repair has emerged as a promising direction to mitigate the growing number of software vulnerabilities. Recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) have further accelerated research in automated repair. However, existing frameworks remain largely restricted to memory-related vulnerabilities and locally repairable vulnerability settings, leaving generalization to unseen vulnerability types underexplored. Their evaluations are often limited to a single programming language, and largely rely on proprietary models. In this paper, we propose RAVEN, a scalable, efficient and autonomous framework that integrates an agentic retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) pipeline with controlled iterative repair in a unified framework. The framework utilizes open-source LLMs in a fully locally deployable setting with limited GPU requirements, while building a multi-faceted retrieval pipeline to retrieve historically relevant vulnerability fixes and guide the patch generation. In addition, RAVEN introduces a dedicated Curator Agent that retrieves cross-file dependencies from the target repository, to fix complex vulnerabilities that cannot be addressed using local vulnerable code alone. We evaluate RAVEN on 160 real-world CVE vulnerabilities across diverse vulnerability types, two programming languages, unseen CWE categories, and out-of-distribution settings. RAVEN achieves an overall repair success rate of 83.13%, outperforming all existing state-of-the-art repair frameworks, while also demonstrating strong generalization capabilities and maintaining the repair cost negligible.

Host intrusion detection systems (HIDS) based on system-call traces are typically trained and evaluated against individual Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE) instances. In operational settings, however, defenders need to recognise new exploits of an already known type of weakness. We empirically examine whether a one-class anomaly detector trained on the normal behaviour of a set of CVEs that share a Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE) class generalises to a different, unseen CVE inside the same class. Using six scenarios drawn from LID-DS-2021 and grouped into three CWE families (CWE-307 broken authentication, CWE-89 SQL injection, CWE-434 unrestricted file upload), we extract a 66-dimensional Peng-Guo-style feature vector per sliding window and train Isolation Forest and SGD One-Class SVM detectors with normal-only thresholds calibrated to fixed target false positive rates. We define and answer four research questions covering self-detection, asymmetric cross-CVE transfer, the value of a combined CWE-level normal profile, and the effect of feature filtering on transferability. The combined CWE-307 detector reaches F1 = 0.6976 at calibration target FPR = 0.05 (precision = 0.8994, recall = 0.5698), whereas CWE-89 and CWE-434 collapse to F1 <= 0.21 under the same protocol. Cross-CVE transfer turns out to be strongly direction-dependent and dominated by the breadth of the source normal profile rather than by the CWE label. We conclude that CWE-level generalisation in HIDS is empirically attainable for some but not all weakness families with current syscall features, and we argue that calibrated FPR is a methodological prerequisite for honest reporting in this setting.

Fully homomorphic encryption (FHE) allows computations to be performed directly on encrypted data without decryption, offering strong privacy guarantees for sensitive data analysis. This capability is important for privacy-sensitive applications like secure cloud computing, finance, and healthcare. The complexity of FHE schemes, however, has hindered their practical adoption. To make FHE accessible to a broader range of developers, a new generation of specialized frameworks has emerged to translate high-level FHE programs into complex FHE operations, introducing a new programming paradigm. However, the inherent complexity of FHE frameworks makes them prone to incorrect implementation logic. Unlike mere crashes, logic bugs in these frameworks can silently corrupt encrypted computation, potentially leading to severe financial losses and security vulnerabilities in FHE-enhanced applications. In this work, we introduce HERTA, the first automated testing tool tailored for FHE frameworks. HERTA leverages metamorphic testing to uncover deep-seated implementation bugs and vulnerabilities across the multi-layered FHE software stack. To that end, we design a set of novel metamorphic relations (MRs) derived specifically from FHE semantics. These MRs stress the most challenging aspects of the pipeline, enabling automated correctness testing without the need for a manual ground truth. Our evaluation of HERTA on 3 leading industry frameworks discovered 21 previously unknown bugs, several of which have already been confirmed and fixed by developers. Furthermore, our hazard analysis reveals the critical security impact these bugs pose to the integrity and availability of FHE-based services.

Memory safety vulnerabilities remain a significant threat even for projects with extensive fuzzing and manual auditing. Recent results suggest that large language models hold great promise for detecting such vulnerabilities, but they are unreliable, at risk of hallucination, and challenging to scale to repository-size codebases. This paper presents Revelio, a cost-efficient end-to-end agentic framework for memory-safety vulnerability discovery. Revelio addresses the problem of hallucination by generating an executable Proof-of-Vulnerability, which is checked with a deterministic sanitizer. It reduces cost using inexpensive LLMs and lightweight static analysis to help generate and rank vulnerability hypotheses, reporting vulnerabilities only when they can be reproduced and confirmed by a sanitizer. We evaluated Revelio on seven production-quality projects that had been continuously fuzzed for five to eight years, as well as on 100 randomly selected Arvo projects from the CyberGym benchmark. With around one hour per project and a total cost of $300, Revelio discovered 19 previously unknown memory-safety vulnerabilities. On benchmarks, Revelio outperformed frontier coding agents across diverse backbone models at comparable token costs. Our results suggest that Revelio enables scalable and trustworthy end-to-end LLM-based memory-safety vulnerability detection.

Summarization-based prompt compression is increasingly used by LLM agents to shorten long, distributed contexts, but it shifts the security boundary: filters inspect the pre-compression prompt while the backend acts on a newly generated compressed context. We identify relinking, a compression-boundary vulnerability where the compressor behaves as a confused deputy, summarizing distributed, locally benign fragments into a complete malicious instruction. Unlike prompt injection, relinking need not place an explicitly malicious payload in the source context. We show that relinking arises from summarization itself: attention makes separated fragments jointly available, pre-training makes compatible fragments plausible to connect, and post-training favors compact backend-actionable summaries. We formalize the attacker-induced form as adversarial relinking and present Relink, an automated DSL-based tool that splits malicious payloads into benign fragments while keeping the complete payload absent before compression. Across four long-context agent benchmarks, Relink achieves 86.9% Relink Rate and Backend Action Rate versus 17.0% for clean-split controls. Existing defenses fail to reliably capture adversarial relinking; our KBRA defense reduces residual Backend Action Rate to 0.0%.

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.

Whether LLMs scoring well on vulnerability benchmarks genuinely reason about security or merely pattern-match on contaminated data remains unresolved. We present CWE-Trace, a framework for LLM vulnerability detection built from 834 manually curated Linux kernel samples spanning 74 CWEs. The framework enforces a strict temporal split (pre-2025 historical set / post-cutoff leakage-free set), preserves context-aware vulnerable--patched pairs, and introduces two diagnostic metrics: the Directional Failure Index (DFI) and Hierarchical Distance and Direction (HDD). We evaluate eight vanilla LLMs and 15 LoRA fine-tuned variants across non-targeted detection, targeted detection, and CWE classification. Our analysis yields two key results. First, data contamination provides no measurable advantage. Function-level analysis shows that 84% of nominally contaminated samples carry no usable memorization signal: vulnerable functions are absent or cross-mapped across datasets, and ~31% of contaminated samples carry CWE misclassification. Second, backbone directional priors dominate fine-tuning. Models exhibit stable, systematic failure modes (DFI ranging from -85.5 to +94.8 pp) that persist from historical to post-cutoff data and resist correction. Fine-tuning shifts the output threshold without changing the decision policy. This is calibration without comprehension: output distributions adapt to training data while the underlying security reasoning remains absent. The weakest backbone at binary detection (DeepSeek-R1) gains the most in coarse CWE classification, revealing that detection and understanding are decoupled capabilities. The best detection score reaches only 52.1% (+2.1 pp above chance); exact CWE ranking remains below 1.3% Top-1 accuracy, confirming that current LLMs lack reliable security reasoning for systems software, regardless of fine-tuning strategy.

Multi-step LLM pipelines fail through interactions among retrieval, reasoning, and formatting steps, so prompt-only optimization can miss bottlenecks in the chain. We present Fully Automated Prompt Optimization (FAPO), a framework that lets Claude Code optimize an LLM pipeline inside a standardized codebase. FAPO evaluates a pipeline, inspects intermediate steps, diagnoses failures, proposes scoped changes, and validates variants repeatedly to optimize against a score function. It first tries prompt edits and, only when prompt optimization appears insufficient, changes chain structure within the permitted scope when attribution identifies a structural bottleneck. Across six benchmarks and three task models, FAPO beats the baseline GEPA in 15 of 18 model-benchmark comparisons. In 11 model-benchmark comparisons, FAPO wins with non-overlapping mean $\pm$ trial-standard-deviation ranges, and the mean FAPO-GEPA gain is +14.1 pp. In the six HoVer and IFBench comparisons where prompt-first search escalated to structural changes, FAPO wins all six with a mean gain of +33.8 pp. FAPO also improves performance on security tasks: on CTIBench-RCM, a security CVE-to-CWE task, prompt-only FAPO lifts test accuracy by +4.0 pp on GPT-5, +7.1 pp on Foundation-Sec-8B-Instruct, and +2.0 pp on Foundation-Sec-8B-Reasoning. These results position FAPO as a state-of-the-art pipeline optimization technique for both general-purpose and security-focused tasks.

Automated vulnerability discovery in large codebases remains challenging: traditional static analysis produces high false-positive rates, while dynamic approaches such as fuzzing require substantial infrastructure and often target narrow classes of bugs. Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) enable semantic reasoning about program behavior, but applying LLMs to repository-scale security analysis introduces challenges related to context management, cost, and verification. We present OpenAnt, an open-source vulnerability discovery system that integrates static program analysis with LLM-based reasoning in a multi-stage pipeline. OpenAnt introduces three key techniques. First, codebases are decomposed into self-contained analysis units filtered by reachability from external entry points, reducing the analysis surface by up to 97% while preserving attack-relevant code. Second, candidate vulnerabilities undergo adversarial verification through constrained attacker simulation, where the model evaluates exploitability under realistic attacker capabilities. Third, findings are validated through dynamic verification, in which exploit environments are generated automatically, executed in sandboxed containers, and discarded after use. Evaluation on widely used open-source projects including OpenSSL, WordPress, and Flowise shows that this architecture can identify previously unknown vulnerabilities while maintaining manageable analysis cost and substantially reducing false positives. Our results suggest that closed-loop vulnerability discovery pipelines, combining semantic reasoning with exploit validation, provide a practical path toward scalable automated security analysis. OpenAnt is released as open source under the Apache 2.0 license at https://github.com/knostic/OpenAnt.

The growing reliance on pre-trained Machine Learning (ML) models has introduced new attack surfaces. Recent vulnerabilities demonstrate that malicious behavior can be embedded within model artifacts, often bypassing existing defenses. Current model-scanning solutions primarily rely on static, format-specific rules or known attack signatures, which limit their ability to generalize across frameworks and to detect novel exploitation paths. In contrast, we propose a solution that focuses on the effects an attack has on the host system executing the model and builds on foundational intuitions about ML model execution. In particular, we observe that ML models operate within well-defined lifecycle phases and that, within each phase, interactions with the host system are highly structured and predictable. We translate these intuitions into Moat, a dynamic lifecycle-aware approach for securing ML model execution, and instantiate this design in Re-Moat, our reference implementation. We evaluate Re-Moat across multiple ML frameworks using 77,974 real-world model artifacts from the Hugging Face Hub, 31 Proofs-of-Concept (PoCs) from CVEs, and 334 models from a state-of-the-art dataset, and compare it against state-of-the-art model-scanning solutions. Our results show that our approach detects all evaluated attack classes while maintaining a close-to-zero false-positive rate, validating our intuitions and motivating dynamic analysis for securing ML model execution.

The advent of agentic vulnerability detection is already becoming a watershed moment for software security. Audits conducted entirely by autonomous LLM agents are uncovering critical vulnerabilities in fundamental software underpinning digital society. Many of these vulnerabilities remained masked for years, surfacing only now with AI agents. Yet the reasoning behind these discoveries remains alarmingly opaque and unvalidated. What assumptions did the agent make about a function's inputs when it deemed that function to be secure? Failures in reasoning and incorrect assumptions can lead to missed vulnerabilities and reduce trust in agentic analysis. We propose a security-specification-first paradigm that (1) exposes the agent's tacit assumptions explicitly as security specifications and (2) continuously refines those specifications via runtime falsification. We realize our approach in Code-Augur, a novel harness for agentic vulnerability detection. Given a codebase, Code-Augur analyzes each component of the system for vulnerable code. When it deems a component to be secure, it commits the local invariants behind that judgment as in-source assertions. In parallel, Code-Augur leverages a guided fuzzer to attempt to falsify those assumptions. When the fuzzer triggers an assertion, this either reveals a genuine vulnerability or a flawed specification to refine. In both cases, this process grounds the agent's understanding, aligning its view of code intent with how the code actually behaves. On real-world subjects, Code-Augur effectively leverages security specifications to detect more vulnerabilities than other state-of-the-art agents. Additionally, Code-Augur found 22 new vulnerabilities in key open-source projects. Compared to curated specialized models like Claude Mythos, Code-Augur offers effective agentic vulnerability detection built on widely available LLMs like Sonnet and DeepSeek.

Multimodal Large Language Model (MLLM)-based web agents provide practical, high-precision solutions for visual browser automation; however, they inherently expand the attack surface, introducing novel vision-based vulnerabilities. Existing adversarial evaluations targeting these agents frequently rely on permissive threat models and visually conspicuous artifacts. In this paper, we investigate a constrained vulnerability detection setting: a trusted web platform where the evaluator acts solely as an unprivileged third party, such as a merchant or advertiser, controlling only a semantically legitimate, spatially constrained region, such as an ad slot, a sponsored card, or a localized widget. Operating under these realistic constraints, we propose MIRAGE, a novel visual indirect prompt injection framework for targeted next-action hijacking. Our approach leverages diffusion models to generate perceptually benign adversarial images strictly confined to the attacker-controlled boundaries permitted by the trusted service provider. To maximize attack efficacy within such a restrictive setting, we introduce a robust optimization technique combining curvature-aware adversarial diffusion guidance with sparse, dark-pixel residual perturbations. Comprehensive evaluations against prominent MLLM web agent frameworks, specifically SeeAct and OpenClaw, empirically demonstrate the potency, realism, and stealth of our proposed MIRAGE.

Large language models are increasingly deployed in agentic pipelines that depend on the model evaluating its own outputs without external verification. The reliability of these pipelines depends on an implicit assumption: that the model applies relevant concepts the same way when it generates an output and later evaluates that output. We propose a new measure, generator-evaluator self-consistency, to test this assumption directly and apply it to 10 frontier models across 491 concepts. We find, first, that there is substantial variation in self-consistency. Second, we find that in a clinical setting with physician-validated mistakes (Proniakin et al., 2025), across models, those with higher self-consistency are linked to greater vulnerability to mistakes. Thus, even when models consistently apply concepts they may not be safe to deploy. This is evidence of a consistency dilemma in LLMs: self-consistency is operationally useful, but models that are more consistent are also more prone to mistakes.

Binary reversing is fundamental to software understanding, vulnerability discovery, malware investigation, and firmware auditing. However, it remains inherently challenging due to the irreversible loss of semantic information during compilation. Recent advances in machine learning, large language models (LLMs), and agentic AI systems have accelerated the adoption of AI-augmented binary reversing. Yet, the resulting body of work has become increasingly fragmented across reversing domains, artifact representations, learning approaches, and evaluation practices. This paper presents the first comprehensive systematization of knowledge on AI-augmented binary reversing. We analyze 144 research papers published since 2015, and organize them into 22 binary reversing domains according to the inference tasks. We further introduce a unified taxonomy spanning conventional and AI-augmented reversing pipelines. Our taxonomy connects traditional analysis techniques, binary-derived artifacts, representation strategies, learning paradigms, and downstream inference tasks, while clarifying the emerging roles of LLMs and agentic AI systems. By establishing a common vocabulary and structured framework, we provide a holistic view of the field's evolution over the past decade. Our study reveals common structures underlying seemingly disparate approaches, highlights persistent technical challenges and evaluation gaps, and identifies promising opportunities for future research. Collectively, these insights clarify the current state of the field and provide a foundation for the next generation of reliable and scalable AI-augmented binary reversing systems.

Achieving reproducibility, quantity, and diversity in vulnerability datasets has long been viewed as an inherent three-way trade-off, where improving one dimension often comes at the cost of the others. In practice, reproducibility has been the dimension most often neglected. This has limited what can be automatically extracted from historical bug datasets, and has reduced their utility for downstream security research. In this work, we propose a method to produce a new security dataset which ensures reproducibility for diverse vulnerabilities at scale by identifying the key obstacles to large-scale bug reproduction and addressing them with general solutions. Using this method, we introduce full reproducibility to the largest open source software vulnerability dataset (OSS-Fuzz) and construct the ARVO dataset (an Atlas of Reproducible Vulnerabilities in Open-source software). ARVO is a large-scale dataset consisting of over 6,100 real-world vulnerabilities across 311 projects. Focusing on reproducibility, ARVO differs from existing datasets by providing each vulnerability in a form that can be consistently rebuilt, triggered, and analyzed across versions. Reproducibility also enables automatic identification of the corresponding patch for each vulnerability and supports direct interaction with vulnerabilities after code changes, capabilities that existing large-scale datasets do not provide. In our evaluation, ARVO successfully reproduces 81% of vulnerabilities and achieves 89.4% accuracy on the located patches. We also discuss ARVO's influence on both upstream practices and downstream security research.

We ran 300 repeated vulnerability-finding scans to measure how repeatable agentic large language model (LLM) security review is on the same JavaScript code, prompt, and benchmark harness. The headline result is that LLM security findings were unevenly repeatable: reference-matched findings were stable, but extra model reports varied heavily from run to run. Across 250 model runs, 80 of 161 unique unmatched findings appeared in only one of five identical repetitions, while only 22 appeared in all five. By contrast, when Claude matched a Snyk Code reference finding, the behavior was much more stable: 134 of 158 unique reference-matched findings appeared in all five repetitions. The benchmark also shows complementarity. Models consistently found familiar, high-signal exploit shapes, and in one case surfaced a likely Snyk Code product gap. Snyk Code static application security testing (SAST) was deterministic and better at systematically enumerating repeated data-flow sinks. The results support combining agentic LLM review with deterministic SAST rather than treating either technique as a replacement for the other.

We study the task of CVE-conditioned exploit generation, where a model drafts proof-of-concept (PoC) exploits given software vulnerability context. We adopt a data-centric approach, constructing a high-quality dataset via multi-stage preprocessing and introducing a scalable evaluation framework with LLM-as-judge and fine-grained rubrics. Under this unified setup, we benchmark 17 large language models across 8 evaluation criteria, providing systematic insights into their zero-shot capabilities. We further show that a compact 8B open-weight model, when fine-tuned on curated data, achieves over 42.5% improvement in exploit quality and rivals some proprietary models when combined with simple test-time rejection strategies. Our results highlight the importance of data quality, structured supervision, and evaluation design for reliable exploit generation, suggesting that these factors can be as critical as model scale in adapting LLMs to cybersecurity tasks.

LLM-based guardrails have emerged as a highly effective defense against prompt injection and jailbreak attacks in autonomous agents. However, we reveal that the very reasoning and task-following capabilities enabling this protection introduce a novel vulnerability: attackers can inject crafted data to trap the guardrail in extended reasoning loops, effectuating a systematic denial-of-service (DoS) attack. To systematically expose this threat, we design a beam-search optimization framework that crafts natural-language payloads to maximize guardrail reasoning length, utilizing an LLM proposer guided by a strategy bank. Based on the observation of guardrail's schema-following nature, we also provide another attack framework driven by mechanism-aware structural mutations with less computational load. The attack efficacy is systematically evaluated in two parts. First, in standalone evaluations, the attack generalizes across diverse guardrail architectures, safety templates, and agent benchmarks. Payloads optimized on a single open-source surrogate successfully transfer to eight leading model backbones (e.g., Claude, GPT, Gemini, DeepSeek, and Qwen), achieving a 13--63$\times$ token amplification. Second, in end-to-end real-world agent deployments (web, desktop, code, and multi-agent systems), the attack reveals up to a 148$\times$ latency amplification. We show that a single poisoned document can saturate shared guardrail infrastructures, effectively starving co-located agents and paralyzing the entire system. By uncovering this availability flaw, our work underscores the urgent need to develop cost-bounded, reasoning-robust guardrails.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in automated code-review systems, where their approvals can determine which code is merged into shared repositories. However, it is unclear whether review agents can detect vulnerability-introducing code when an attacker controls both the code change and the persuasive Pull Request (PR) narrative designed to mask it. We introduce SEVRA-BENCH (Social Engineering of Vulnerabilities in Review Agents), a benchmark that measures how often a review agent approves such adversarial PR s. Each PR in SEVRA-BENCH is built from a historical commit that fixed a vulnerability. We automatically reverse that fix to extract the original vulnerable code, and submit the resulting code change as a PR wrapped in one of 15 social-engineering framings. To test review-agent resilience to narrative manipulation, these framings vary dimensions such as supporting evidence, conveyed urgency, signals of prior approval, and appeals to authority. SEVRA-BENCH evaluates a retained challenge split of roughly 1000 adversarial PRs drawn from publicly disclosed vulnerability fixes across the top 10 entries of the MITRE's 2025 most dangerous software weaknesses. Evaluating 8 review agents against this benchmark, we reveal that review agents are susceptible to narrative manipulation, exposing a significant gap in security capabilities.

Visualization-based malware detection maps raw binary bytes to grayscale images and applies learned visual classifiers, providing an evasion-resistant and disassembly-free alternative to conventional analysis pipelines. However, executable packing remains a critical failure mode: packed binaries produce high-entropy images that obscure the structural patterns these models rely on. Because packing is also prevalent in benign software (e.g., for compression or copy protection), packing state alone is not a reliable indicator of maliciousness, and existing approaches do not address this challenge within a unified supervised framework. We present ViPER, a Vision-based Packing-Aware Encoder for Robust malware detection. ViPER builds on a LoRA-adapted ViT-B/14 backbone with a dual-head architecture that jointly learns malware classification and packing detection. A packing-aware gating mechanism conditions malware predictions on the inferred packing state, enabling distinct decision boundaries for packed and unpacked inputs. To address packing label skew during training, we employ frequency-weighted losses with stratified sampling over joint class-packing strata. Evaluated on 200,000 Windows PE byteplot images, ViPER achieves a balanced accuracy of 0.8521, ROC-AUC of 0.9260, and AUPR of 0.9279, outperforming representative state-of-the-art baselines across all primary metrics, while attaining a packing detection AUC of 0.9949.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are rapidly evolving into agentic systems that interact with external tools and environments, introducing new security risks such as indirect prompt injection attacks through untrusted external sources. Existing defenses mainly focus on blocking malicious content at inference time, and current red-teaming methods primarily optimize attack success. As a result, developers have limited visibility into how latent prompt injections emerge and propagate through agents. We propose PI-Hunter, an automated agentic auditing framework for proactive vulnerability exposure in LLM agents. PI-Hunter constructs realistic source-aware test cases and iteratively evolves them through feedback-driven exploration to induce agents to retrieve and reveal latent malicious instructions embedded within external environments. Extensive experiments across multiple benchmarks, agent architectures, attacks, and defenses demonstrate that PI-Hunter substantially improves vulnerability exposure and attack-surface coverage over strong automated red-teaming baselines, while remaining effective under existing prompt injection defenses.

Federated Learning (FL) has emerged as a promising solution for data hunger in centralized learning. This paradigm enables privacy with multiple clients to train a shared-task model collaboratively without exposing their local data. While being a key component in any learning system, data is also a primary source of vulnerabilities and challenges, and a major determinant of a stable and well-converged training. Existing FL reviews describe general foundations, security practices, opportunities, challenges, and applications, without delving into diverse aspects of data and considering problems from the data perspective. They rarely provide a data-lens synthesis that links concrete data properties, split protocols, and defenses to convergence speed and stability. This survey fills that gap with three advances. First, we analyze non-IID into measurable traits and rank their influence on convergence as strong, medium, or light, explaining the mechanisms behind each and reconciling evidence across images, texts, and graphs. Second, we connect experimental splitting practices to the real phenomena they emulate, expose the artifacts they introduce, and show how those artifacts affect target accuracy. Third, we analyze how data-related vulnerabilities and their proposed defenses affect convergence, reporting performance under clean and adversarial conditions to make the convergence-robustness trade-off explicit. To our knowledge, this is the first survey to provide a complete understanding of data-related challenges that govern FL. With clear takeaways distilled for each concern, our work serves as actionable guidance, helping practitioners design their system with predictable convergence and stability.

Deploying Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models in real robotic systems requires robustness not only to semantic and perceptual variations, but also to embodiment-side faults that change how actions are physically realized. Real robots can experience joint-level changes caused by actuator degradation, hardware faults, safety limits, collision damage, or wear-induced friction. These faults are critical because they alter the action-to-motion interface of a policy, disrupting the learned closed-loop relationship between commanded actions, realized motion, and subsequent observations. In this work, we study realistic joint-level physical faults and show that VLA models are vulnerable when predicted actions are executed through a perturbed robot body. Our analysis reveals joint-dependent effects, with heterogeneous degradation in task success across affected joints. We also show that performance drops cannot be attributed solely to physical infeasibility, since feasible faults such as increased joint friction can still substantially reduce success rates and induce closed-loop execution mismatch. Motivated by these findings, we propose Joint-level Physical-fault Aware Residual Calibrator (J-PARC), a lightweight residual calibration framework built on top of a frozen VLA policy. J-PARC infers a latent joint-fault regime from recent joint dynamics and conditions a shared residual calibrator on this regime, enabling adaptive action correction across faulty joints. Experiments show that J-PARC improves robustness under joint-level faults while preserving fault-free environment performance.

Privacy risks in text-only Large Language Models (LLMs) are well studied, particularly their tendency to memorize and leak sensitive information. However, Multi-modal Large Language Models (MLLMs), which process both text and images, introduce unique privacy challenges that remain underexplored. Compared to text-only models, MLLMs can extract and expose sensitive information embedded in images, posing new privacy risks. We reveal that some MLLMs are susceptible to privacy breaches, leaking sensitive data embedded in images or stored in memory. Specifically, in this paper, we (1) introduce MM-Privacy, a comprehensive dataset designed to assess privacy risks across various multi-modal tasks and scenarios, where we define Disclosure Risks and Retention Risks. (2) systematically evaluate different MLLMs using MM-Privacy and demonstrate how models leak sensitive data across various tasks, and (3) provide additional insights into the role of task inconsistency in privacy risks, emphasizing the urgent need for mitigation strategies. Our findings highlight privacy concerns in MLLMs, underscoring the necessity of safeguards to prevent data exposure. Our dataset and code can be found here.

Data agents integrate LLM-driven reasoning with relational data access, executable analytical tools, and multi-step workflow orchestration, making them increasingly central to enterprise analytics. This integration introduces new security vulnerabilities across data resources, database execution, and agent reasoning, recombining concerns from database security and general-purpose LLM-agent security into failure modes that neither line of work captures on its own. To address this gap, we present a systematic security study of data agents. Our contributions are threefold. First, we develop a layered vulnerability framework that identifies eight data agent-specific risks across interpretation, execution, and policy layers. Second, we introduce an attack taxonomy organized by adversary goal, tactic, and technique, covering three goals, seven tactics, and fourteen techniques, and pair it with an LLM-driven payload generation pipeline grounded in real database schemas. Third, we evaluate these attacks on six systems, including four open-source data agents and two production cloud analytics services. Our experiments reveal substantial security vulnerabilities across current systems and yield four key takeaways.

This paper reads six engine-level measurements together -- 1.1 host attack surface, 1.2 information leakage, 1.3 defense-in-depth stackability, 1.4 public CVE history, 1.5 patch cadence, and 1.6 upstream fuzzing posture -- to describe how five AI-sandbox products isolate guest code from the host kernel. No single axis is a sufficient basis for a comparative judgement; the cross-axis reading is the load-bearing analysis. Three high-level findings: (1) engine classes (microVM, userspace kernel, OCI container) separate cleanly on every architectural axis, but products within a class do not; (2) product pin policy is the dominant operator-facing variable -- engine-side patch latency aggregates to ~0 days for coordinated disclosures, while downstream lag spans 0 days to 471+ days to "opaque" to infinity; (3) fuzzing investment splits into three tiers, and the strongest combination -- microVM x continuous public fuzzer -- is unoccupied in this set, leaving the "0 published CVEs x no upstream fuzzer x no academic study" intersection structurally unmeasured. We report per-axis orderings, per-product portraits, and a threat-model qualification matrix; no overall ranking is proposed. Companion repository (code, Apache-2.0): https://github.com/orbitalab/RnD-ai-sandboxes-sec-study-part-1. License: CC BY 4.0.

As the Model Context Protocol (MCP) standardizes tool-calling for autonomous agents, it introduces a critical, unexamined attack surface: the error-handling loop. We hypothesize that tool error messages possess implicit authority, triggering corrective reasoning modes that bypass standard safety heuristics. We introduce VATS (Vulnerability Analysis of Tool Streams), a mutation-driven framework that systematically evolves adversarial payloads across seven structural and linguistic dimensions. Our evaluation across four frontier models, Gemini 3.1 Pro, GPT-5.5, GLM-5.1, and Qwen3-Coder, demonstrates that error-path injection triples the success rate of standard indirect prompt injection (IPI), achieving up to 100% compliance in controlled evaluations. We isolate structural positioning (sandwiching instructions within error context) as the most effective exploit vector across all tested models. While we find that production framework guardrails can mitigate these vulnerabilities, the inherent susceptibility of the model layer poses a systemic risk to bespoke agentic workflows.

Existing learning-based detectors for Solidity smart-contracts reduce vulnerability detection to syntactic pattern matching within single functions, yet many of the most consequential exploits (The DAO, Cream Finance) exist not in any individual function but in the relationship between functions and in the combination of conditions that made the attack feasible. Thus, we propose AttackPathGNN, a graph neural network (GNN) that reframes detection as reasoning over explicit attack paths. Two architectural choices distinguish it from prior GNN-based detectors: (1)a State Interference Graph that links every pair of functions sharing mutable storage through typed, weighted edges and through directed reentrancy-path edges defined by an explicit five-condition predicate; (2)conjunction pooling, a differentiable AND-aggregator over eight named exploit preconditions whose log-sigmoid form causes the per-function exploit score to collapse whenever any single mitigation (a reentrancy guard, an access-control modifier or SafeMath) is in place. Across five independent training runs, AttackPathGNN attains 92.3+/-0.2% F1 on the SmartBugs Wild held-out test partition (4.3+/-0.3% false-negative rate, 90.8+/-2.5% detection rate on the independently human-labelled SmartBugs Curated benchmark), recovering 6/10 DASP10 categories at 100% on every seed and Reentrancy at 98.7+/-1.8%. Each prediction is emitted with a structured remediation report, turning each verdict into an actionable, function-level audit finding.

Producing a labeled vulnerable code at scale is a recurring obstacle for learning-based vulnerability detection: mined corpora carry substantial label noise, and existing LLM-based augmentation propagates these inaccuracies because it transforms vulnerable seeds rather than synthesising vulnerabilities from a specification. A complementary route is to start from safe code and ask an instruction-tuned LLM to inject a specified CWE (which would shift the labeling burden from open-ended detection to bounded binary confirmation) but safety-aligned code LLMs systematically refuse such prompts. This paper is a preliminary feasibility study of abliteration, a low-rank weight edit that orthogonally projects out the refusal direction in the residual stream, as a tool to remove this barrier. We use Python and CWE-89 (SQL injection) as a case study, evaluating the Qwen2.5-Coder-Instruct family at 3B, 7B, and 14B parameters on safe samples drawn from PromSec and SafeCoder, replicated three times per condition. We find that (i) refusal on injection prompts is strongly size- and prompt-context-dependent: the 14B refuses 100% of prompts, the 7B refuses 73% of PromSec but only 5% of SafeCoder, whereas the 3B is essentially never blocked; (ii) abliteration reduces refusal to zero or near-zero across all sizes while leaving syntactic validity above 93%, supporting the view that, in this setting, refusal can be detached from measured code-generation capability; and (iii) the post-abliteration injection rate remains capacity-bound (88-97% on the 14B, 89-90% on the 7B, and 25-48% on the 3B) separating willingness, which abliteration unlocks, from capability, which scales with parameters. Vulnerability verdicts are produced by a three-tool detector ensemble (CodeQL, Semgrep, Bandit) followed by manual adjudication by two authors on detector-positive outputs.

Large language models (LLMs) have shown strong potential for automated software vulnerability detection, particularly in retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) settings. However, for approaches relying on proprietary models and APIs, reproducibility and replicability remain largely unexplored, raising the question of whether reported results generalize or depend primarily on specific model choices. In this work, we present a reproducibility study of Vul-RAG, a RAG-based framework for source code vulnerability detection that enhances LLMs with high-level vulnerability knowledge. We first replicate the results in a fully local and open-weights setting using the reported open-weight baseline models. We then extend the evaluation to a diverse set of recent open-weight LLMs, including code-specialized, general-purpose, and reasoning models of varying parameter sizes. The results confirm that the findings of Vul-RAG are reproducible under local deployment, but with minor deviations. Across all evaluated models, we observe a performance plateau at approximately 0.30 pairwise accuracy (code pairs for which both the vulnerable and the patched function are correctly classified). Notably, this plateau persists even for more recent and advanced models, indicating that improvements in model capacity alone do not substantially enhance performance. Finally, we discuss practical implications and trade-offs between detection effectiveness, model capabilities, and model scale. Implementation and evaluation artifacts are publicly available at https://github.com/hs-esslingen-it-security/revisiting-Vul-RAG.

AI has the potential to transform cybersecurity by enabling systems that can autonomously detect, analyze, and remediate software vulnerabilities. However, existing cybersecurity evaluations of AI systems are limited in scale or scope, and fail to capture the end-to-end lifecycle of real-world software vulnerability discovery and remediation. To address this gap, we propose CyberGym-E2E, a large-scale and realistic end-to-end cybersecurity benchmark that comprehensively evaluates AI agents' abilities across the full lifecycle of vulnerability discovery, PoC generation, and patch generation. CyberGym-E2E is comprehensive and scalable, as we build an automated, agent-enhanced pipeline for transforming open-source vulnerability data into realistic evaluation environments. Currently, the benchmark consists of 920 real-world vulnerabilities across 139 different open-source projects.

Modern agentic systems transform LLMs from session-bounded assistants into stateful systems that persist and evolve shared world state across sessions through memories, filesystems, tools, and other long-lived contextual artifacts. This shift fundamentally expands the attack surface of prompt injection. However, prior works on prompt injection have largely focused on model-level threats within a single session, overlooking how cross-session persistent system state fundamentally changes the system-level risk of agentic systems. Inspired by stored cross-site scripting in web systems, we introduce cross-session stored prompt injection, where a successful injection can persist within agentic system state and silently influence future executions long after the original attacker interaction has ended. To systematically study this threat, we formalize stored prompt injection and develop a taxonomy of how adversarial content persists and affects agentic systems across sessions. We further develop a benchmark and sandbox toolkit to evaluate the risks of stored prompt injection, enabling quantitative analysis of attack success across different models, attack goals, and persistence channels. Our findings highlight that persistence transforms prompt injection from an ephemeral model-level threat into a long-lived system-level vulnerability embedded within agent execution state. We hope this work draws broader attention to this emerging threat and motivates the community to systematically study and mitigate system risks arising from persistence in agentic systems.

A computer worm is malware that spreads on a network by replicating itself from one machine to another. Traditional worms, like WannaCry, exploited predetermined vulnerabilities, and their spread can be halted by patching those vulnerabilities. Here we show that artificial intelligence (AI) agents enable a fundamentally new threat: a worm that generates tailored attack strategies to each target it encounters. The worm parasitically uses compromised machines to run open-weight large language models (LLMs) to sustain its reasoning, or extend its reach for further attacks. Deployed on a network of machines spanning Linux, Windows, and IoT (Internet of Things) devices, the worm propagated by exploiting common, real-world corporate network vulnerabilities. Since the worm is powered by stolen compute, the attacker's marginal cost per new infection is zero. This creates a destabilizing economic asymmetry between attackers and defenders. Moreover, because the worm requires no commercial AI platform, centralized safety controls, such as service refusals or rate limiting, are structurally irrelevant. Our results demonstrate that self-sustaining AI-driven cyber-threats are no longer theoretical. We must prepare for autonomous generative adversaries: malware systems that propagate without human operators and are defined not by fixed exploit code, but by the capacity to reason about targets, adapt to observations, and synthesize attack logic in real time.

Vulnerability disclosure volumes now far exceed organizational assessment capacity, yet three adjacent research communities (proof-of-concept generation, vulnerability prioritization, and detection rule engineering) operate largely in isolation. Existing automated exploit generation systems report binary pass/fail outcomes, discarding partial progress and producing no signal for the other two communities. This paper presents FORGE, a multi-agent system that bridges these three silos through graduated exploitation depth. Five specialized agents (Intel, Generator, Planner, Exploit, and Detector) execute in a fixed pipeline that (1) generates targeted vulnerable applications from CVE metadata, (2) conducts coached, multi-turn exploitation assessed by an LLM-primary oracle on a four-level taxonomy (L0: no evidence through L3: full compromise), and (3) produces Sigma and Snort detection rules grounded in OpenTelemetry exploitation traces. Graduated depth is the bridging mechanism: deeper exploitation yields richer behavioral traces for detection engineering, while depth data across scoring bands provides ground truth for prioritization validation. A tiered knowledge architecture accumulates intelligence across assessments, transferring build and exploitation experience to subsequent CVEs. Evaluation on 603 CVEs from the CVE-GENIE dataset achieves 67.8% end-to-end L1+ exploitation at USD 1.50 per CVE across eight languages and 187 CWE types. Exploitation rates remain near 68% regardless of EPSS or CVSS band, indicating that pattern-level reachability is orthogonal to metadata-based prioritization. Detection rules from L2+ exploitation achieve significantly higher span-normalized grounding than L1-derived rules (p=0.035), and 93.4% of generated Snort rules produce zero false positives against a synthetic benign corpus.

Smart contracts face critical security challenges that require thorough auditing in decentralized web services. While Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown promise in automated vulnerability detection, existing approaches lack severity evaluations with actionable remediation and demand unnecessarily massive computational overhead. In this study, we introduce an efficient end-to-end smart contract security audit framework utilizing lightweight, highly optimized open-source LLMs (0.6B-4B parameters). Our framework decouples comprehensive audit tasks into four interconnected components: vulnerability detection, explanation, severity classification, and remediation recommendation. To maintain high accuracy without massive parameters, we implement Rank-Stabilized Low-Rank Adapters (rsLoRA), knowledge distillation, and a custom Chain-of-Verification (CoVe) aggregation strategy to systematically screen and consolidate multiple draft responses from the model into a highly accurate audit report. Experimental results demonstrate that our lightweight pipeline consistently outperforms state-of-the-art open-source coder dense LLMs (7B to 34B parameters), achieving 98.25% accuracy in vulnerability detection and an alignment score of 0.4375 in generative explanation tasks. Furthermore, our extensive ablation studies empirically validate the superiority of our decoupled audit processes over unified prompting and uncover a novel severity centrality bias, establishing a critical benchmark for future research in LLM-assisted auditing.

The attack surface of a modern operating system is a haystack: thousands of signed binaries and millions of functions, almost none relevant to any given vulnerability. A human analyst or an LLM agent must pick the function worth reading before analyzing it. At whole-OS scope, this target selection, not the analysis, is the binding constraint. We present Symbolicate-Enrich-Sample, a low-cost batch pipeline that turns a corpus of production Windows binaries into a queryable, priority-ranked research queue. We (i) recover function-level symbols for stripped vendor binaries by auto-fetching the public symbol files and joining them to a recovered call graph; (ii) attach cheap, deterministic structural features to each named function and, conditioned on those features, use a low-cost language model to assign a reachability tier, a risk level, a bug-class hypothesis, and a rationale; and (iii) draw diverse, prioritized batches via a priority-weighted importance sampler. The contribution is a selection substrate: the prioritization layer a downstream detector or LLM agent runs on top of. Across a whole Windows image of 7,231,419 functions, the labels are markedly selective, and stacking deterministic filters on them leaves a ~22K-function shortlist: the candidate needles, few enough for a human or agent to work through. We characterize the pipeline's selectivity and its failure modes, describe the methodology, and report aggregate statistics; we withhold the derived dataset for legal and dual-use reasons.

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems are widely deployed and increasingly influential, but their reliance on external corpora exposes new security risks from poisoned retrieval content. Existing RAG attacks are largely focusing on individual queries or narrow topic-local query sets, which limits their practical reach and offers limited camouflage in real-world settings. In this paper, we introduce discourse-level opinion manipulation, a new threat model in which coordinated influence across a semantic query network induces opinion shifts over a holistic, multi-topic query space. We formalize this threat in a black-box setting and propose DiscourseFlip, an agentic, graph-guided attack that dynamically allocates a limited poisoning budget to maximize discourse-level opinion deviation. Extensive experiments demonstrate that DiscourseFlip consistently induces targeted opinion shifts across the contextualized query network and significantly outperforms existing baselines in terms of coverage and effectiveness. User studies further confirm that DiscourseFlip is effective while remaining well camouflaged from user detection. Moreover, systematic analyses show that existing mitigation strategies are ineffective against discourse-level manipulation, underscoring the urgent need for more robust and adaptive defenses to address discourse-level vulnerabilities.