Security Attacks on LLM-based Code Completion Tools
Wen Cheng, Ke Sun, Xinyu Zhang, Wei Wang
Abstract
The rapid development of large language models (LLMs) has significantly advanced code completion capabilities, giving rise to a new generation of LLM-based Code Completion Tools (LCCTs). Unlike general-purpose LLMs, these tools possess unique workflows, integrating multiple information sources as input and prioritizing code suggestions over natural language interaction, which introduces distinct security challenges. Additionally, LCCTs often rely on proprietary code datasets for training, raising concerns about the potential exposure of sensitive data. This paper exploits these distinct characteristics of LCCTs to develop targeted attack methodologies on two critical security risks: jailbreaking and training data extraction attacks. Our experimental results expose significant vulnerabilities within LCCTs, including a 99.4% success rate in jailbreaking attacks on GitHub Copilot and a 46.3% success rate on Amazon Q. Furthermore, We successfully extracted sensitive user data from GitHub Copilot, including 54 real email addresses and 314 physical addresses associated with GitHub usernames. Our study also demonstrates that these code-based attack methods are effective against generalpurpose LLMs, highlighting a broader security misalignment in the handling of code by modern LLMs. These findings underscore critical security challenges associated with LCCTs and suggest essential directions for strengthening their security frameworks. The example code and attack samples from our research are provided at https://github.com/Sensente/Security-Attacks-on-LCCTs . Disclaimer. This paper contains examples of harmful language. Reader discretion is recommended.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 1d219892-0534-465f-9d6b-8a2508d94a2eCited by top-tier papers2
- From Completion to Editing: Unlocking Context-Aware Code Infilling via Search-and-Replace Instruction TuningJiajun Zhang, Zeyu Cui, Jiaxi Yang, Lei Zhang et al.ACL 2026 · 8 citations
- ImportSnare: Directed 'Code Manual' Hijacking in Retrieval-Augmented Code GenerationKai Ye, Liangcai Su, Chenxiong QianCCS 2025
Builds on11
- Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackLong Ouyang, Jeffrey Wu, Xu Jiang, Diogo Almeida et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 24,707 citations
- Extracting Training Data from Large Language ModelsNicholas Carlini, Florian Tramèr, Eric Wallace, Matthew Jagielski et al.USENIX Security 2021 · 2,866 citations
- Jailbroken: How Does LLM Safety Training Fail?Alexander Wei, Nika Haghtalab, Jacob SteinhardtNeurIPS 2023 · 2,230 citations
- Asleep at the Keyboard? Assessing the Security of GitHub Copilot's Code ContributionsHammond Pearce, Baleegh Ahmad, Benjamin Tan, Brendan Dolan-Gavitt et al.S&P 2022 · 725 citations
- Pretraining Language Models with Human PreferencesTomasz Korbak, Kejian Shi, Angelica Chen, Rasika Vinayak Bhalerao et al.ICML 2023 · 287 citations
Related papers
- Black-Box Adversarial Attacks on LLM-Based Code CompletionSlobodan Jenko, Niels Mündler, Jingxuan He, Mark Vero et al.ICML 2025
- LLMs Caught in the Crossfire: Malware Requests and Jailbreak ChallengesHaoyang Li, Huan Gao, Zhiyuan Zhao, Zhiyu Lin et al.ACL 2025
- TrojanPuzzle: Covertly Poisoning Code-Suggestion ModelsHojjat Aghakhani, Wei Dai, Andre Manoel, Xavier Fernandes et al.S&P 2024 · 70 citations
- PIG: Privacy Jailbreak Attack on LLMs via Gradient-based Iterative In-Context OptimizationYidan Wang, Yanan Cao, Yubing Ren, Fang Fang et al.ACL 2025 · 12 citations
- EquaCode: A Multi-Strategy Jailbreak Approach for Large Language Models via Equation Solving and Code CompletionZhen Liang, Hai Huang, Zhengkui ChenAAAI 2026 · 1 citation
