Benchmarking LLMs and LLM-based Agents in Practical Vulnerability Detection for Code Repositories
Alperen Yildiz, Sin G. Teo, Yiling Lou, Yebo Feng, Chong Wang, Dinil Mon Divakaran
Abstract
Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown promise in software vulnerability detection, particularly on function-level benchmarks like Devign and BigVul. However, real-world detection requires interprocedural analysis, as vulnerabilities often emerge through multi-hop function calls rather than isolated functions. While repository-level benchmarks like ReposVul and VulEval introduce interprocedural context, they remain computationally expensive, lack pairwise evaluation of vulnerability fixes, and explore limited context retrieval, limiting their practicality. We introduce JitVul, a JIT vulnerability detection benchmark linking each function to its vulnerability-introducing and fixing commits. Built from 879 CVEs spanning 91 vulnerability types, JitVul enables comprehensive evaluation of detection capabilities. Our results show that ReAct Agents, leveraging thought-action-observation and interprocedural context, perform better than LLMs in distinguishing vulnerable from benign code. While prompting strategies like Chain-of-Thought help LLMs, ReAct Agents require further refinement. Both methods show inconsistencies, either misidentifying vulnerabilities or over-analyzing security guards, indicating significant room for improvement.
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 6f996879-ba3e-40b7-8d07-9ad3a16698b5Cited by top-tier papers3
- SecureVibeBench: Benchmarking Secure Vibe Coding of AI Agents via Reconstructing Vulnerability-Introducing ScenariosJunkai Chen, Huihui Huang, Yunbo Lyu, Junwen An et al.ACL 2026 · 5 citations
- Three Heads Are Better Than One: A Multi-perspective Reasoning Framework for Enhanced Vulnerability DetectionXin Peng, Bo Lin, Jing Wang, Xiaoling Li et al.FSE 2026 · 1 citation
- VulInstruct: Teaching LLMs Root-Cause Reasoning for Vulnerability Detection via Security SpecificationsHao Zhu, Jia Li, Cuiyun Gao, Jiaru Qian et al.FSE 2026
Builds on4
- Language Models are Few-Shot LearnersTom B. Brown, Benjamin Mann, Nick Ryder, Melanie Subbiah et al.NeurIPS 2020 · 64,255 citations
- Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language ModelsJason Wei, Xuezhi Wang, Dale Schuurmans, Maarten Bosma et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 22,562 citations
- Reflexion: language agents with verbal reinforcement learningNoah Shinn, Federico Cassano, Ashwin Gopinath, Karthik Narasimhan et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 5,828 citations
- ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language ModelsShunyu Yao, Jeffrey Zhao, Dian Yu, Nan Du et al.ICLR 2023
Related papers
- Enhancing Vulnerability Detection via Inter-procedural Semantic CompletionBozhi Wu, Chengjie Liu, Zhiming Li, Yushi Cao et al.ISSTA 2025 · 2 citations
- MulVul: Retrieval-augmented Multi-Agent Code Vulnerability Detection via Cross-Model Prompt EvolutionZihan Wu, Jie Xu, Yun Peng, Chun Yong Chong et al.ACL 2026 · 4 citations
- Vulnerability Detection with Code Language Models: How Far are We?Yangruibo Ding, Yanjun Fu, Omniyyah Ibrahim, Chawin Sitawarin et al.ICSE 2025 · 44 citations
- RealVul: Can We Detect Vulnerabilities in Web Applications with LLM?Di Cao, Yong Liao, Xiuwei ShangEMNLP 2024 · 11 citations
- SEC-bench: Automated Benchmarking of LLM Agents on Real-World Software Security TasksHwiwon Lee, Ziqi Zhang, Hanxiao Lu, Lingming ZhangNeurIPS 2025 · 86 citations
