LogicEval: A Systematic Framework for Evaluating Automated Repair Techniques for Logical Vulnerabilities in Real-World Software
Syed Md. Mukit Rashid, Abdullah Al Ishtiaq, Kai Tu, Yilu Dong, Tianwei Wu, Ali Ranjbar, Tianchang Yang, Najrin Sultana, Shagufta Mehnaz, Syed Rafiul Hussain
Abstract
Logical vulnerabilities in software stem from flaws in program logic rather than memory safety, which can lead to critical security failures. Although existing automated programrepair techniques primarily focus on repairing memory-corruption vulnerabilities, they struggle with logical vulnerabilities because of their limited semantic understanding of the vulnerable code and its expected behavior. On the other hand, recent successes of large language models (LLMs) in understanding and repairing code are promising. However, no framework currently exists to analyze the capabilities and limitations of such techniques for logical vulnerabilities. We aim to systematically evaluate both traditional and LLM-based repair approaches for addressing real-world logical vulnerabilities. To facilitate our assessment, we created the first-ever dataset, LogicDS, comprising 122 logical vulnerabilities that reflect tangible security impact. We also developed a systematic framework, LogicEval, to evaluate patches for logical vulnerabilities. Evaluations suggest that compilation and testing failures are primarily driven by prompt sensitivity, loss of code context, and difficulty in patch localization. 1
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 8086a8e3-8429-4a1f-9a0f-676b0bd38580Builds on21
- LLM Evaluators Recognize and Favor Their Own GenerationsArjun Panickssery, Samuel R. Bowman, Shi FengNeurIPS 2024 · 865 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
- CoCoNuT: combining context-aware neural translation models using ensemble for program repairThibaud Lutellier, Hung Viet Pham, Lawrence Pang, Yitong Li et al.ISSTA 2020 · 325 citations
- A Large-Scale Empirical Study of Security PatchesFrank Li, Vern PaxsonCCS 2017 · 273 citations
- CURE: Code-Aware Neural Machine Translation for Automatic Program RepairNan Jiang, Thibaud Lutellier, Lin TanICSE 2021 · 267 citations
Related papers
- INTENTFIX: Automated Logic Vulnerability Repair via LLM-Driven Intent ModelingJinseok Heo, Dongwook Choi, Jinyoung Kim, Misoo Kim et al.ICSE 2026
- Well Begun is Half Done: Location-Aware and Trace-Guided Iterative Automated Vulnerability RepairZhenlei Ye, Xiaobing Sun, Sicong Cao, Lili Bo et al.ICSE 2026
- Logs In, Patches Out: Automated Vulnerability Repair via Tree-of-Thought LLM AnalysisYoungjoon Kim, Sunguk Shin, Hyoungshick Kim, Jiwon YoonUSENIX Security 2025
- How Effective Are Neural Networks for Fixing Security VulnerabilitiesYi Wu, Nan Jiang, Hung Viet Pham, Thibaud Lutellier et al.ISSTA 2023 · 86 citations
- Vul-R2: A Reasoning LLM for Automated Vulnerability RepairXin-Cheng Wen, Zirui Lin, Yijun Yang, Cuiyun Gao et al.ASE 2025 · 1 citation
