CrypFormBench: Benchmarking Formal Analysis Capability of Large Language Models for Cryptographic Schemes
Zhaoxuan Li, Qionglu Zhang, Hengyuan Liu, Xiaoyan Gu, Xianhui Lu, Hongbo Liu, Bingzheng Wang, Haihui Fan, Ziming Zhao, Rui Zhang, Li Zhou
Abstract
Manual formal analysis of cryptographic schemes is labor-intensive and requires substantial expertise. While model-checking tools (e.g., Scyther and Tamarin) and computational-security tools (e.g., CryptoVerif and EasyCrypt) improve the automation of security proofs, they still rely on experts to abstract schemes and write tool-specific formal descriptions. Large language models (LLMs) are a promising alternative, but their effectiveness in this domain remains unexplored due to the absence of standardized evaluation methodologies. To fill this gap, we introduce CrypFormBench (C.F.B for short), a comprehensive benchmark jointly covering symbolic and computational security to evaluate five core LLM capabilities: interpretation, generation, completion, transformation, and correction. It comprises 700 instances spanning 677 schemes, 7 mainstream formal verifier languages, and 160 security properties. The evaluation of 9 state-of-the-art LLMs reveals that most of them perform well on interpretation and completion, given their code-awareness advantages, but struggle with generation, transformation, and correction. Overall, their performance remains limited, with Claude-3.5 achieving the highest score at 48.7 out of 100. We further provide practical guidance, e.g., few-shot prompting, Pass@K sampling, and lightweight fine-tuning, to mitigate the executability bottleneck and improve tool-usable outputs. Taken together, our benchmark and analyses offer a grounded view of current progress and concrete directions toward reliable LLM-assisted formal cryptographic analysis.
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 f29b77c5-04d9-45b5-bc4a-91894ecaec82Builds on17
- 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
- Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP TasksPatrick Lewis, Ethan Perez, Aleksandra Piktus, Fabio Petroni et al.NeurIPS 2020 · 19,162 citations
- Measuring Massive Multitask Language UnderstandingDan Hendrycks, Collin Burns, Steven Basart, Andy Zou et al.ICLR 2021 · 7,905 citations
- Tree of Thoughts: Deliberate Problem Solving with Large Language ModelsShunyu Yao, Dian Yu, Jeffrey Zhao, Izhak Shafran et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 5,068 citations
Related papers
- LLM-Aided Automatic Modeling for Security Protocol VerificationZiyu Mao, Jingyi Wang, Jun Sun, Shengchao Qin et al.ICSE 2025 · 3 citations
- AICrypto: Evaluating Cryptography Capabilities of Large Language ModelsYu Wang, Yijian Liu, Liheng Ji, Han Luo et al.ICML 2026 · 3 citations
- Can LLMs Reason About Program Semantics? A Comprehensive Evaluation of LLMs on Formal Specification InferenceThanh Le-Cong, Bach Le, Toby MurrayACL 2025
- Local Success Does Not Compose: Benchmarking Large Language Models for Compositional Formal VerificationXu Xu, Xin Li, Xingwei Qu, Jie Fu et al.ICLR 2026 · 9 citations
- VeriEquivBench: An Equivalence Score for Ground-Truth-Free Evaluation of Formally Verifiable CodeLingfei Zeng, Fengdi Che, Xuhan Huang, Fei Ye et al.ICLR 2026 · 8 citations
