A Case Study of LLM for Automated Vulnerability Repair: Assessing Impact of Reasoning and Patch Validation Feedback
Ummay Kulsum, Haotian Zhu, Bowen Xu, Marcelo d'Amorim

TL;DR
This paper evaluates the effectiveness of reasoning and patch validation feedback in LLM-based vulnerability repair, introducing VRpilot, which outperforms existing methods on C and Java datasets.
Contribution
It presents VRpilot, a novel LLM-based vulnerability repair approach that incorporates reasoning and iterative feedback, demonstrating improved patch correctness over state-of-the-art techniques.
Findings
VRpilot generates 14% more correct patches for C
VRpilot generates 7.6% more correct patches for Java
Reasoning and feedback are critical for effectiveness
Abstract
Recent work in automated program repair (APR) proposes the use of reasoning and patch validation feedback to reduce the semantic gap between the LLMs and the code under analysis. The idea has been shown to perform well for general APR, but its effectiveness in other particular contexts remains underexplored. In this work, we assess the impact of reasoning and patch validation feedback to LLMs in the context of vulnerability repair, an important and challenging task in security. To support the evaluation, we present VRpilot, an LLM-based vulnerability repair technique based on reasoning and patch validation feedback. VRpilot (1) uses a chain-of-thought prompt to reason about a vulnerability prior to generating patch candidates and (2) iteratively refines prompts according to the output of external tools (e.g., compiler, code sanitizers, test suite, etc.) on previously-generated patches.…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsSoftware Reliability and Analysis Research
