SecureFalcon: Are We There Yet in Automated Software Vulnerability Detection with LLMs?

Mohamed Amine Ferrag; Ammar Battah; Norbert Tihanyi; Ridhi Jain; Diana Maimut; Fatima Alwahedi; Thierry Lestable; Narinderjit Singh Thandi; Abdechakour Mechri; Merouane Debbah; Lucas C. Cordeiro

arXiv · 2307.06616

SecureFalcon: Are We There Yet in Automated Software Vulnerability Detection with LLMs?

Mohamed Amine Ferrag·Ammar Battah·Norbert Tihanyi·Ridhi Jain·Diana Maimut·Fatima Alwahedi·Thierry Lestable·Narinderjit Singh Thandi·Abdechakour Mechri·Merouane Debbah·Lucas C. Cordeiro

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Software vulnerabilities can cause numerous problems, including crashes, data loss, and security breaches. These issues greatly compromise quality and can negatively impact the market adoption of software applications and systems. Traditional bug-fixing methods, such as static analysis, often produce false positives. While bounded model checking, a form of Formal Verification (FV), can provide more accurate outcomes compared to static analyzers, it demands substantial resources and significantly hinders developer productivity. Can Machine Learning (ML) achieve accuracy comparable to FV methods and be used in popular instant code completion frameworks in near real-time? In this paper, we introduce SecureFalcon, an innovative model architecture with only 121 million parameters derived from the Falcon-40B model and explicitly tailored for classifying software vulnerabilities. To achieve the best performance, we trained our model using two datasets, namely the FormAI dataset and the FalconVulnDB. The FalconVulnDB is a combination of recent public datasets, namely the SySeVR framework, Draper VDISC, Bigvul, Diversevul, SARD Juliet, and ReVeal datasets. These datasets contain the top 25 most dangerous software weaknesses, such as CWE-119, CWE-120, CWE-476, CWE-122, CWE-190, CWE-121, CWE-78, CWE-787, CWE-20, and CWE-762. SecureFalcon achieves 94% accuracy in binary classification and up to 92% in multiclassification, with instant CPU inference times. It outperforms existing models such as BERT, RoBERTa, CodeBERT, and traditional ML algorithms, promising to push the boundaries of software vulnerability detection and instant code completion frameworks.

Explore related subjects

cs.CR cs.AI

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Mohamed Amine Ferrag, Ammar Battah, Norbert Tihanyi, Ridhi Jain, Diana Maimut, Fatima Alwahedi, Thierry Lestable, Narinderjit Singh Thandi, Abdechakour Mechri, Merouane Debbah, Lucas C. Cordeiro. 2025-03-03. SecureFalcon: Are We There Yet in Automated Software Vulnerability Detection with LLMs?. https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.06616

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

WAInjectBench: Benchmarking Prompt Injection Detections for Web Agents

Multiple prompt injection attacks have been proposed against web agents. At the same time, various methods have been developed to detect general prompt injection attacks, but none have been systematically evaluated for web agents. In this work, we bridge this gap by presenting the first comprehensive benchmark study on detecting prompt injection attacks targeting web agents. We begin by introducing a fine-grained categorization of such attacks based on the threat model. We then construct datasets containing both malicious and benign samples: malicious text segments generated by different attacks, benign text segments from four categories, malicious images produced by attacks, and benign images from two categories. Next, we systematize both text-based and image-based detection methods. Finally, we evaluate their performance across multiple scenarios. Our key findings show that while some detectors can identify attacks that rely on explicit textual instructions or visible image perturbations with moderate to high accuracy, they largely fail against attacks that omit explicit instructions or employ imperceptible perturbations. Our datasets and code are released at: https://github.com/Norrrrrrr-lyn/WAInjectBench.

cs.CR↗

arXiv2026

MIRANDA: short signatures from a leakage-free full-domain-hash scheme

We present $\mathsf{Miranda}$, the first family of full-domain-hash signatures based on matrix codes. This signature scheme fulfils the paradigm of Gentry, Peikert and Vaikuntanathan ($\mathsf{GPV}$), which gives strong security guarantees. Our trapdoor is very simple and generic: if we propose it with matrix codes, it can actually be instantiated in many other ways since it only involves a subcode of a decodable code (or lattice) in a unique decoding regime of parameters. Though $\mathsf{Miranda}$ signing algorithm relies on a decoding task where there is exactly one solution, there are many possible signatures given a message to sign and we ensure that signatures are not leaking information on their underlying trapdoor by means of a very simple procedure involving the drawing of a small number of uniform bits. In particular $\mathsf{Miranda}$ does not use a rejection sampling procedure which makes its implementation a very simple task contrary to other $\mathsf{GPV}$-like signatures schemes such as $\mathsf{Falcon}$ or even $\mathsf{Wave}$. We instantiate $\mathsf{Miranda}$ with the famous family of Gabidulin codes represented as spaces of matrices and we study thoroughly its security (in the EUF-CMA security model). For~$128$ bits of classical security, the signature sizes are as low as~$90$ bytes and the public key sizes are in the order of~$2.6$ megabytes.

cs.CR↗

arXiv2026

The Role of Learning in Attacking ML-based Network Intrusion Detection

Machine Learning-based Network Intrusion Detection Systems (ML-NIDS) can be bypassed by rudimentary adversarial perturbations. Recent work has focused on identifying where such perturbations can realistically be applied by a host-side adversary. Yet every one of these attacks produces perturbations the same way: searching from scratch for every flow. The cost of an attack therefore grows in lockstep with the number of flows it must perturb, and real networks produce them by the tens of millions. In this paper, we show that using reinforcement learning to train lightweight perturbation-generating policies lets an adversary amortize that cost across flows it perturbs. Counting every detector query and every second an attack spends, training included, we compare learned policies against gradient, query-based, and random search across six ML-NIDS environments at two operating points, under both evasion and alert inflation. One successful adversarial example costs a learned policy 1.5 to 18 detector queries against 52 to 1,100 for the strongest search baseline, and the policy amortizes its training cost after 76 to 1,622 examples, a volume a monitored link produces in seconds of traffic. We further find that the RL formulation literature adopts by default is unnecessary for evasion, that the policy conditions on the flow it is given rather than converging on a fixed perturbation, and that it transfers to detectors and traffic it never trained against. The value of learning to attack ML-NIDS is therefore not a matter of effectiveness, but of scale.

cs.CR↗