Large language models (LLMs) and autonomous coding agents are increasingly used to generate software across a wide range of domains. Yet a core requirement remains unmet: ensuring that generated code is secure without compromising its functional correctness. Existing benchmarks and evaluations for secure code generation fall short-many measure only vulnerability reduction, disregard correctness preservation, or evaluate security and functionality on separate datasets, violating the fundamental need for simultaneous joint evaluation. We present DUALGAUGE, the first fully automated benchmarking framework designed to rigorously evaluate the security and correctness of LLM-generated code in unison. Given the lack of datasets enabling joint evaluation of secure code generation, we also present DUALGAUGE-BENCH, a curated benchmark suite of diverse coding tasks, each paired with manually validated test suites for both security and functionality, designed for full coverage of specification requirements. At the core of DUALGAUGE is an agentic program executor, which runs a program against given tests in sandboxed environments, and an LLM-based evaluator, which assesses both correctness and vulnerability behavior against expected outcomes. We rigorously evaluated and ensured the quality of DUALGAUGE-BENCH and the accuracy of DUALGAUGE, and applied DUALGAUGE to benchmarking ten leading LLMs on DUALGAUGE-BENCH across thousands of test scenarios. Our results reveal critical gaps in correct and secure code generation by these LLMs, for which our open-source system and datasets help accelerate progress via reproducible, scalable, and rigorous evaluation.

Abstract--Large language models (LLMs) are now widely used to draft and refactor code, but code that works is not necessarily secure. We evaluate secure code generation using the Instruct Prime, which eliminated compliance-required prompts and cue contamination, and evaluate five instruction-tuned code LLMs using a zero-shot baseline and a three-round reflexion prompting approach. Security is measured using the Insecure Code Detector (ICD), and results are reported by measuring Repair, Regression, and NetGain metrics, considering the programming language and CWE family. Python yields the highest secure rates; C and C# are the lowest, with Java, JS, PHP, and C++ in the middle. Reflexion prompting improves security for all models, improving average accuracy from 70.74% at t The trends with Repair, Regression, and NetGain metrics show that applying one to two rounds produces most of the benefits. A replication package is available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17065846. LLMs such as GitHub Copilot, Codex, and DeepSeekCoder have made LLM-assisted coding common. Early studies focused on functionality and correctness [1], [2]: can models produce code that compiles and passes tests? Y et LLMs learn from large codebases that also contain design flaws. Recent work shows that low-quality code [3], [4] and vulnerabilities [5] can carry over into generated code.

Security in code generation remains a pivotal challenge when applying large language models (LLMs). This paper introduces RefleXGen, an innovative method that significantly enhances code security by integrating Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) techniques with guided self-reflection mechanisms inherent in LLMs. Unlike traditional approaches that rely on fine-tuning LLMs or developing specialized secure code datasets - processes that can be resource-intensive - RefleXGen iteratively optimizes the code generation process through self-assessment and reflection without the need for extensive resources. Within this framework, the model continuously accumulates and refines its knowledge base, thereby progressively improving the security of the generated code. Experimental results demonstrate that RefleXGen substantially enhances code security across multiple models, achieving a 13.6% improvement with GPT-3.5 Turbo, a 6.7% improvement with GPT-4o, a 4.5% improvement with CodeQwen, and a 5.8% improvement with Gemini. Our findings highlight that improving the quality of model self-reflection constitutes an effective and practical strategy for strengthening the security of AI-generated code.

Despite recent advances, Large Language Models (LLMs) still generate vulnerable code. Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) has the potential to enhance LLMs for secure code generation by incorporating external security knowledge. However, the conventional RAG design struggles with the noise of raw security-related documents, and existing retrieval methods overlook the significant security semantics implicitly embedded in task descriptions. To address these issues, we propose RESCUE, a new RAG framework for secure code generation with two key innovations. First, we propose a hybrid knowledge base construction method that combines LLM-assisted cluster-then-summarize distillation with program slicing, producing both high-level security guidelines and concise, security-focused code examples. Second, we design a hierarchical multi-faceted retrieval to traverse the constructed knowledge base from top to bottom and integrates multiple security-critical facts at each hierarchical level, ensuring comprehensive and accurate retrieval. We evaluated RESCUE on four benchmarks and compared it with five state-of-the-art secure code generation methods on six LLMs. The results demonstrate that RESCUE improves the SecurePass@1 metric by an average of 4.8 points, establishing a new state-of-the-art performance for security. Furthermore, we performed in-depth analysis and ablation studies to rigorously validate the effectiveness of individual components in RESCUE.

Large language Models (LLMs) have shown remarkable proficiency in code generation tasks across various programming languages. However, their outputs often contain subtle but critical vulnerabilities, posing significant risks when deployed in security-sensitive or mission-critical systems. This paper introduces TypePilot, an agentic AI framework designed to enhance the security and robustness of LLM-generated code by leveraging strongly typed and verifiable languages, using Scala as a representative example. We evaluate the effectiveness of our approach in two settings: formal verification with the Stainless framework and general-purpose secure code generation. Our experiments with leading open-source LLMs reveal that while direct code generation often fails to enforce safety constraints, just as naive prompting for more secure code, our type-focused agentic pipeline substantially mitigates input validation and injection vulnerabilities. The results demonstrate the potential of structured, type-guided LLM workflows to improve the SotA of the trustworthiness of automated code generation in high-assurance domains.

The code generation capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) have transformed the field of software development. However, this advancement also presents significant security challenges, as LLM-generated code often contains vulnerabilities. One direction of research strengthens LLMs by injecting or refining security knowledge through curated datasets, model tuning, or static analyzers. While effective in certain settings, these methods can be resource-intensive, less adaptable to zero-day vulnerabilities, and often inapplicable to proprietary models. To address these challenges, we introduce GRASP, which explores a new direction that focuses on structured reasoning over Secure Coding Practices(SCPs) rather than additional training or external feedback. GRASP comprises two key ideas: (1) an SCP graph that organizes SCPs into a Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG) capturing dependencies and relationships, and (2) a graph-based reasoning process that systematically guides LLMs through relevant SCPs for code generation. This design enables interpretable, model-agnostic, and scalable security improvements, particularly for previously unseen vulnerabilities. Our evaluation shows that GRASP consistently achieves Security Rates (SR) exceeding 80% across multiple LLMs, and delivers up to 88% improvements over baselines on zero-day vulnerabilities.

The increasing adoption of large language models (LLMs) in software engineering necessitates rigorous security evaluation of their generated code. However, existing benchmarks often lack relevance to real-world AI-assisted programming scenarios, making them inadequate for assessing the practical security risks associated with AI-generated code in production environments. To address this gap, we introduce A.S.E (AI Code Generation Security Evaluation), a repository-level evaluation benchmark designed to closely mirror real-world AI programming tasks, offering a comprehensive and reliable framework for assessing the security of AI-generated code. Our evaluation of leading LLMs on A.S.E reveals several key findings. In particular, current LLMs still struggle with secure coding. The complexity in repository-level scenarios presents challenges for LLMs that typically perform well on snippet-level tasks. Moreover, a larger reasoning budget does not necessarily lead to better code generation. These observations offer valuable insights into the current state of AI code generation and help developers identify the most suitable models for practical tasks. They also lay the groundwork for refining LLMs to generate secure and efficient code in real-world applications.

Code-generating Large Language Models (LLMs) significantly accelerate software development. However, their frequent generation of insecure code presents serious risks. We present a comprehensive evaluation of seven parameter-efficient fine-tuning (PEFT) techniques, demonstrating substantial gains in secure code generation without compromising functionality. Our research identifies prompt-tuning as the most effective PEFT method, achieving an 80.86% Overall-Secure-Rate on CodeGen2 16B, a 13.5-point improvement over the 67.28% baseline. Optimizing decoding strategies through sampling temperature further elevated security to 87.65%. This equates to a reduction of approximately 203,700 vulnerable code snippets per million generated. Moreover, prompt and prefix tuning increase robustness against poisoning attacks in our TrojanPuzzle evaluation, with strong performance against CWE-79 and CWE-502 attack vectors. Our findings generalize across Python and Java, confirming prompt-tuning's consistent effectiveness. This study provides essential insights and practical guidance for building more resilient software systems with LLMs.

Prompt engineering reduces reasoning mistakes in Large Language Models (LLMs). However, its effectiveness in mitigating vulnerabilities in LLM-generated code remains underexplored. To address this gap, we implemented a benchmark to automatically assess the impact of various prompt engineering strategies on code security. Our benchmark leverages two peer-reviewed prompt datasets and employs static scanners to evaluate code security at scale. We tested multiple prompt engineering techniques on GPT-3.5-turbo, GPT-4o, and GPT-4o-mini. Our results show that for GPT-4o and GPT-4o-mini, a security-focused prompt prefix can reduce the occurrence of security vulnerabilities by up to 56%. Additionally, all tested models demonstrated the ability to detect and repair between 41.9% and 68.7% of vulnerabilities in previously generated code when using iterative prompting techniques. Finally, we introduce a "prompt agent" that demonstrates how the most effective techniques can be applied in real-world development workflows.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have significantly aided developers by generating or assisting in code writing, enhancing productivity across various tasks. While identifying incorrect code is often straightforward, detecting vulnerabilities in functionally correct code is more challenging, especially for developers with limited security knowledge, which poses considerable security risks of using LLM-generated code and underscores the need for robust evaluation benchmarks that assess both functional correctness and security. Current benchmarks like CyberSecEval and SecurityEval attempt to solve it but are hindered by unclear and impractical specifications, failing to assess both functionality and security accurately. To tackle these deficiencies, we introduce CWEval, a novel outcome-driven evaluation framework designed to enhance the evaluation of secure code generation by LLMs. This framework not only assesses code functionality but also its security simultaneously with high-quality task specifications and outcome-driven test oracles which provides high accuracy. Coupled with CWEval-bench, a multilingual, security-critical coding benchmark, CWEval provides a rigorous empirical security evaluation on LLM-generated code, overcoming previous benchmarks' shortcomings. Through our evaluations, CWEval reveals a notable portion of functional but insecure code produced by LLMs, and shows a serious inaccuracy of previous evaluations, ultimately contributing significantly to the field of secure code generation. We open-source our artifact at: https://github.com/Co1lin/CWEval .