HoF-Bench (named after AISLE's public Hall of Fame), a benchmark built from 95 public AI-discovered CVEs across eight repositories pinned at vulnerable commits, provides a compact test bed for comparing vulnerability scanners, their reliability across repeated runs, and the candidate volume they create.
Abstract
LLM-based analyzers have begun finding real vulnerabilities in mature open-source projects: AISLE's analyzer is credited with more than 280 CVEs across 78 projects, including OpenSSL, curl, and GnuTLS. We introduce HoF-Bench (named after AISLE's public Hall of Fame), a benchmark built from 95 of these public AI-discovered CVEs across eight repositories pinned at vulnerable commits. Analyzers receive source and target-file scope but not CVE identifiers, descriptions, fixes, or expected mechanisms; a detector-blinded frontier-model judge credits only findings that identify the same code path, root cause, attack condition, and impact. A deliberately minimal LLM-based analyzer rediscovers up to 65 of the 95 CVEs (68%) under this strict protocol. No frontier model performs detection anywhere in the study. The ten detector backbones are five open-weight models (21B--284B total parameters, 3--13B active) and five proprietary small or"flash"-tier models. All of them run in the fixed scaffold with four repeated passes, an optional generated-context stage, and a replayable multi-round triage stage (7,600 model--CVE pass records). Difficulty is strongly structured by language; the CVEs missed by every model concentrate in C infrastructure code. HoF-Bench provides a compact test bed for comparing vulnerability scanners, their reliability across repeated runs, and the candidate volume they create. The dataset is available at https://huggingface.co/datasets/aisleinc/HoF-Bench.
The results show that access to repository history is insufficient: concealment becomes most effective when benign and malicious changes jointly occupy the auditor's active review context or when the stated purpose plausibly accounts for the attack-bearing diff.
Candidate generation for open-source vulnerabilities is no longer scarce. AI-assisted code review now produces defect candidates cheaply, and industry programs pair them with expert human triage. The remaining scarcity is validation and impact assessment, and the gap is largest in critical-infrastructure software like...
Evaluating the ability of large language models (LLMs) to discover software bugs is increasingly important. Existing benchmarks typically evaluate this capability by asking the model to generate a proof-of-concept input that triggers a predefined target vulnerability. However, this setup may overlook valid crashes disc...
Ze Sheng, Aleksandar Kezic, Zhicheng Chen et al.· 0 citations
: Large language models are increasingly being deployed in safety-critical domains, yet remain vulnerable to jailbreak attacks that circumvent safety alignments. This systematic review synthesizes empirical jailbreak research published between 2024 and 2025, using a PRISMA-guided search protocol, followed by BERTopic-b...
Meda Račaitytė, Hélder Bastos, R. Ribeiro et al.· International Conference on...· 0 citations
With the increasing usage of AI-generated code in software development workflows, new security challenges and concerns arise. This paper analyzes five LLMs: ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, DeepSeek, and Grok in three phases of security assessments against web vulnerabilities listed by the OWASP Top 10. Phase 1 (December 2025)...
Malak Mansour, Anas AlMajali· IEEE Jordan Conference on Ap...· 0 citations
GenIaC-SecBench is introduced, a benchmark of 100 deployment scenarios stratified by architectural complexity, evaluated across 12 model configurations from four vendors, producing 1,196 IaC artifacts scanned by three independent policy engines (Checkov, Trivy, KICS).
Animesh Shaw· 1 citation
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.