Skip to content

Directed Symbolic Execution for Vulnerability Discovery: An LLM-Guided Approach in KLEE

Jul 2026 · arXiv.org · Vol abs/2607.21676 · 0 citations · 81 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

KLEECopilot, a Large Language Model-guided directed symbolic execution approach built on KLEE, exhibits only marginal sensitivity to model scale, supporting the efficacy of integrating security semantics and loop-exit prioritization.

Abstract

Symbolic execution effectively discovers security violations but suffers from path explosion. Engines like KLEE therefore use path prioritization heuristics to order state exploration, typically optimizing code coverage. However, path prioritization can become trapped in cyclic control-flow regions, where repeated branching consumes the exploration budget before exploration reaches vulnerable code beyond these cyclic regions. We propose KLEECopilot, a Large Language Model (LLM)-guided directed symbolic execution approach built on KLEE. KLEECopilot uses LLMs to mark potentially vulnerable code and guide path prioritization. It also integrates loop-exit prioritization to escape potentially non-vulnerable cycles and progress toward deeper vulnerabilities. Compared with baselines such as Empc, KLEECopilot improves basic block coverage by 42.24% and line coverage by 125.82%. It discovers 1,335 total violations and 87 unique violations, outperforming the second-best baseline by 32.2% in total violations and Empc by 24.3% in unique violations. Although KLEECopilot is sensitive to model family, it exhibits only marginal sensitivity to model scale, supporting the efficacy of integrating security semantics and loop-exit prioritization. Ablation studies further show that individual components contribute to effectiveness: alternative configurations involving searchers, internal components, marking sources, and prompt variants yield only 54--61 unique violations, while KLEECopilot maintains competitive code coverage.

View source

Similar papers

#small language model Preprint Sep 2026

Towards Behavior Tree-Guided Vulnerability Detection with Lightweight LLMs

Investigating Behavior Trees (BTs) as an alternative intermediate representation for LLM-based vulnerability detection suggests that BTs can provide a compact and useful structured representation for vulnerability detection with quantized, locally deployable LLMs.

Enna Bašić, A. Giaretta · 0 citations
Conference Open access 2026

Hybrid Vulnerability Detection: Combining Latent Semantic Analysis with LLM-Assisted Fuzzing via Context Distillation

A hybrid pipeline combining static vulnerability candidate selection using Latent Semantic Analysis with dynamic verification through Large Language Model-assisted fuzzing is presented, which reduces manual effort while still requiring human validation.

Kevin Nguyen, Dominik Schoop · 0 citations
Jul 2026

PROGRESS: Property-Guided Regression Search for Semantic Falsification

This work presents PROGRESS (PROperty-Guided REgression Search for Semantic Falsification), integrating intent-driven properties into coverage-guided, search-based evolutionary test generation to reach deep program states and detect violations of intended behavior.

D. Mo, Noshin Ulfat, Matthew B. Dwyer et al. · 0 citations
Preprint Jul 2026

ContainmentBench: Trace-Based Evaluation of Post-Exposure Containment in Tool-Using LLM Agents

ContainmentBench, a sandboxed benchmark comprising a 504-scenario specification dataset, a shared rollout-trace schema, and stage-scoped metrics for endpoint violations, logged propagation, and explicitly authorized taint-exposed proposals that commit, is introduced.

Wen-Hao Lan, Shan Li, Meiqi Wu et al. · 0 citations
Book Open access Apr 2026

HarnessLLM: Rust Verification Harness Generation with Large Language Models

This paper presents HarnessLLM, an automated workflow that leverages LLMs to generate verification harnesses for Rust code directly from existing test suites and is the first work to use LLMs for generating harnesses aimed at memory safety verification in real-world Rust projects.

Minghua Wang, Yuwei Liu, Lin Huang · 0 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.