ZeroHour
DashboardNewsCVEsExploitsIncidentsAIBriefAnalyticsEntitiesWatchlistIOCsAsk the feedSourcesFeeds & APIKiosk mode

Search: “vulnerability detection”

14,111 stories

Searchkeywordsmart Sortlatesthotimportancerelevance
DomainAllCyberAIWindow24h3d7d30dAllIn the wildImportant onlyShow duplicates
CategoryAllVulnerability 5222Ransomware 2691Exploit / PoC 1833Malware 1486Data breach 1050Threat actor 597Policy & legal 430Phishing & fraud 363Industry 163AI safety & security 106Advisory 91Research 63Tools 38AI research 17
SeverityAllcritical 7303high 3754medium 2661low 215info 256

Towards Scalable and Cost-Efficient Vulnerability Detection: A Study on Automatic Query Generation

A study finds LLM-synthesized CodeQL queries improve average F1-score by 82% over baseline queries, offering scalable vulnerability detection versus direct LLM scanning.

Researchers conducted an empirical study evaluating whether LLMs can synthesize executable CodeQL queries from National Vulnerability Database vulnerability data. LLM-generated queries significantly enhanced baseline CodeQL suites, yielding an 82% improvement in average F1-score across a diverse set of real-world vulnerabilities. A cost-benefit analysis shows direct LLM-based scanning of entire repositories is often computationally and financially prohibitive, while LLM query synthesis offers a scalable and cost-effective alternative for large-scale vulnerability detection.

arXiv cs.CR · 6d agoResearch1

AWS puts AI vulnerability detection to the test, and false positives pile up

AWS publicly released its Deception Benchmark (14,822 samples) showing leading AI models falsely flag 41-99% of safe code as vulnerable.

AWS released its Deception Benchmark publicly, containing 14,822 samples across 16 programming languages and more than 70 CWE categories, with 9,695 scored samples split into 6,988 code-level and 2,707 environment-gated challenges. AWS evaluated 12 models from five providers using single-turn prompts and found none met its production bar of below 10% for both false-positive and false-negative rates. With direct prompting, models caught nearly all real vulnerabilities but incorrectly flagged 41% to 99% of safe code, with precision between 52% and 71%. Asking models to prove exploitability reduced false positives by 17 to 74 percentage points but raised false-negative rates to 7-44%, with models struggling most when external controls like Kubernetes Network Policies blocked apparent exploits.

Help Net Security · 1d agoAI research