Papers › SEC-bench Pro: Can Language Models Solve Long-Horizon Software Security Tasks?

SEC-bench Pro: Can Language Models Solve Long-Horizon Software Security Tasks?

26 May 2026arXiv:2605.26548added by Syntology

Hwiwon Lee, Jiawei Liu, Dongjun Kim, Wubing Xia, Ziqi Zhang, Chunqiu Steven Xia, Lingming Zhang

Title, abstract, authors and date from arXiv's metadata (CC0); this paper is not in the Papers with Code archive (frozen 2025-07-28).

Finding a real vulnerability in complicated systems is a challenging, long-horizon task that demands reasoning across an entire codebase to produce a working proof-of-concept (PoC). However, such critical security problems remain understudied. We present SEC-bench Pro, a benchmark that measures how well frontier models hunt real vulnerabilities by reproducing working PoC inputs from disclosed reports, where each task pairs a concrete bug with the instructions for triggering it. We also demonstrate the limitations of existing rule-based judges for grading generated PoCs, and propose a novel LLM-based judge for more precise grading. We instantiate SEC-bench Pro with 344 validated vulnerabilities across three targets, the V8 and SpiderMonkey browser engines and the Linux kernel, covering critical vulnerability families including memory-safety, sandbox, JIT, race-condition, and kernel-subsystem bugs. Across six frontier commercial and open-weight models and three coding agents, the strongest, Codex with GPT-5.5, solves 58% of instances overall. We also observe that Claude Code with Opus 4.6 tends to time out but solves most instances it completes. In contrast, open-weight models struggle; for example, GLM-5 solves only 13 of the 344 instances. During construction and evaluation, SEC-bench Pro also surfaced three vulnerabilities in V8 and SpiderMonkey, including a sandbox escape that was fixed and earned a $20,000 Google Vulnerability Reward Program bounty. More recently, SEC-bench Pro has been adopted by OpenAI to evaluate the long-horizon security capabilities of its newest models. Overall, SEC-bench Pro exposes where long-horizon vulnerability discovery succeeds, where it fails, and how different grading choices change the evaluation landscape, offering insights for security-centric model evaluation and training. Our artifact is available at https://github.com/SEC-bench/SEC-bench-Pro.

PaperPDFCode Syntology ran

In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.

For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2605.26548")

Code

Syntology Ran 17 of 22 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 5 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 1 ran · honoured contract; 3 ran · violated contract; 8 ran · our draft was wrong; 5 ran with no contract checked.

By repository: found in paper text by Syntology: 22 samples from 1 repository, 17 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.

SEC-bench/SEC-bench-Pro found in paper text by Syntology report

Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

22 samples harvested; 17 ran; 1 honoured the contract we drafted; 5 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

1ran · honoured contract
3ran · violated contract
8ran · our draft was wrong
5ran
5unverified

Licence: 0 of the 22 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from SEC-bench/SEC-bench-Pro. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

JudgeInput SEC-bench/SEC-bench-Pro/harness/judge.py found in paper text by Syntology ran MIT (permissive) · 684285477b62f8ef · report
JudgeVerdict SEC-bench/SEC-bench-Pro/harness/judge.py found in paper text by Syntology ran MIT (permissive) · 0b5bc98045258a9f · report
_LLMResult SEC-bench/SEC-bench-Pro/harness/judge.py found in paper text by Syntology ran MIT (permissive) · a3786d8c19da864e · report
_extract_json SEC-bench/SEC-bench-Pro/harness/judge.py found in paper text by Syntology ran · our draft was wrong MIT (permissive) · eb59ee8d15869fc7 · report
_is_bedrock_env SEC-bench/SEC-bench-Pro/harness/judge.py found in paper text by Syntology ran MIT (permissive) · 536365e65ceb5859 · report
_is_refusal_error SEC-bench/SEC-bench-Pro/harness/judge.py found in paper text by Syntology ran · violated contract MIT (permissive) · 4c7e66f6041f2587 · report
_is_transient_error SEC-bench/SEC-bench-Pro/harness/judge.py found in paper text by Syntology ran · violated contract MIT (permissive) · cf7b4ec99f036551 · report
_majority_verdict SEC-bench/SEC-bench-Pro/harness/judge.py found in paper text by Syntology ran · our draft was wrong MIT (permissive) · bb20404d793ee7c5 · report
_parse_outcome SEC-bench/SEC-bench-Pro/harness/judge.py found in paper text by Syntology ran · our draft was wrong MIT (permissive) · c27deff59df24679 · report
_render_prompt SEC-bench/SEC-bench-Pro/harness/judge.py found in paper text by Syntology ran · our draft was wrong MIT (permissive) · 8dad99c441398eee · report
_scan_balanced_brace_block SEC-bench/SEC-bench-Pro/harness/judge.py found in paper text by Syntology ran · our draft was wrong fingerprinted MIT (permissive) · 25046f7683277cea · report
_temperature_for_model SEC-bench/SEC-bench-Pro/harness/judge.py found in paper text by Syntology ran · honoured contract fingerprinted MIT (permissive) · 9bb9777b798f566f · report
_uses_claude_extended_thinking SEC-bench/SEC-bench-Pro/harness/judge.py found in paper text by Syntology ran · violated contract fingerprinted MIT (permissive) · 179d9cec2d58107c · report
_validate_schema SEC-bench/SEC-bench-Pro/harness/judge.py found in paper text by Syntology ran · our draft was wrong MIT (permissive) · 2593118c573c39f9 · report
get_default_model SEC-bench/SEC-bench-Pro/harness/judge.py found in paper text by Syntology ran MIT (permissive) · 2e9ba390a6958e8c · report
resolve_model SEC-bench/SEC-bench-Pro/harness/judge.py found in paper text by Syntology ran · our draft was wrong fingerprinted MIT (permissive) · 1b333cccdd9dcf48 · report
template_name SEC-bench/SEC-bench-Pro/harness/judge.py found in paper text by Syntology ran · our draft was wrong fingerprinted MIT (permissive) · b39b807368212d44 · report
_SchemaError SEC-bench/SEC-bench-Pro/harness/judge.py found in paper text by Syntology unverified MIT (permissive) · ed2d1a96a876d6e1 · report
_call_llm SEC-bench/SEC-bench-Pro/harness/judge.py found in paper text by Syntology unverified MIT (permissive) · 80f6496de6134cbb · report
_judge_single_call SEC-bench/SEC-bench-Pro/harness/judge.py found in paper text by Syntology unverified MIT (permissive) · 08b5364c4751aa16 · report
_load_template SEC-bench/SEC-bench-Pro/harness/judge.py found in paper text by Syntology unverified MIT (permissive) · 9e0ba417b654b649 · report
judge_single SEC-bench/SEC-bench-Pro/harness/judge.py found in paper text by Syntology unverified MIT (permissive) · 7fdac0083b7ad354 · report

Results from the paper

The Papers with Code archive ends with its 2025-07-28 snapshot. This paper's arXiv identifier, 2605.26548, was issued in May 2026, after that date, so the archive has no leaderboard rows for it.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections