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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
684285477b62f8ef · report
0b5bc98045258a9f · report
a3786d8c19da864e · report
eb59ee8d15869fc7 · report
536365e65ceb5859 · report
4c7e66f6041f2587 · report
cf7b4ec99f036551 · report
bb20404d793ee7c5 · report
c27deff59df24679 · report
8dad99c441398eee · report
25046f7683277cea · report
9bb9777b798f566f · report
179d9cec2d58107c · report
2593118c573c39f9 · report
2e9ba390a6958e8c · report
1b333cccdd9dcf48 · report
b39b807368212d44 · report
ed2d1a96a876d6e1 · report
80f6496de6134cbb · report
08b5364c4751aa16 · report
9e0ba417b654b649 · report
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