Papers › AutoSafeCoder: A Multi-Agent Framework for Securing LLM Code Generation through Static...

AutoSafeCoder: A Multi-Agent Framework for Securing LLM Code Generation through Static Analysis and Fuzz Testing

16 Sep 2024arXiv:2409.10737archive 2025-07-28

Ana Nunez, Nafis Tanveer Islam, Sumit Kumar Jha, Peyman Najafirad

Recent advancements in automatic code generation using large language models (LLMs) have brought us closer to fully automated secure software development. However, existing approaches often rely on a single agent for code generation, which struggles to produce secure, vulnerability-free code. Traditional program synthesis with LLMs has primarily focused on functional correctness, often neglecting critical dynamic security implications that happen during runtime. To address these challenges, we propose AutoSafeCoder, a multi-agent framework that leverages LLM-driven agents for code generation, vulnerability analysis, and security enhancement through continuous collaboration. The framework consists of three agents: a Coding Agent responsible for code generation, a Static Analyzer Agent identifying vulnerabilities, and a Fuzzing Agent performing dynamic testing using a mutation-based fuzzing approach to detect runtime errors. Our contribution focuses on ensuring the safety of multi-agent code generation by integrating dynamic and static testing in an iterative process during code generation by LLM that improves security. Experiments using the SecurityEval dataset demonstrate a 13% reduction in code vulnerabilities compared to baseline LLMs, with no compromise in functionality.

PaperPDFCodeCode 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="2409.10737")

Code

Syntology Ran 2 of 5 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 3 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 1 ran · violated contract; 1 ran · our draft was wrong.

By repository: official repository: 5 samples from 1 repository, 2 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.

secureaiautonomylab/autosafecoder officialmentioned in paper report

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. 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

5 samples harvested; 2 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 3 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 · violated contract
1ran · our draft was wrong
3unverified

Licence: 5 of the 5 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 secureaiautonomylab/autosafecoder. “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.

call_chatgpt_analyze_static_security secureaiautonomylab/autosafecoder/executor_static.py official repository ran · our draft was wrong fingerprinted no licence file found · pointer only · a7501a1b227fdc9e · report
preprocess_string SecureAIAutonomyLab/AutoSafeCoder/utils.py official repository ran · violated contract fingerprinted no licence file found · pointer only · 92f398cf14df393b · report
ExecutorStaticAgent secureaiautonomylab/autosafecoder/executor_static.py official repository unverified no licence file found · pointer only · a029719412f0bf13 · report
FResult secureaiautonomylab/autosafecoder/executor_static.py official repository unverified no licence file found · pointer only · a124cf0819f3d703 · report
run_bandit_on_code SecureAIAutonomyLab/AutoSafeCoder/eval_bandit.py official repository unverified no licence file found · pointer only · 2391f1cff023ff84 · report

Tasks

Code GenerationProgram Synthesis

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

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