Papers › PromSec: Prompt Optimization for Secure Generation of Functional Source Code with...
PromSec: Prompt Optimization for Secure Generation of Functional Source Code with Large Language Models (LLMs)
Mahmoud Nazzal, Issa Khalil, Abdallah Khreishah, NhatHai Phan
The capability of generating high-quality source code using large language models (LLMs) reduces software development time and costs. However, they often introduce security vulnerabilities due to training on insecure open-source data. This highlights the need for ensuring secure and functional code generation. This paper introduces PromSec, an algorithm for prom optimization for secure and functioning code generation using LLMs. In PromSec, we combine 1) code vulnerability clearing using a generative adversarial graph neural network, dubbed as gGAN, to fix and reduce security vulnerabilities in generated codes and 2) code generation using an LLM into an interactive loop, such that the outcome of the gGAN drives the LLM with enhanced prompts to generate secure codes while preserving their functionality. Introducing a new contrastive learning approach in gGAN, we formulate code-clearing and generation as a dual-objective optimization problem, enabling PromSec to notably reduce the number of LLM inferences. PromSec offers a cost-effective and practical solution for generating secure, functional code. Extensive experiments conducted on Python and Java code datasets confirm that PromSec effectively enhances code security while upholding its intended functionality. Our experiments show that while a state-of-the-art approach fails to address all code vulnerabilities, PromSec effectively resolves them. Moreover, PromSec achieves more than an order-of-magnitude reduction in operation time, number of LLM queries, and security analysis costs. Furthermore, prompts optimized with PromSec for a certain LLM are transferable to other LLMs across programming languages and generalizable to unseen vulnerabilities in training. This study is a step in enhancing the trustworthiness of LLMs for secure and functional code generation, supporting their integration into real-world software development.
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="2409.12699")
Code
Syntology Ran 2 of 3 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 1 has no recorded run. Of those that ran: 2 ran with no contract checked.
By repository: official repository: 3 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.
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
3 samples harvested; 2 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 1 has 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: 3 of the 3 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 mahmoudkanazzal/PromSec. “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.
0dce8f07bc0ff40a · report
b9679bc0cd989a1f · report
38219c3961de444d · report
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Methods
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