arXiv:2608.13450cs.SEcs.CR2026-08

用大模型自动测试自动驾驶软件漏洞,发现编译连接才是最大障碍。

LLM-Assisted Dynamic Threat Analysis for Attacker-Reachable Software Weaknesses in Autonomous Vehicles

  • 用大模型生成测试代码,结合编译反馈逐步修复
  • 80%的编译失败源于依赖配置而非逻辑错误
  • 大模型生成的测试框架仅64%首次编译成功,漏洞未被验证

自动驾驶汽车依赖大型安全关键软件栈,攻击者可利用输入可达的弱点影响转向、制动等控制决策。静态分析可定位候选漏洞,但动态验证需可执行测试代码,手动构造困难。本文研究大语言模型(LLMs)能否自动化处理Autoware开源自动驾驶系统中的漏洞验证。对185个包进行编译精确的静态分析,识别出1,375条决策规则、2,274个校验点和482条输入到安全输出的数据流,构建弱点分类体系,并采样740个可达漏洞点。使用两个本地开源权重的LLM、无上下文消融实验和简单模板基线,生成3,700组测试代码集,在真实构建环境中通过沙箱编译,借助编译器反馈修复,若可执行则进行模糊测试。主要结果为构建集成失败分类:首次尝试中80%的编译失败源于依赖关系配置而非程序逻辑。推理型模型首次编译成功率64%,远高于代码专用模型的6%。修复后仅推理模型实现完全对象级编译,但其不足一半的测试用例进入模糊测试,所有37次崩溃均来自模拟代码,未在Autoware核心代码中发现可验证漏洞。结果表明,全栈自动驾驶软件的可靠大模型辅助动态分析中,构建集成是首要瓶颈。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

Autonomous vehicles depend on large safety-critical software stacks, where weaknesses reachable from adversarial inputs may affect steering, braking, or other control decisions. Static analysis can identify candidate sites, but dynamically confirming exploitability requires executable test artifacts that are difficult to construct manually. We investigate whether large language models (LLMs) can automate this process for Autoware, an open-source autonomous-driving stack. We perform compiler-precise static analysis across 185 packages, identifying 1,375 decision rules, 2,274 validation checks, and 482 input-to-safety-output flows, from which we derive a weakness taxonomy and sample 740 reachable sites. Two local open-weight LLMs, a no-static-context ablation, and a naive-template baseline generate 3,700 artifact sets, which are compiled against the real build under sanitizers, repaired through compiler-in-the-loop feedback, and fuzzed when executable. The main result is a build-integration failure taxonomy showing that 80% of first-shot compilation failures arise from dependency wiring rather than program logic. The reasoning model compiled 64% of harnesses on the first attempt, compared with 6% for the code-specialized model. Repair achieved full object-compileability for the reasoning model only through extensive stubbing; fewer than half of its harnesses reached the fuzzer, and all 37 observed crashes originated in stubbed code rather than Autoware. No candidate weakness was dynamically confirmed within budget. These results show that build integration, not candidate generation or fuzzing, is the primary barrier to reliable LLM-assisted dynamic analysis of full autonomous-vehicle software stacks.

自动驾驶漏洞检测大模型动态分析

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。