Skip to content
OpenTrain AIFor AI Companies

Is Vibe Coding Safe? Benchmarking Vulnerability of Agent-Generated Code in Real-World Tasks

Songwen Zhao, Danqing Wang, Kexun Zhang, Jiaxuan Luo, Zhuo Li +1 morePublished Dec 2, 2025
arXiv PDF
Researcher verdict
Context only
Use as context only
Benchmark evidence
Missing
Not verified yet
Time to first repro
A few days
Plan setup time
Risk flags
2
Review before use

Abstract

Domain fit: AI-core · Core AI workload signals detected from paper context and implementation/artifact evidence.

Vibe coding is a new programming paradigm in which human engineers instruct large language model (LLM) agents to complete complex coding tasks with little supervision. Although vibe coding is increasingly adopted, are its outputs really safe to deploy in production? To answer this question, we propose SU S VI B E S, a benchmark consisting of 200 feature-request software engineering tasks from real-world open-source projects, which, when given to human programmers, led to vulnerable implementations. We evaluate multiple widely used coding agents with frontier models on this benchmark. Disturbingly, all agents perform poorly in terms of software security. Although 61% of the solutions from SWE-Agent with Claude 4 Sonnet are functionally correct, only 10.5% are secure. Further experiments demonstrate that preliminary security strategies, such as augmenting the feature request with vulnerability hints, cannot mitigate these security issues. Our findings raise serious concerns about the widespread adoption of vibe-coding, particularly in security-sensitive applications.

Results and benchmarks

Freshness tier: hot
Vibe coding is a new programming paradigm in which human engineers instruct large language model (LLM) agents to complete complex coding tasks with little supervision.

Implementation

No direct implementation yet

Maintained implementation evidence is not confirmed for this paper yet.

Use the implementation status and reproduction sections for the current action plan.

Implementation evidence summary
Confidence: low

Recommendation evidence is currently too limited for a maintained-repo choice. Use Implementation Status and Reproduction Path for a practical baseline plan.

Reproduction risks
  • Estimate is based on paper-only reproduction flow

Compare implementation paths

Compare maintenance quality, reproducibility coverage, and evidence confidence before choosing a reproduction baseline.

Maintenance
Active
Confidence
Low
Reproducibility
Moderate
Stars
2
Last push
Aug 6, 2026 (18d)

Matched via arXiv identifier search · Partial overlap with paper title keywords

  • No CI pipeline detected
  • No tagged releases
  • No Docker setup
Maintenance
Recently updated
Confidence
Low
Reproducibility
Limited
Stars
21
Last push
May 3, 2026 (113d)

Matched via arXiv identifier search

  • No CI pipeline detected
  • No tagged releases
  • No Docker setup
Maintenance
Recently updated
Confidence
Medium
Reproducibility
Moderate
Stars
1
Last push
Jun 16, 2026 (70d)

Matched via arXiv identifier search · Strong overlap with paper title keywords

  • No CI pipeline detected
  • No tagged releases
  • No Docker setup

Reproduction readiness

Time to first repro: days
Last checked: Aug 24, 2026

No repo

No verified implementation available

  • No maintained repository has been identified for this paper. Check adjacent implementations or HF artifacts below.

Hardware requirements

  • Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.

Repositories and ecosystem

No additional verified repositories beyond the primary recommendation.

Hugging Face artifacts

No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet. Use targeted searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.

Tip: start with models, then check datasets and spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.

Research context

Tasks

Agentic tool use

Methods

Transformer

Domains

Natural Language Processing, Large Language Models, AI Agents

Evaluation and human feedback data

Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.

Open in HFEPX
Explore similar papers

Jump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.