Neuro-Symbolic Proof-of-Vulnerability Generation with Open-Weight Models
Source
Yu Nong, Haipeng Cai
Author
Yu Nong, Haipeng Cai
Published
Terms in this piece · Glossary
LLM — A large language model — the neural network behind tools like Claude and ChatGPT, trained on huge amounts of text to predict what comes next.
open weights — A model whose trained parameters are published for anyone to download and run — unlike API-only models you can access but never possess.
Why it matters
It shows LLMA large language model — the neural network behind tools like Claude and ChatGPT, trained on huge amounts of text to predict what comes next.Full definition →-guided constraint reasoning decisively beating fuzzing at vulnerability validation, and that a locally-run open weightsA model whose trained parameters are published for anyone to download and run — unlike API-only models you can access but never possess.Full definition → model is enough to do it — no frontier API bill required.
Transcript
Software vulnerabilities are persistent, but validating them remains difficult: a Proof-of-Vulnerability (PoV) requires a concrete input that triggers the vulnerable behavior, yet public triggering inputs are often unavailable for disclosed vulnerabilities. Existing techniques make different tradeoffs in effectiveness, scalability, cost, and controllability, leaving room for complementary designs. To complement them, we present POVGEN, a low-cost neuro-symbolic framework that makes PoV generation cost-effective via semantic focusing and LLM-guided constraint reasoning using open-weight models. POVGEN first localizes vulnerability-relevant regions (utilizing patch information if available), then performs path-sensitive reachability analysis, and finally generates PoVs by extracting and solving constraints with LLM-guided reasoning backed by an SMT solver. POVGEN successfully generates PoVs for 78.98% of vulnerabilities in a recent benchmark, outperforming fuzzing (up to 50.20%) and symbolic execution (2.45%). On 250 real-world CVEs without public PoVs, it generates valid PoVs for 74.80% of cases and reproduces 65.1% when without patch information. The fine-tuned open-weight models match frontier commercial LLMs on key sub-tasks (i.e., the core constraint-reasoning steps) while running locally at no per-sample API cost. Applying the generated PoVs revealed six flawed patches in disclosed CVEs (all subsequently fixed) and five previously unreported vulnerabilities (of which four have been confirmed and fixed by the developers).