CyberIntel ⬡ News
★ Saved ◆ Cyber Reads
← Back ◬ AI & Machine Learning Apr 23, 2026

Towards Secure Logging: Characterizing and Benchmarking Logging Code Security Issues with LLMs

arXiv Security Archived Apr 23, 2026 ✓ Full text saved

arXiv:2604.20211v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Logging code plays an important role in software systems by recording key events and behaviors, which are essential for debugging and monitoring. However, insecure logging practices can inadvertently expose sensitive information or enable attacks such as log injection, posing serious threats to system security and privacy. Prior research has examined general defects in logging code, but systematic analysis of logging code security issues remains

Full text archived locally
✦ AI Summary · Claude Sonnet


    Computer Science > Software Engineering [Submitted on 22 Apr 2026] Towards Secure Logging: Characterizing and Benchmarking Logging Code Security Issues with LLMs He Yang Yuan, Xin Wang, Kundi Yao, An Ran Chen, Zishuo Ding, Zhenhao Li Logging code plays an important role in software systems by recording key events and behaviors, which are essential for debugging and monitoring. However, insecure logging practices can inadvertently expose sensitive information or enable attacks such as log injection, posing serious threats to system security and privacy. Prior research has examined general defects in logging code, but systematic analysis of logging code security issues remains limited, particularly in leveraging LLMs for detection and repair. In this paper, we derive a comprehensive taxonomy of logging code security issues, encompassing four common issue categories and 10 corresponding patterns. We further construct a benchmark dataset with 101 real-world logging security issue reports that have been manually reviewed and annotated. We then propose an automated framework that incorporates various contextual knowledge to evaluate LLMs' capabilities in detecting and repairing logging security issues. Our experimental results reveal a notable disparity in performance: while LLMs are moderately effective at detecting security issues (e.g., the accuracy ranges from 12.9% to 52.5% on average), they face noticeable challenges in reliably generating correct code repairs. We also find that the issue description alone improves the LLMs' detection accuracy more than the security pattern explanation or a combination of both. Overall, our findings provide actionable insights for practitioners and highlight the potential and limitations of current LLMs for secure logging. Comments: Accepted at FSE 2026 Research Papers Track Subjects: Software Engineering (cs.SE); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Cryptography and Security (cs.CR) Cite as: arXiv:2604.20211 [cs.SE]   (or arXiv:2604.20211v1 [cs.SE] for this version)   https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2604.20211 Focus to learn more Submission history From: Zhenhao Li [view email] [v1] Wed, 22 Apr 2026 05:54:45 UTC (1,145 KB) Access Paper: view license Current browse context: cs.SE < prev   |   next > new | recent | 2026-04 Change to browse by: cs cs.AI cs.CR References & Citations NASA ADS Google Scholar Semantic Scholar Export BibTeX Citation Bookmark Bibliographic Tools Bibliographic and Citation Tools Bibliographic Explorer Toggle Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?) Connected Papers Toggle Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?) Litmaps Toggle Litmaps (What is Litmaps?) scite.ai Toggle scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?) Code, Data, Media Demos Related Papers About arXivLabs Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)
    💬 Team Notes
    Article Info
    Source
    arXiv Security
    Category
    ◬ AI & Machine Learning
    Published
    Apr 23, 2026
    Archived
    Apr 23, 2026
    Full Text
    ✓ Saved locally
    Open Original ↗