Detecting Malicious Source Code in PyPI Packages with LLMs: Does RAG Come in Handy?

April 18, 2025 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› International Conference on Evaluation & Assessment in Software Engineering

πŸ‘» CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Motunrayo Ibiyo, Thinakone Louangdy, Phuong T. Nguyen, Claudio Di Sipio, Davide Di Ruscio arXiv ID 2504.13769 Category cs.SE: Software Engineering Citations 2 Venue International Conference on Evaluation & Assessment in Software Engineering Last Checked 4 months ago
Abstract
Malicious software packages in open-source ecosystems, such as PyPI, pose growing security risks. Unlike traditional vulnerabilities, these packages are intentionally designed to deceive users, making detection challenging due to evolving attack methods and the lack of structured datasets. In this work, we empirically evaluate the effectiveness of Large Language Models (LLMs), Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG), and few-shot learning for detecting malicious source code. We fine-tune LLMs on curated datasets and integrate YARA rules, GitHub Security Advisories, and malicious code snippets with the aim of enhancing classification accuracy. We came across a counterintuitive outcome: While RAG is expected to boost up the prediction performance, it fails in the performed evaluation, obtaining a mediocre accuracy. In contrast, few-shot learning is more effective as it significantly improves the detection of malicious code, achieving 97% accuracy and 95% balanced accuracy, outperforming traditional RAG approaches. Thus, future work should expand structured knowledge bases, refine retrieval models, and explore hybrid AI-driven cybersecurity solutions.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

πŸ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt β€” Software Engineering

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted