Benchmark Almanac

CWEval

Only in system cards

Models write code for security-critical tasks in several languages. Outcome-driven test oracles check both functionality (func@k) and security (func-sec@k).

Published at the LLM4Code 2025 workshop.

Released
January 2025
Kind
Secure code and review
Level
Expert
Scored
Checked automatically
Answers
Code
Tasks
All public
Last in a system card
February 2026
Last model added
February 2026

In the authors’ words

Large Language Models (LLMs) have significantly aided developers by generating or assisting in code writing, enhancing productivity across various tasks. While identifying incorrect code is often straightforward, detecting vulnerabilities in functionally correct code is more challenging, especially for developers with limited security knowledge, which poses considerable security risks of using LLM-generated code and underscores the need for robust evaluation benchmarks that assess both functional correctness and security. Current benchmarks like CyberSecEval and SecurityEval attempt to solve it but are hindered by unclear and impractical specifications, failing to assess both functionality and security accurately. To tackle these deficiencies, we introduce CWEval, a novel outcome-driven evaluation framework designed to enhance the evaluation of secure code generation by LLMs. This framework not only assesses code functionality but also its security simultaneously with high-quality task specifications and outcome-driven test oracles which provides high accuracy. Coupled with CWEval-bench, a multilingual, security-critical coding benchmark, CWEval provides a rigorous empirical security evaluation on LLM-generated code, overcoming previous benchmarks' shortcomings. Through our evaluations, CWEval reveals a notable portion of functional but insecure code produced by LLMs, and shows a serious inaccuracy of previous evaluations, ultimately contributing significantly to the field of secure code generation. We open-source our artifact at: https://github.com/Co1lin/CWEval .

Abstract of CWEval: Outcome-driven Evaluation on Functionality and Security of LLM Code Generation (arXiv:2501.08200, CC0)
1
Model scored in lab cards
1
System card reports it, from 1 lab

Qwen3-Coder-Next leads with 56.3%

Best score per model as labs report them in their own cards. Labs pick their own settings, so these compare less cleanly than independent runs.

  1. 1 Qwen3-Coder-Next 56.3%

Source: Labs’ model cards

#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 Qwen3-Coder-Next 56.3% Feb 2026 Lab model card

Scores over time

All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.

Reported by the lab in its model card
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Qwen3-Coder-Next 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Qwen3-Coder-Next

Source: Labs’ model cards

Labs report it only in system cards

We read the headline results of 522 launch posts from 52 labs, and none of them list this benchmark. Some system cards do, below.

One system card reports it

Besides launch posts, we read the system cards, model cards and technical reports labs publish with a release. They report far more, including safety and frontier-risk tests.

DateDocumentScoreAs the document writes itSection
Feb 28, 2026 Qwen3-Coder-Next technical report 56.3 CWEval func-sec@1, n=10 at temperature 0.8. func@1 80.17 (Table 16) Cyber risk

More in Cybersecurity

All 115 in Cybersecurity
  • ExploitGym In use 869 real-vulnerability exploit-development tasks (userspace, V8, Linux kernel). Success means capturing a flag through the intended vulnerability. GPT-6 Astra 42.4%
  • ExploitBench In use 41 recent V8 JavaScript-engine N-day vulnerabilities. Progress measured by 16 grader-verified capability flags across five tiers. GPT-6 Astra 100%
  • CyberBench v1.1 (Vals) In use Agents work on OSS-Fuzz memory-safety bugs from ARVO images in two tracks. They write a proof-of-concept input that crashes the target, or patch the source so the crash stops and tests still pass. Muse Wonder 80.4%
  • SRE-Bench In use Software reverse engineering without source: 262 binary instances from 19 private programs, each with six graded objectives. GPT-6 Astra 56.9%
  • CyScenarioBench In use Scenario-based long-horizon security challenges in sandboxes, organized in task, scenario and campaign tiers. Evaluation set kept private. Gemini 4 Argon 100%
  • ExploitBench - Internal Port In use Agents develop working exploits for recently disclosed vulnerabilities to limit contamination. Scored as arbitrary code execution success rate. GPT-6 Cyber 42%