AI Copilot for Secure Code Analysis and Vulnerability Removal

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing code assisting tools may introduce security vulnerabilities and fail to fully understand the security context of a project, leading to potential risks and complacency among developers.

Innovation Solution

An artificial intelligence model (AIM) is trained to analyze source code and identify vulnerabilities, generating prompts to determine if initial source code includes vulnerabilities and removing them to produce refactored code.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If code assisting tools are used to generate source code snippets, then productivity is improved, but security reliability deteriorates due to introduced vulnerabilities

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvecode generation efficiencyVSAvoidsecurity reliability

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

A security analysis copilot AIM is introduced as an intermediary between the code assisting tool and the final code output. This intermediary analyzes generated code for vulnerabilities before deployment, acting as a security filter that prevents harmful code from reaching production while allowing productive code generation to continue

Inventive Principle:

Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Solution Approach 2:

The system implements feedback loops where the security analysis copilot AIM continuously analyzes code generated by the code assisting tool, provides security assessments back to the generation process, and enables iterative improvement of code security without halting productivity

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

2Reliability

If developers manually review code for security vulnerabilities, then security reliability is improved, but productivity deteriorates due to time consumption

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvesecurity reliabilityVSAvoiddevelopment speed

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The manual mechanical process of developer code review is replaced with an automated artificial intelligence system (security analysis copilot AIM). This AI system performs security analysis automatically without human intervention, maintaining high security reliability while eliminating the time cost associated with manual review processes

Inventive Principle:

Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Solution Approach 2:

The code generation and security analysis system becomes self-service capable, where the security analysis copilot AIM autonomously identifies and flags vulnerabilities without requiring developer involvement in the review process, thereby maintaining security while preserving development speed

Inventive Principle:

Principle #25Self-service

3Reliability

If comprehensive security analysis is performed on all code, then security reliability is improved, but device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvesecurity reliabilityVSAvoidsystem complexity

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The security analysis system is segmented into specialized components: a code assisting tool for generation and a security analysis copilot AIM for analysis. This segmentation allows each component to focus on its specific function, reducing overall system complexity while maintaining comprehensive security coverage through coordinated operation

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Data Source

PatentUS20250139251A1Secure code analysis copilot

Publication Date: 2025.05.01 CROWDSTRIKE

AI summary

An approach is provided that identifies a vulnerability corresponding to an initial source code. Then, the approach generates a prompt comprising the initial source code and the vulnerability. The approach inputs the prompt into an artificial intelligence model (AIM) that is trained to determine whether the initial source code comprises the vulnerability. In turn, the approach removes, using the AIM, the vulnerability from the initial source code to produce a refactored source code in response to determining that the initial source code comprises the vulnerability.