Explaining Graph Neural Networks for Vulnerability Discovery

Tom Ganz, Martin Härterich, Alexander Warnecke, Konrad Rieck
{"title":"Explaining Graph Neural Networks for Vulnerability Discovery","authors":"Tom Ganz, Martin Härterich, Alexander Warnecke, Konrad Rieck","doi":"10.1145/3474369.3486866","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Graph neural networks (GNNs) have proven to be an effective tool for vulnerability discovery that outperforms learning-based methods working directly on source code. Unfortunately, these neural networks are uninterpretable models, whose decision process is completely opaque to security experts, which obstructs their practical adoption. Recently, several methods have been proposed for explaining models of machine learning. However, it is unclear whether these methods are suitable for GNNs and support the task of vulnerability discovery. In this paper we present a framework for evaluating explanation methods on GNNs. We develop a set of criteria for comparing graph explanations and linking them to properties of source code. Based on these criteria, we conduct an experimental study of nine regular and three graph-specific explanation methods. Our study demonstrates that explaining GNNs is a non-trivial task and all evaluation criteria play a role in assessing their efficacy. We further show that graph-specific explanations relate better to code semantics and provide more information to a security expert than regular methods.","PeriodicalId":411057,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 14th ACM Workshop on Artificial Intelligence and Security","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 14th ACM Workshop on Artificial Intelligence and Security","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3474369.3486866","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Graph neural networks (GNNs) have proven to be an effective tool for vulnerability discovery that outperforms learning-based methods working directly on source code. Unfortunately, these neural networks are uninterpretable models, whose decision process is completely opaque to security experts, which obstructs their practical adoption. Recently, several methods have been proposed for explaining models of machine learning. However, it is unclear whether these methods are suitable for GNNs and support the task of vulnerability discovery. In this paper we present a framework for evaluating explanation methods on GNNs. We develop a set of criteria for comparing graph explanations and linking them to properties of source code. Based on these criteria, we conduct an experimental study of nine regular and three graph-specific explanation methods. Our study demonstrates that explaining GNNs is a non-trivial task and all evaluation criteria play a role in assessing their efficacy. We further show that graph-specific explanations relate better to code semantics and provide more information to a security expert than regular methods.
解释图神经网络的漏洞发现
图神经网络(gnn)已被证明是一种有效的漏洞发现工具,其性能优于直接在源代码上工作的基于学习的方法。不幸的是,这些神经网络是不可解释的模型,其决策过程对安全专家来说是完全不透明的,这阻碍了它们的实际应用。最近,人们提出了几种解释机器学习模型的方法。然而,目前尚不清楚这些方法是否适用于gnn并支持漏洞发现任务。在本文中,我们提出了一个评估gnn解释方法的框架。我们开发了一套标准来比较图的解释,并将它们与源代码的属性联系起来。基于这些标准,我们对九种规则解释方法和三种特定图的解释方法进行了实验研究。我们的研究表明,解释gnn是一项艰巨的任务,所有的评估标准都在评估其有效性方面发挥作用。我们进一步表明,特定于图的解释与代码语义关系更好,并且比常规方法为安全专家提供更多信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信