Coverage Metrics and Detection of Injection Vulnerabilities: An Experimental Study

Ana Paula Sayuri Matsunaga, Nuno Antunes, Regina L. O. Moraes
{"title":"Coverage Metrics and Detection of Injection Vulnerabilities: An Experimental Study","authors":"Ana Paula Sayuri Matsunaga, Nuno Antunes, Regina L. O. Moraes","doi":"10.1109/EDCC.2016.32","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Coverage is frequently considered a metric of the quality of the tests and, consequently, of the software dependability. Although one tends to assume a similar relation in the context of vulnerability detection, such assumption is yet to be shown in practice. Although the effectiveness of vulnerability detection tools is limited and largely dependent on the context, developers usually select and use a single tool and implicitly trust on its results. In this practical experience report we study the relation between coverage measurements and the quality of the results of detection tests for injection vulnerabilities, in particular SQL Injection, considering two state of the art tools and multiple testing configurations. Such relation is of utmost importance for developers to understand how good vulnerability detectors are and to compare alternative tools. Results show that code coverage is indeed an effective mean to estimate the quality of vulnerability detection tests and is useful to compare different sets of tests. However, they also show that domain specific metrics are much more effective than generic ones.","PeriodicalId":166039,"journal":{"name":"2016 12th European Dependable Computing Conference (EDCC)","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2016 12th European Dependable Computing Conference (EDCC)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/EDCC.2016.32","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Coverage is frequently considered a metric of the quality of the tests and, consequently, of the software dependability. Although one tends to assume a similar relation in the context of vulnerability detection, such assumption is yet to be shown in practice. Although the effectiveness of vulnerability detection tools is limited and largely dependent on the context, developers usually select and use a single tool and implicitly trust on its results. In this practical experience report we study the relation between coverage measurements and the quality of the results of detection tests for injection vulnerabilities, in particular SQL Injection, considering two state of the art tools and multiple testing configurations. Such relation is of utmost importance for developers to understand how good vulnerability detectors are and to compare alternative tools. Results show that code coverage is indeed an effective mean to estimate the quality of vulnerability detection tests and is useful to compare different sets of tests. However, they also show that domain specific metrics are much more effective than generic ones.
覆盖度量和注入漏洞检测:一项实验研究
覆盖率通常被认为是测试质量的度量,因此也是软件可靠性的度量。虽然人们倾向于在漏洞检测的背景下假设类似的关系,但这种假设尚未在实践中得到证明。尽管漏洞检测工具的有效性是有限的,并且很大程度上依赖于上下文,但开发人员通常选择和使用单个工具,并隐式地信任其结果。在这份实践经验报告中,我们研究了覆盖率度量和检测注入漏洞(特别是SQL注入)测试结果质量之间的关系,考虑了两种最先进的工具和多种测试配置。这种关系对于开发人员了解漏洞检测器有多好以及比较替代工具是至关重要的。结果表明,代码覆盖率确实是评估漏洞检测测试质量的有效手段,并且有助于比较不同的测试集。然而,它们也表明领域特定的度量比通用的度量更有效。
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信