Predicting Vulnerable Components via Text Mining or Software Metrics? An Effort-Aware Perspective

Yaming Tang, Fei Zhao, Yibiao Yang, Hongmin Lu, Yuming Zhou, Baowen Xu
{"title":"Predicting Vulnerable Components via Text Mining or Software Metrics? An Effort-Aware Perspective","authors":"Yaming Tang, Fei Zhao, Yibiao Yang, Hongmin Lu, Yuming Zhou, Baowen Xu","doi":"10.1109/QRS.2015.15","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In order to identify vulnerable software components, developers can take software metrics as predictors or use text mining techniques to build vulnerability prediction models. A recent study reported that text mining based models have higher recall than software metrics based models. However, this conclusion was drawn without considering the sizes of individual components which affects the code inspection effort to determine whether a component is vulnerable. In this paper, we investigate the predictive power of these two kinds of prediction models in the context of effort-aware vulnerability prediction. To this end, we use the same data sets, containing 223 vulnerabilities found in three web applications, to build vulnerability prediction models. The experimental results show that: (1) in the context of effort-aware ranking scenario, text mining based models only slightly outperform software metrics based models, (2) in the context of effort-aware classification scenario, text mining based models perform similarly to software metrics based models in most cases, and (3) most of the effect sizes (i.e. the magnitude of the differences) between these two kinds of models are trivial. These results suggest that, from the viewpoint of practical application, software metrics based models are comparable to text mining based models. Therefore, for developers, software metrics based models are practical choices for vulnerability prediction, as the cost to build and apply these models is much lower.","PeriodicalId":361839,"journal":{"name":"2015 IEEE International Conference on Software Quality, Reliability and Security","volume":"248 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"29","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2015 IEEE International Conference on Software Quality, Reliability and Security","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/QRS.2015.15","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 29

Abstract

In order to identify vulnerable software components, developers can take software metrics as predictors or use text mining techniques to build vulnerability prediction models. A recent study reported that text mining based models have higher recall than software metrics based models. However, this conclusion was drawn without considering the sizes of individual components which affects the code inspection effort to determine whether a component is vulnerable. In this paper, we investigate the predictive power of these two kinds of prediction models in the context of effort-aware vulnerability prediction. To this end, we use the same data sets, containing 223 vulnerabilities found in three web applications, to build vulnerability prediction models. The experimental results show that: (1) in the context of effort-aware ranking scenario, text mining based models only slightly outperform software metrics based models, (2) in the context of effort-aware classification scenario, text mining based models perform similarly to software metrics based models in most cases, and (3) most of the effect sizes (i.e. the magnitude of the differences) between these two kinds of models are trivial. These results suggest that, from the viewpoint of practical application, software metrics based models are comparable to text mining based models. Therefore, for developers, software metrics based models are practical choices for vulnerability prediction, as the cost to build and apply these models is much lower.
通过文本挖掘还是软件度量来预测易受攻击的组件?努力意识的视角
为了识别易受攻击的软件组件,开发人员可以将软件度量作为预测器,或者使用文本挖掘技术构建漏洞预测模型。最近的一项研究报告称,基于文本挖掘的模型比基于软件度量的模型具有更高的召回率。然而,这个结论是在没有考虑影响代码检查工作的单个组件的大小的情况下得出的,以确定组件是否容易受到攻击。本文研究了这两种预测模型在努力感知脆弱性预测中的预测能力。为此,我们使用相同的数据集,包含三个web应用程序中发现的223个漏洞,来构建漏洞预测模型。实验结果表明:(1)在努力感知排序场景下,基于文本挖掘的模型仅略优于基于软件度量的模型;(2)在努力感知分类场景下,基于文本挖掘的模型在大多数情况下的表现与基于软件度量的模型相似;(3)这两种模型之间的大多数效应大小(即差异的大小)微不足道。这些结果表明,从实际应用的角度来看,基于软件度量的模型与基于文本挖掘的模型具有可比性。因此,对于开发人员来说,基于软件度量的模型是漏洞预测的实际选择,因为构建和应用这些模型的成本要低得多。
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