静态代码分析检测软件安全漏洞——经验重要吗?

D. Baca, K. Petersen, B. Carlsson, L. Lundberg
{"title":"静态代码分析检测软件安全漏洞——经验重要吗?","authors":"D. Baca, K. Petersen, B. Carlsson, L. Lundberg","doi":"10.1109/ARES.2009.163","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Code reviews with static analysis tools are today recommended by several security development processes. Developers are expected to use the tools' output to detect the security threats they themselves have introduced in the source code. This approach assumes that all developers can correctly identify a warning from a static analysis tool (SAT) as a security threat that needs to be corrected. We have conducted an industry experiment with a state of the art static analysis tool and real vulnerabilities. We have found that average developers do not correctly identify the security warnings and only developers with specific experiences are better than chance in detecting the security vulnerabilities. Specific SAT experience more than doubled the number of correct answers and a combination of security experience and SAT experience almost tripled the number of correct security answers.","PeriodicalId":169468,"journal":{"name":"2009 International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-03-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"57","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Static Code Analysis to Detect Software Security Vulnerabilities - Does Experience Matter?\",\"authors\":\"D. Baca, K. Petersen, B. Carlsson, L. Lundberg\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/ARES.2009.163\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Code reviews with static analysis tools are today recommended by several security development processes. Developers are expected to use the tools' output to detect the security threats they themselves have introduced in the source code. This approach assumes that all developers can correctly identify a warning from a static analysis tool (SAT) as a security threat that needs to be corrected. We have conducted an industry experiment with a state of the art static analysis tool and real vulnerabilities. We have found that average developers do not correctly identify the security warnings and only developers with specific experiences are better than chance in detecting the security vulnerabilities. Specific SAT experience more than doubled the number of correct answers and a combination of security experience and SAT experience almost tripled the number of correct security answers.\",\"PeriodicalId\":169468,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2009 International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security\",\"volume\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2009-03-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"57\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2009 International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/ARES.2009.163\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2009 International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ARES.2009.163","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 57

摘要

使用静态分析工具的代码审查现在被一些安全开发过程所推荐。开发人员希望使用工具的输出来检测他们自己在源代码中引入的安全威胁。此方法假定所有开发人员都可以正确地识别来自静态分析工具(SAT)的警告,并将其视为需要纠正的安全威胁。我们使用最先进的静态分析工具和真实的漏洞进行了一次行业实验。我们发现,一般开发人员不能正确识别安全警告,只有具有特定经验的开发人员才能更好地检测安全漏洞。特定的SAT经验使正确答案的数量增加了一倍以上,而安全经验和SAT经验的结合使正确的安全答案的数量几乎增加了两倍。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Static Code Analysis to Detect Software Security Vulnerabilities - Does Experience Matter?
Code reviews with static analysis tools are today recommended by several security development processes. Developers are expected to use the tools' output to detect the security threats they themselves have introduced in the source code. This approach assumes that all developers can correctly identify a warning from a static analysis tool (SAT) as a security threat that needs to be corrected. We have conducted an industry experiment with a state of the art static analysis tool and real vulnerabilities. We have found that average developers do not correctly identify the security warnings and only developers with specific experiences are better than chance in detecting the security vulnerabilities. Specific SAT experience more than doubled the number of correct answers and a combination of security experience and SAT experience almost tripled the number of correct security answers.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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