对安全漏洞检测插件评估报告的关键理解

S. Beba, Magnus Melseth Karlsen, Jingyue Li, Bing Zhang
{"title":"对安全漏洞检测插件评估报告的关键理解","authors":"S. Beba, Magnus Melseth Karlsen, Jingyue Li, Bing Zhang","doi":"10.1109/APSEC53868.2021.00035","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Integrated development environment (IDE) plugins aimed at detecting web application security vulnerabilities can help developers create secure applications in the first place. Most of such IDE plugins use static source code analysis approaches. Although several empirical studies evaluated the plugins and compared their precision and recall of detecting web application security, few follow-up studies tried to understand the evaluation results. We analyzed more than 20,000 vulnerability reports based on 7,215 distinct test cases spanning 11 categories of web application vulnerabilities to understand the evaluation results of three open-source IDE plugins, namely, SpotBugs, FindSecBugs, and Early Security Vulnerability Detector (ESVD), which aimed at detecting security vulnerabilities of Java-based web applications. Our results identify many factors besides the source code analysis approach that can dramatically bias the detection performance. Based on our insights, we improved the studied plugins. In addition, our study raises the alarm that, without solid root cause analyses, the evaluation and comparisons of security vulnerability detection approaches and tools could be misleading. Thus, we proposed a guideline on reporting the evaluation results of the security vulnerability detection approaches.","PeriodicalId":143800,"journal":{"name":"2021 28th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference (APSEC)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Critical Understanding of Security Vulnerability Detection Plugin Evaluation Reports\",\"authors\":\"S. Beba, Magnus Melseth Karlsen, Jingyue Li, Bing Zhang\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/APSEC53868.2021.00035\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Integrated development environment (IDE) plugins aimed at detecting web application security vulnerabilities can help developers create secure applications in the first place. Most of such IDE plugins use static source code analysis approaches. Although several empirical studies evaluated the plugins and compared their precision and recall of detecting web application security, few follow-up studies tried to understand the evaluation results. We analyzed more than 20,000 vulnerability reports based on 7,215 distinct test cases spanning 11 categories of web application vulnerabilities to understand the evaluation results of three open-source IDE plugins, namely, SpotBugs, FindSecBugs, and Early Security Vulnerability Detector (ESVD), which aimed at detecting security vulnerabilities of Java-based web applications. Our results identify many factors besides the source code analysis approach that can dramatically bias the detection performance. Based on our insights, we improved the studied plugins. In addition, our study raises the alarm that, without solid root cause analyses, the evaluation and comparisons of security vulnerability detection approaches and tools could be misleading. Thus, we proposed a guideline on reporting the evaluation results of the security vulnerability detection approaches.\",\"PeriodicalId\":143800,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2021 28th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference (APSEC)\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2021 28th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference (APSEC)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/APSEC53868.2021.00035\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2021 28th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference (APSEC)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/APSEC53868.2021.00035","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

旨在检测web应用程序安全漏洞的集成开发环境(IDE)插件可以帮助开发人员在第一时间创建安全的应用程序。大多数这样的IDE插件使用静态源代码分析方法。虽然有一些实证研究评估了这些插件,并比较了它们检测web应用程序安全的准确率和召回率,但很少有后续研究试图理解评估结果。我们基于11类web应用漏洞的7215个不同测试用例,分析了2万多份漏洞报告,了解了SpotBugs、FindSecBugs和早期安全漏洞检测器(Early Security vulnerability Detector, ESVD)这三个开源IDE插件的评估结果,这三个插件旨在检测基于java的web应用的安全漏洞。我们的结果确定了除了源代码分析方法之外的许多因素,这些因素会极大地影响检测性能。基于我们的见解,我们改进了研究过的插件。此外,我们的研究还敲响了警钟,如果没有扎实的根本原因分析,对安全漏洞检测方法和工具的评估和比较可能会产生误导。因此,我们提出了安全漏洞检测方法评估结果报告准则。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Critical Understanding of Security Vulnerability Detection Plugin Evaluation Reports
Integrated development environment (IDE) plugins aimed at detecting web application security vulnerabilities can help developers create secure applications in the first place. Most of such IDE plugins use static source code analysis approaches. Although several empirical studies evaluated the plugins and compared their precision and recall of detecting web application security, few follow-up studies tried to understand the evaluation results. We analyzed more than 20,000 vulnerability reports based on 7,215 distinct test cases spanning 11 categories of web application vulnerabilities to understand the evaluation results of three open-source IDE plugins, namely, SpotBugs, FindSecBugs, and Early Security Vulnerability Detector (ESVD), which aimed at detecting security vulnerabilities of Java-based web applications. Our results identify many factors besides the source code analysis approach that can dramatically bias the detection performance. Based on our insights, we improved the studied plugins. In addition, our study raises the alarm that, without solid root cause analyses, the evaluation and comparisons of security vulnerability detection approaches and tools could be misleading. Thus, we proposed a guideline on reporting the evaluation results of the security vulnerability detection approaches.
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信