应用漏洞预测模型的挑战

P. Morrison, Kim Herzig, Brendan Murphy, L. Williams
{"title":"应用漏洞预测模型的挑战","authors":"P. Morrison, Kim Herzig, Brendan Murphy, L. Williams","doi":"10.1145/2746194.2746198","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Vulnerability prediction models (VPM) are believed to hold promise for providing software engineers guidance on where to prioritize precious verification resources to search for vulnerabilities. However, while Microsoft product teams have adopted defect prediction models, they have not adopted vulnerability prediction models (VPMs). The goal of this research is to measure whether vulnerability prediction models built using standard recommendations perform well enough to provide actionable results for engineering resource allocation. We define 'actionable' in terms of the inspection effort required to evaluate model results. We replicated a VPM for two releases of the Windows Operating System, varying model granularity and statistical learners. We reproduced binary-level prediction precision (~0.75) and recall (~0.2). However, binaries often exceed 1 million lines of code, too large to practically inspect, and engineers expressed preference for source file level predictions. Our source file level models yield precision below 0.5 and recall below 0.2. We suggest that VPMs must be refined to achieve actionable performance, possibly through security-specific metrics.","PeriodicalId":134331,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 2015 Symposium and Bootcamp on the Science of Security","volume":"36 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-04-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"99","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Challenges with applying vulnerability prediction models\",\"authors\":\"P. Morrison, Kim Herzig, Brendan Murphy, L. Williams\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/2746194.2746198\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Vulnerability prediction models (VPM) are believed to hold promise for providing software engineers guidance on where to prioritize precious verification resources to search for vulnerabilities. However, while Microsoft product teams have adopted defect prediction models, they have not adopted vulnerability prediction models (VPMs). The goal of this research is to measure whether vulnerability prediction models built using standard recommendations perform well enough to provide actionable results for engineering resource allocation. We define 'actionable' in terms of the inspection effort required to evaluate model results. We replicated a VPM for two releases of the Windows Operating System, varying model granularity and statistical learners. We reproduced binary-level prediction precision (~0.75) and recall (~0.2). However, binaries often exceed 1 million lines of code, too large to practically inspect, and engineers expressed preference for source file level predictions. Our source file level models yield precision below 0.5 and recall below 0.2. We suggest that VPMs must be refined to achieve actionable performance, possibly through security-specific metrics.\",\"PeriodicalId\":134331,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the 2015 Symposium and Bootcamp on the Science of Security\",\"volume\":\"36 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-04-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"99\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the 2015 Symposium and Bootcamp on the Science of Security\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/2746194.2746198\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 2015 Symposium and Bootcamp on the Science of Security","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/2746194.2746198","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 99

摘要

漏洞预测模型(VPM)被认为有希望为软件工程师提供指导,指导他们在哪里优先考虑宝贵的验证资源来搜索漏洞。然而,虽然微软产品团队采用了缺陷预测模型,但他们还没有采用漏洞预测模型(VPMs)。本研究的目的是衡量使用标准建议建立的脆弱性预测模型是否能够很好地为工程资源分配提供可操作的结果。我们根据评估模型结果所需的检查工作来定义“可操作的”。我们为两个版本的Windows操作系统复制了一个VPM,不同的模型粒度和统计学习器。我们重现了二值水平的预测精度(~0.75)和召回率(~0.2)。然而,二进制代码通常超过100万行,太大而无法实际检查,工程师们表示更倾向于源文件级别的预测。我们的源文件级模型的精度低于0.5,召回率低于0.2。我们建议必须改进vpm以实现可操作的性能,可能是通过特定于安全的度量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Challenges with applying vulnerability prediction models
Vulnerability prediction models (VPM) are believed to hold promise for providing software engineers guidance on where to prioritize precious verification resources to search for vulnerabilities. However, while Microsoft product teams have adopted defect prediction models, they have not adopted vulnerability prediction models (VPMs). The goal of this research is to measure whether vulnerability prediction models built using standard recommendations perform well enough to provide actionable results for engineering resource allocation. We define 'actionable' in terms of the inspection effort required to evaluate model results. We replicated a VPM for two releases of the Windows Operating System, varying model granularity and statistical learners. We reproduced binary-level prediction precision (~0.75) and recall (~0.2). However, binaries often exceed 1 million lines of code, too large to practically inspect, and engineers expressed preference for source file level predictions. Our source file level models yield precision below 0.5 and recall below 0.2. We suggest that VPMs must be refined to achieve actionable performance, possibly through security-specific metrics.
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