Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Vulpedia: Detecting Vulnerable Ethereum Smart Contracts via Abstracted Vulnerability Signatures

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1912.04466 v2 pith:W5FS5CGD submitted 2019-12-10 cs.SE cs.CRcs.DC

classification cs.SEcs.CRcs.DC
keywords contractsvulpediarulessignaturesvulnerabilitiesvulnerabilityvulnerabledetection
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Recent years have seen smart contracts are getting increasingly popular in building trustworthy decentralized applications. Previous research has proposed static and dynamic techniques to detect vulnerabilities in smart contracts. These tools check vulnerable contracts against several predefined rules. However, the emerging new vulnerable types and programming skills to prevent possible vulnerabilities emerging lead to a large number of false positive and false negative reports of tools. To address this, we propose Vulpedia, which mines expressive vulnerability signatures from contracts. Vulpedia is based on the relaxed assumption that the owner of contract is not malicious. Specifically, we extract structural program features from vulnerable and benign contracts as vulnerability signatures, and construct a systematic detection method based on detection rules composed of vulnerability signatures. Compared with the rules defined by state-of-the-arts, our approach can extract more expressive rules to achieve better completeness (i.e., detection recall) and soundness (i.e., precision). We further evaluate Vulpedia with four baselines (i.e., Slither, Securify, SmartCheck and Oyente) on the testing dataset consisting of 17,770 contracts. The experiment results show that Vulpedia achieves best performance of precision on 4 types of vulnerabilities and leading recall on 3 types of vulnerabilities meanwhile exhibiting the great efficiency performance.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Exposing Hidden Backdoors in NFT Smart Contracts: A Static Security Analysis of Rug Pull Patterns

    cs.CR 2025-06 reject novelty 3.0 of 10

    A static analysis of nearly 50,000 Ethereum NFT contracts finds that 22.6% contain multiple rug-pull-related code patterns, though the study does not validate these flags against confirmed scams.

Pith tools