Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Identifying Vulnerable Third-Party Java Libraries from Textual Descriptions of Vulnerabilities and Libraries

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 2307.08206 v3 pith:5FCHO7AI submitted 2023-07-17 cs.CR cs.SE

classification cs.CRcs.SE
keywords librariesvulnerableapproachesidentifyidentifyingvullibminerdatasetjava
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

To address security vulnerabilities arising from third-party libraries, security researchers maintain databases monitoring and curating vulnerability reports. Application developers can identify vulnerable libraries by directly querying the databases with their used libraries. However, the querying results of vulnerable libraries are not reliable due to the incompleteness of vulnerability reports. Thus, current approaches model the task of identifying vulnerable libraries as a named-entity-recognition (NER) task or an extreme multi-label learning (XML) task. These approaches suffer from highly inaccurate results in identifying vulnerable libraries with complex and similar names, e.g., Java libraries. To address these limitations, in this paper, we propose VulLibMiner, the first to identify vulnerable libraries from textual descriptions of both vulnerabilities and libraries, together with VulLib, a Java vulnerability dataset with their affected libraries. VulLibMiner consists of a TF-IDF matcher to efficiently screen out a small set of candidate libraries and a BERT-FNN model to identify vulnerable libraries from these candidates effectively. We evaluate VulLibMiner using four state-of-the-art/practice approaches of identifying vulnerable libraries on both their dataset named VeraJava and our VulLib dataset. Our evaluation results show that VulLibMiner can effectively identify vulnerable libraries with an average F1 score of 0.657 while the state-of-the-art/practice approaches achieve only 0.521.

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. Can Highlighting Help GitHub Maintainers Track Security Fixes?

    cs.CR 2024-11 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Token-level highlighting does not improve human accuracy in tracing vulnerability patches, though TfIdf-Highlight is more faithful to the retrieval model than LIME.

Pith tools