REVIEW 1 cited by
Bomfather: An eBPF-based Kernel-level Monitoring Framework for Accurate Identification of Unknown, Unused, and Dynamically Loaded Dependencies in Modern Software Supply Chains
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
Bomfather: An eBPF-based Kernel-level Monitoring Framework for Accurate Identification of Unknown, Unused, and Dynamically Loaded Dependencies in Modern Software Supply Chains
read the original abstract
Inaccuracies in conventional dependency-tracking methods frequently undermine the security and integrity of modern software supply chains. This paper introduces a kernel-level framework leveraging extended Berkeley Packet Filter (eBPF) to capture software build dependencies transparently in real time. Our approach provides tamper-evident, intrinsic identifiers of build-time dependencies by computing cryptographic hashes of files accessed during compilation and constructing Merkle trees based on the observed file content. In contrast to traditional static analysis, this kernel-level methodology accounts for conditional compilation, dead-code, selective library usage, and dynamic dependencies, yielding more precise Software Bills of Materials (SBOMs) and Artifact Dependency Graphs (ADGs). We illustrate how existing SBOMs may omit dynamically loaded or ephemeral dependencies and discuss how kernel-level tracing can mitigate these omissions. The proposed system enhances trustworthiness in software artifacts by offering independently verifiable, kernel-level evidence of build provenance, thereby reducing supply chain risks and facilitating more accurate vulnerability management.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
When Model Release Meets Model Reuse: Producer-Consumer Misalignment in Hugging Face
Producers and consumers of pre-trained models rely on the same documentation but systematically disagree on where metadata belongs, why lineage is traced, and which governance mechanisms help.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.