REVIEW 4 cited by
VulEval: Towards Repository-Level Evaluation of Software Vulnerability Detection
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
read the original abstract
Deep Learning (DL)-based methods have proven to be effective for software vulnerability detection, with a potential for substantial productivity enhancements for detecting vulnerabilities. Current methods mainly focus on detecting single functions (i.e., intra-procedural vulnerabilities), ignoring the more complex inter-procedural vulnerability detection scenarios in practice. For example, developers routinely engage with program analysis to detect vulnerabilities that span multiple functions within repositories. In addition, the widely-used benchmark datasets generally contain only intra-procedural vulnerabilities, leaving the assessment of inter-procedural vulnerability detection capabilities unexplored. To mitigate the issues, we propose a repository-level evaluation system, named \textbf{VulEval}, aiming at evaluating the detection performance of inter- and intra-procedural vulnerabilities simultaneously. Specifically, VulEval consists of three interconnected evaluation tasks: \textbf{(1) Function-Level Vulnerability Detection}, aiming at detecting intra-procedural vulnerability given a code snippet; \textbf{(2) Vulnerability-Related Dependency Prediction}, aiming at retrieving the most relevant dependencies from call graphs for providing developers with explanations about the vulnerabilities; and \textbf{(3) Repository-Level Vulnerability Detection}, aiming at detecting inter-procedural vulnerabilities by combining with the dependencies identified in the second task. VulEval also consists of a large-scale dataset, with a total of 4,196 CVE entries, 232,239 functions, and corresponding 4,699 repository-level source code in C/C++ programming languages. Our analysis highlights the current progress and future directions for software vulnerability detection.
Forward citations
Cited by 4 Pith papers
-
PRWeaver: Evaluating LLM-Based Code Auditors against Long-Horizon Malicious Pull Requests
A benchmark of 832 matched attack renderings shows long-horizon malicious pull requests evade LLM code auditors most when benign and malicious changes share the active review window.
-
DREA: Decoupled Reasoning and Exploration Agents for Repository-Level Vulnerability Detection
DREA improves repository-level vulnerability detection by coupling an LLM planner that forms hypotheses with a cheap local explorer that gathers cross-file evidence, lifting paired accuracy from 19-26% to 30-42% at mu...
-
It Only Gets Worse: Revisiting DL-Based Vulnerability Detectors from a Practical Perspective
An evaluation of seven deep learning vulnerability detectors shows low consistency and poor generalization, and finds that code features beyond CWE labels strongly influence detection results.
-
Position Paper: Programming Language Techniques for Bridging LLM Code Generation Semantic Gaps
A position paper arguing that PL techniques, especially formal verification and structure-aware representations, should be deeply integrated into LLM code generation.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.