Leveraging Large Language Models to Detect npm Malicious Packages

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2403.12196v4
• Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2025 16:29:32 GMT
• Title: Leveraging Large Language Models to Detect npm Malicious Packages
• Authors: Nusrat Zahan, Philipp Burckhardt, Mikola Lysenko, Feross Aboukhadijeh, Laurie Williams,
• Abstract summary: This study empirically studies the effectiveness of Large Language Models (LLMs) in detecting malicious code.<n>We present SocketAI, a malicious code review workflow to detect malicious code.
• Score: 4.479741014073169
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Existing malicious code detection techniques demand the integration of multiple tools to detect different malware patterns, often suffering from high misclassification rates. Therefore, malicious code detection techniques could be enhanced by adopting advanced, more automated approaches to achieve high accuracy and a low misclassification rate. The goal of this study is to aid security analysts in detecting malicious packages by empirically studying the effectiveness of Large Language Models (LLMs) in detecting malicious code. We present SocketAI, a malicious code review workflow to detect malicious code. To evaluate the effectiveness of SocketAI, we leverage a benchmark dataset of 5,115 npm packages, of which 2,180 packages have malicious code. We conducted a baseline comparison of GPT-3 and GPT-4 models with the state-of-the-art CodeQL static analysis tool, using 39 custom CodeQL rules developed in prior research to detect malicious Javascript code. We also compare the effectiveness of static analysis as a pre-screener with SocketAI workflow, measuring the number of files that need to be analyzed. and the associated costs. Additionally, we performed a qualitative study to understand the types of malicious activities detected or missed by our workflow. Our baseline comparison demonstrates a 16% and 9% improvement over static analysis in precision and F1 scores, respectively. GPT-4 achieves higher accuracy with 99% precision and 97% F1 scores, while GPT-3 offers a more cost-effective balance at 91% precision and 94% F1 scores. Pre-screening files with a static analyzer reduces the number of files requiring LLM analysis by 77.9% and decreases costs by 60.9% for GPT-3 and 76.1% for GPT-4. Our qualitative analysis identified data theft, execution of arbitrary code, and suspicious domain categories as the top detected malicious packages.

Related papers

• Benchmarking LLM for Code Smells Detection: OpenAI GPT-4.0 vs DeepSeek-V3 [0.0]
  This study introduces a structured methodology and evaluation matrix to tackle this issue. The dataset spans four prominent programming languages Java, Python, JavaScript, and C++. We benchmark two state of the art LLMs, OpenAI GPT 4.0 and DeepSeek-V3, using precision, recall, and F1 score as evaluation metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-22T16:44:39Z)
• EXPLICATE: Enhancing Phishing Detection through Explainable AI and LLM-Powered Interpretability [44.2907457629342]
  EXPLICATE is a framework that enhances phishing detection through a three-component architecture. It is on par with existing deep learning techniques but has better explainability. It addresses the critical divide between automated AI and user trust in phishing detection systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-22T23:37:35Z)
• Fine-Grained 1-Day Vulnerability Detection in Binaries via Patch Code Localization [12.73365645156957]
  1-day vulnerabilities in binaries have become a major threat to software security. patch presence test is one of the effective ways to detect the vulnerability. We propose a novel approach named PLocator, which leverages stable values from both the patch code and its context.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-29T04:35:37Z)
• Preference Optimization for Reasoning with Pseudo Feedback [100.62603571434167]
  We introduce a novel approach to generate pseudo feedback for reasoning tasks by framing the labeling of solutions as an evaluation against associated test cases. We conduct experiments on both mathematical reasoning and coding tasks using pseudo feedback for preference optimization, and observe improvements across both tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-25T12:44:02Z)
• Automated Software Vulnerability Static Code Analysis Using Generative Pre-Trained Transformer Models [0.8192907805418583]
  Generative Pre-Trained Transformer models have been shown to be surprisingly effective at a variety of natural language processing tasks. We evaluate the effectiveness of open source GPT models for the task of automatic identification of the presence of vulnerable code syntax.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-31T23:33:26Z)
• Networks of Networks: Complexity Class Principles Applied to Compound AI Systems Design [63.24275274981911]
  Compound AI Systems consisting of many language model inference calls are increasingly employed. In this work, we construct systems, which we call Networks of Networks (NoNs) organized around the distinction between generating a proposed answer and verifying its correctness. We introduce a verifier-based judge NoN with K generators, an instantiation of "best-of-K" or "judge-based" compound AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-23T20:40:37Z)
• Step-DPO: Step-wise Preference Optimization for Long-chain Reasoning of LLMs [54.05511925104712]
  We propose a simple, effective, and data-efficient method called Step-DPO. Step-DPO treats individual reasoning steps as units for preference optimization rather than evaluating answers holistically. Our findings demonstrate that as few as 10K preference data pairs and fewer than 500 Step-DPO training steps can yield a nearly 3% gain in accuracy on MATH for models with over 70B parameters.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-26T17:43:06Z)
• SORRY-Bench: Systematically Evaluating Large Language Model Safety Refusal Behaviors [64.9938658716425]
  Existing evaluations of large language models' (LLMs) ability to recognize and reject unsafe user requests face three limitations. First, existing methods often use coarse-grained of unsafe topics, and are over-representing some fine-grained topics. Second, linguistic characteristics and formatting of prompts are often overlooked, like different languages, dialects, and more -- which are only implicitly considered in many evaluations. Third, existing evaluations rely on large LLMs for evaluation, which can be expensive.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-20T17:56:07Z)
• Leveraging Stack Traces for Spectrum-based Fault Localization in the Absence of Failing Tests [44.13331329339185]
  We introduce a new approach, SBEST, that integrates stack trace data with test coverage to enhance fault localization. Our approach shows a significant improvement, increasing Mean Average Precision (MAP) by 32.22% and Mean Reciprocal Rank (MRR) by 17.43% over traditional stack trace ranking methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-01T15:15:52Z)
• Do Neutral Prompts Produce Insecure Code? FormAI-v2 Dataset: Labelling Vulnerabilities in Code Generated by Large Language Models [3.4887856546295333]
  This study provides a comparative analysis of state-of-the-art large language models (LLMs) We analyze how likely they generate vulnerabilities when writing simple C programs using a neutral zero-shot prompt.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-29T01:24:14Z)
• Small Effect Sizes in Malware Detection? Make Harder Train/Test Splits! [51.668411293817464]
  Industry practitioners care about small improvements in malware detection accuracy because their models are deployed to hundreds of millions of machines. Academic research is often restrained to public datasets on the order of ten thousand samples. We devise an approach to generate a benchmark of difficulty from a pool of available samples.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-25T21:25:55Z)
• Data-Free Hard-Label Robustness Stealing Attack [67.41281050467889]
  We introduce a novel Data-Free Hard-Label Robustness Stealing (DFHL-RS) attack in this paper. It enables the stealing of both model accuracy and robustness by simply querying hard labels of the target model. Our method achieves a clean accuracy of 77.86% and a robust accuracy of 39.51% against AutoAttack.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-10T16:14:02Z)
• Zero-Shot Detection of Machine-Generated Codes [83.0342513054389]
  This work proposes a training-free approach for the detection of LLMs-generated codes. We find that existing training-based or zero-shot text detectors are ineffective in detecting code. Our method exhibits robustness against revision attacks and generalizes well to Java codes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-08T10:08:21Z)
• Can Large Language Models Find And Fix Vulnerable Software? [0.0]
  GPT-4 identified approximately four times the vulnerabilities than its counterparts. It provided viable fixes for each vulnerability, demonstrating a low rate of false positives. GPT-4's code corrections led to a 90% reduction in vulnerabilities, requiring only an 11% increase in code lines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-20T19:33:12Z)
• G$^2$uardFL: Safeguarding Federated Learning Against Backdoor Attacks through Attributed Client Graph Clustering [116.4277292854053]
  Federated Learning (FL) offers collaborative model training without data sharing. FL is vulnerable to backdoor attacks, where poisoned model weights lead to compromised system integrity. We present G$2$uardFL, a protective framework that reinterprets the identification of malicious clients as an attributed graph clustering problem.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-08T07:15:04Z)
• Dataflow Analysis-Inspired Deep Learning for Efficient Vulnerability Detection [17.761541379830373]
  DeepDFA is a dataflow analysis-inspired graph learning framework. It was trained in 9 minutes, 75x faster than the highest-performing baseline model. It detected 8.7 out of 17 vulnerabilities on average across folds and was able to distinguish between patched and buggy versions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-15T19:49:27Z)
• Malicious Code Detection: Run Trace Output Analysis by LSTM [0.0]
  We propose a methodological framework for detecting malicious code by analyzing run trace outputs by Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) We created our dataset from run trace outputs obtained from dynamic analysis of PE files. Experiments showed that the ISM achieved an accuracy of 87.51% and a false positive rate of 18.34%, while BSM achieved an accuracy of 99.26% and a false positive rate of 2.62%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-14T15:00:42Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.