A Mixed-Methods Study on the Implications of Unsafe Rust for Interoperation, Encapsulation, and Tooling

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2404.02230v3
• Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2024 17:45:18 GMT
• Title: A Mixed-Methods Study on the Implications of Unsafe Rust for Interoperation, Encapsulation, and Tooling
• Authors: Ian McCormack, Tomas Dougan, Sam Estep, Hanan Hibshi, Jonathan Aldrich, Joshua Sunshine,
• Abstract summary: Rust developers need verification tools that can provide guarantees of soundness within multi-language applications. We study how developers reason about foreign function calls, the limitations of the tools that they currently use, their motivations for using unsafe code, and how they reason about encapsulating it.
• Score: 2.2463451968497425
• License:
• Abstract: The Rust programming language restricts aliasing to provide static safety guarantees. However, in certain situations, developers need to bypass these guarantees by using a set of unsafe features. If they are used incorrectly, these features can reintroduce the types of safety issues that Rust was designed to prevent. We seek to understand how current development tools can be improved to better assist developers who find it necessary to interact with unsafe code. To that end, we study how developers reason about foreign function calls, the limitations of the tools that they currently use, their motivations for using unsafe code, and how they reason about encapsulating it. We conducted a mixed-methods investigation consisting of semi-structured interviews with 19 developers, followed by a survey that reached an additional 160 developers. Our participants were motivated to use unsafe code when they perceived that there was no alternative, and most avoided using it. However, limited tooling support for foreign function calls made participants uncertain about their design choices, and certain foreign aliasing and concurrency patterns were difficult to encapsulate. To overcome these challenges, Rust developers need verification tools that can provide guarantees of soundness within multi-language applications.

Related papers

• What Makes and Breaks Safety Fine-tuning? A Mechanistic Study [64.9691741899956]
  Safety fine-tuning helps align Large Language Models (LLMs) with human preferences for their safe deployment. We design a synthetic data generation framework that captures salient aspects of an unsafe input. Using this, we investigate three well-known safety fine-tuning methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-14T16:12:57Z)
• WildTeaming at Scale: From In-the-Wild Jailbreaks to (Adversarially) Safer Language Models [66.34505141027624]
  We introduce WildTeaming, an automatic LLM safety red-teaming framework that mines in-the-wild user-chatbot interactions to discover 5.7K unique clusters of novel jailbreak tactics. WildTeaming reveals previously unidentified vulnerabilities of frontier LLMs, resulting in up to 4.6x more diverse and successful adversarial attacks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-26T17:31:22Z)
• Characterizing Unsafe Code Encapsulation In Real-world Rust Systems [2.285834282327349]
  Interior unsafe is an essential design paradigm advocated by the Rust community in system software development. The Rust compiler is incapable of verifying the soundness of a safe function containing unsafe code. We propose a novel unsafety isolation graph to model the essential usage and encapsulation of unsafe code.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-12T06:59:51Z)
• A Study of Undefined Behavior Across Foreign Function Boundaries in Rust Libraries [2.359557447960552]
  Rust is frequently used to interoperate with other languages. Miri is the only dynamic analysis tool capable of validating applications against these models. Miri does not support foreign functions, indicating that there may be a critical correctness gap at the heart of the Rust ecosystem.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-17T18:12:05Z)
• On Prompt-Driven Safeguarding for Large Language Models [172.13943777203377]
  We find that in the representation space, the input queries are typically moved by safety prompts in a "higher-refusal" direction. Inspired by these findings, we propose a method for safety prompt optimization, namely DRO. Treating a safety prompt as continuous, trainable embeddings, DRO learns to move the queries' representations along or opposite the refusal direction, depending on their harmfulness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-31T17:28:24Z)
• Static Deadlock Detection for Rust Programs [6.596623081054982]
  Rust relies on its unique ownership mechanism to ensure thread and memory safety. New language features in Rust pose new challenges for vulnerability detection. This paper proposes a static deadlock detection method tailored for Rust programs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-02T09:09:48Z)
• All Languages Matter: On the Multilingual Safety of Large Language Models [96.47607891042523]
  We build the first multilingual safety benchmark for large language models (LLMs) XSafety covers 14 kinds of commonly used safety issues across 10 languages that span several language families. We propose several simple and effective prompting methods to improve the multilingual safety of ChatGPT.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-02T05:23:34Z)
• Is unsafe an Achilles' Heel? A Comprehensive Study of Safety Requirements in Unsafe Rust Programming [4.981203415693332]
  Rust is an emerging, strongly-typed programming language focusing on efficiency and memory safety. Current unsafe API documents in the standard library exhibited variations, including inconsistency and insufficiency. To enhance Rust security, we suggest unsafe API documents to list systematic descriptions of safety requirements for users to follow.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-09T08:16:10Z)
• Online Safety Property Collection and Refinement for Safe Deep Reinforcement Learning in Mapless Navigation [79.89605349842569]
  We introduce the Collection and Refinement of Online Properties (CROP) framework to design properties at training time. CROP employs a cost signal to identify unsafe interactions and use them to shape safety properties. We evaluate our approach in several robotic mapless navigation tasks and demonstrate that the violation metric computed with CROP allows higher returns and lower violations over previous Safe DRL approaches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-13T21:19:36Z)
• CodeLMSec Benchmark: Systematically Evaluating and Finding Security Vulnerabilities in Black-Box Code Language Models [58.27254444280376]
  Large language models (LLMs) for automatic code generation have achieved breakthroughs in several programming tasks. Training data for these models is usually collected from the Internet (e.g., from open-source repositories) and is likely to contain faults and security vulnerabilities. This unsanitized training data can cause the language models to learn these vulnerabilities and propagate them during the code generation procedure.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-08T11:54:07Z)
• Breaking Type Safety in Go: An Empirical Study on the Usage of the unsafe Package [3.548075273599941]
  We present the first large-scale study on the usage of the unsafe package in 2,438 popular Go projects. Our investigation shows that unsafe is used in 24% of Go projects, motivated primarily by communicating with operating systems and C code. We report a series of real issues faced by projects that use unsafe, from crashing errors and non-deterministic behavior to having their deployment restricted.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-17T16:38:40Z)

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.