Top Score on the Wrong Exam: On Benchmarking in Machine Learning for Vulnerability Detection

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2408.12986v1
• Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2024 11:08:49 GMT
• Title: Top Score on the Wrong Exam: On Benchmarking in Machine Learning for Vulnerability Detection
• Authors: Niklas Risse, Marcel Böhme,
• Abstract summary: We study both vulnerable and non-vulnerable functions in the most popular ML4VD datasets. We find that in almost all cases this decision cannot be made without further context. We conclude that the current problem statement of ML4VD is ill-defined and call into question the internal validity of this growing body of work.
• Score: 12.529028629599349
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: According to our survey of the machine learning for vulnerability detection (ML4VD) literature published in the top Software Engineering conferences, every paper in the past 5 years defines ML4VD as a binary classification problem: Given a function, does it contain a security flaw? In this paper, we ask whether this decision can really be made without further context and study both vulnerable and non-vulnerable functions in the most popular ML4VD datasets. A function is vulnerable if it was involved in a patch of an actual security flaw and confirmed to cause the vulnerability. It is non-vulnerable otherwise. We find that in almost all cases this decision cannot be made without further context. Vulnerable functions are often vulnerable only because a corresponding vulnerability-inducing calling context exists while non-vulnerable functions would often be vulnerable if a corresponding context existed. But why do ML4VD techniques perform so well even though there is demonstrably not enough information in these samples? Spurious correlations: We find that high accuracy can be achieved even when only word counts are available. This shows that these datasets can be exploited to achieve high accuracy without actually detecting any security vulnerabilities. We conclude that the current problem statement of ML4VD is ill-defined and call into question the internal validity of this growing body of work. Constructively, we call for more effective benchmarking methodologies to evaluate the true capabilities of ML4VD, propose alternative problem statements, and examine broader implications for the evaluation of machine learning and programming analysis research.

Related papers

• SafeMLRM: Demystifying Safety in Multi-modal Large Reasoning Models [50.34706204154244]
  Acquiring reasoning capabilities catastrophically degrades inherited safety alignment. Certain scenarios suffer 25 times higher attack rates. Despite tight reasoning-answer safety coupling, MLRMs demonstrate nascent self-correction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-09T06:53:23Z)
• AutoPT: How Far Are We from the End2End Automated Web Penetration Testing? [54.65079443902714]
  We introduce AutoPT, an automated penetration testing agent based on the principle of PSM driven by LLMs. Our results show that AutoPT outperforms the baseline framework ReAct on the GPT-4o mini model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-02T13:24:30Z)
• ANVIL: Anomaly-based Vulnerability Identification without Labelled Training Data [5.938113434208745]
  Supervised learning-based software vulnerability detectors often fall short due to the inadequate availability of labelled training data. In this paper, we explore a different approach by reframing vulnerability detection as one of anomaly detection. Our approach achieves $1.62times$ to $2.18times$ better Top-5 accuracies and $1.02times$ to $1.29times$ times better ROC scores on line-level vulnerability detection tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-28T03:28:17Z)
• Uncertainty is Fragile: Manipulating Uncertainty in Large Language Models [79.76293901420146]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are employed across various high-stakes domains, where the reliability of their outputs is crucial. Our research investigates the fragility of uncertainty estimation and explores potential attacks. We demonstrate that an attacker can embed a backdoor in LLMs, which, when activated by a specific trigger in the input, manipulates the model's uncertainty without affecting the final output.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-15T23:41:11Z)
• 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)
• Security Vulnerability Detection with Multitask Self-Instructed Fine-Tuning of Large Language Models [8.167614500821223]
  We introduce MSIVD, multitask self-instructed fine-tuning for vulnerability detection, inspired by chain-of-thought prompting and LLM self-instruction. Our experiments demonstrate that MSIVD achieves superior performance, outperforming the highest LLM-based vulnerability detector baseline (LineVul) with a F1 score of 0.92 on the BigVul dataset, and 0.48 on the PreciseBugs dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-09T19:18:05Z)
• FoC: Figure out the Cryptographic Functions in Stripped Binaries with LLMs [51.898805184427545]
  We propose a novel framework called FoC to Figure out the Cryptographic functions in stripped binaries. We first build a binary large language model (FoC-BinLLM) to summarize the semantics of cryptographic functions in natural language. We then build a binary code similarity model (FoC-Sim) upon the FoC-BinLLM to create change-sensitive representations and use it to retrieve similar implementations of unknown cryptographic functions in a database.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-27T09:45:33Z)
• An Insight into Security Code Review with LLMs: Capabilities, Obstacles and Influential Factors [9.309745288471374]
  Security code review is a time-consuming and labor-intensive process. Existing security analysis tools struggle with poor generalization, high false positive rates, and coarse detection granularity. Large Language Models (LLMs) have been considered promising candidates for addressing those challenges.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-29T17:13:44Z)
• SliceLocator: Locating Vulnerable Statements with Graph-based Detectors [33.395068754566935]
  SliceLocator identifies the most relevant taint flow by selecting the highest-weighted flow path from all potential vulnerability-triggering statements. We demonstrate that SliceLocator consistently performs well on four state-of-the-art GNN-based vulnerability detectors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-05T10:15:04Z)
• Understanding the Effectiveness of Large Language Models in Detecting Security Vulnerabilities [12.82645410161464]
  We evaluate the effectiveness of 16 pre-trained Large Language Models on 5,000 code samples from five diverse security datasets. Overall, LLMs show modest effectiveness in detecting vulnerabilities, obtaining an average accuracy of 62.8% and F1 score of 0.71 across datasets. We find that advanced prompting strategies that involve step-by-step analysis significantly improve performance of LLMs on real-world datasets in terms of F1 score (by upto 0.18 on average)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-16T13:17:20Z)
• 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)
• Uncovering the Limits of Machine Learning for Automatic Vulnerability Detection [12.529028629599349]
  We propose a novel benchmarking methodology to help researchers better evaluate the true capabilities and limits of ML4VD techniques. Using six ML4VD techniques and two datasets, we find (a) that state-of-the-art models severely overfit to unrelated features for predicting the vulnerabilities in the testing data, and (b) that the performance gained by data augmentation does not generalize beyond the specific augmentations applied during training.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-28T08:41:39Z)
• A Survey on Automated Software Vulnerability Detection Using Machine Learning and Deep Learning [19.163031235081565]
  Machine Learning (ML) and Deep Learning (DL) based models for detecting vulnerabilities in source code have been presented in recent years. It may be difficult to discover gaps in existing research and potential for future improvement without a comprehensive survey. This work address that gap by presenting a systematic survey to characterize various features of ML/DL-based source code level software vulnerability detection approaches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-20T16:51:59Z)
• The #DNN-Verification Problem: Counting Unsafe Inputs for Deep Neural Networks [94.63547069706459]
  #DNN-Verification problem involves counting the number of input configurations of a DNN that result in a violation of a safety property. We propose a novel approach that returns the exact count of violations. We present experimental results on a set of safety-critical benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-17T18:32:01Z)
• Robust Deep Semi-Supervised Learning: A Brief Introduction [63.09703308309176]
  Semi-supervised learning (SSL) aims to improve learning performance by leveraging unlabeled data when labels are insufficient. SSL with deep models has proven to be successful on standard benchmark tasks. However, they are still vulnerable to various robustness threats in real-world applications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-12T04:16:41Z)
• VELVET: a noVel Ensemble Learning approach to automatically locate VulnErable sTatements [62.93814803258067]
  This paper presents VELVET, a novel ensemble learning approach to locate vulnerable statements in source code. Our model combines graph-based and sequence-based neural networks to successfully capture the local and global context of a program graph. VELVET achieves 99.6% and 43.6% top-1 accuracy over synthetic data and real-world data, respectively.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-12-20T22:45:27Z)
• Estimating Structural Target Functions using Machine Learning and Influence Functions [103.47897241856603]
  We propose a new framework for statistical machine learning of target functions arising as identifiable functionals from statistical models. This framework is problem- and model-agnostic and can be used to estimate a broad variety of target parameters of interest in applied statistics. We put particular focus on so-called coarsening at random/doubly robust problems with partially unobserved information.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-14T16:48:29Z)

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.