Search

Open-source software (OSS) vulnerabilities are increasingly prevalent, emphasizing the importance of security patches. However, in widely used security platforms like NVD, a substantial number of CVE records still lack trace links to patches. Although rank-based approaches have been proposed for security patch tracing, they heavily rely on handcrafted features in a single-step framework, which limits their effectiveness. In this paper, we propose PatchFinder, a two-phase framework with end-to-end correlation learning for better-tracing security patches. In the **initial retrieval** phase, we employ a hybrid patch retriever to account for both lexical and semantic matching based on the code changes and the description of a CVE, to narrow down the search space by extracting those commits as candidates that are similar to the CVE descriptions. Afterwards, in the **re-ranking** phase, we design an end-to-end architecture under the supervised fine-tuning paradigm for learning the semantic correlations between CVE descriptions and commits. In this way, we can automatically rank the candidates based on their correlation scores while maintaining low computation overhead. We evaluated our system against 4,789 CVEs from 532 OSS projects. The results are highly promising: PatchFinder achieves a Recall@10 of 80.63% and a Mean Reciprocal Rank (MRR) of 0.7951. Moreover, the Manual Effort@10 required is curtailed to 2.77, marking a 1.94 times improvement over current leading methods. When applying PatchFinder in practice, we initially identified 533 patch commits and submitted them to the official, 482 of which have been confirmed by CVE Numbering Authorities., Comment: to appear at ISSTA 2024

In recent years, the importance of smart contract security has been heightened by the increasing number of attacks against them. To address this issue, a multitude of static application security testing (SAST) tools have been proposed for detecting vulnerabilities in smart contracts. However, objectively comparing these tools to determine their effectiveness remains challenging. Existing studies often fall short due to the taxonomies and benchmarks only covering a coarse and potentially outdated set of vulnerability types, which leads to evaluations that are not entirely comprehensive and may display bias. In this paper, we fill this gap by proposing an up-to-date and fine-grained taxonomy that includes 45 unique vulnerability types for smart contracts. Taking it as a baseline, we develop an extensive benchmark that covers 40 distinct types and includes a diverse range of code characteristics, vulnerability patterns, and application scenarios. Based on them, we evaluated 8 SAST tools using this benchmark, which comprises 788 smart contract files and 10,394 vulnerabilities. Our results reveal that the existing SAST tools fail to detect around 50% of vulnerabilities in our benchmark and suffer from high false positives, with precision not surpassing 10%. We also discover that by combining the results of multiple tools, the false negative rate can be reduced effectively, at the expense of flagging 36.77 percentage points more functions. Nevertheless, many vulnerabilities, especially those beyond Access Control and Reentrancy vulnerabilities, remain undetected. We finally highlight the valuable insights from our study, hoping to provide guidance on tool development, enhancement, evaluation, and selection for developers, researchers, and practitioners., Comment: to appear at FSE 2024

Automated Static Analysis Tools (ASATs) have evolved over time to assist in detecting bugs. However, the excessive false warnings can impede developers' productivity and confidence in the tools. Previous research efforts have explored learning-based methods to validate the reported warnings. Nevertheless, their coarse granularity, focusing on either long-term warnings or function-level alerts, which are insensitive to individual bugs. Also, they rely on manually crafted features or solely on source code semantics, which is inadequate for effective learning. In this paper, we propose FineWAVE, a learning-based approach that verifies bug-sensitive warnings at a fine-grained granularity. Specifically, we design a novel LSTM-based model that captures multi-modal semantics of source code and warnings from ASATs and highlights their correlations with cross-attention. To tackle the data scarcity of training and evaluation, we collected a large-scale dataset of 280,273 warnings. We conducted extensive experiments on the dataset to evaluate FineWAVE. The experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach, with an F1-score of 97.79\% for reducing false alarms and 67.06% for confirming actual warnings, significantly outperforming all baselines. Moreover, we have applied our FineWAVE to filter out about 92% warnings in four popular real-world projects, and found 25 new bugs with minimal manual effort.

Smart contracts are susceptible to various security issues, among which access control (AC) vulnerabilities are particularly critical. While existing research has proposed multiple detection tools, the automatic and appropriate repair of AC vulnerabilities in smart contracts remains a challenge. Unlike commonly supported vulnerability types by existing repair tools, such as reentrancy, which are usually fixed by template-based approaches, the main obstacle of AC lies in identifying the appropriate roles or permissions amid a long list of non-AC-related source code to generate proper patch code, a task that demands human-level intelligence. Leveraging recent advancements in large language models (LLMs), we employ the state-of-the-art GPT-4 model and enhance it with a novel approach called ACFIX. The key insight is that we can mine common AC practices for major categories of code functionality and use them to guide LLMs in fixing code with similar functionality. To this end, ACFIX involves both offline and online phases. First, during the offline phase, ACFIX mines a taxonomy of common Role-based Access Control (RBAC) practices from 344,251 on-chain contracts, categorizing 49 role-permission pairs from the top 1,000 pairs mined. Second, during the online phase, ACFIX tracks AC-related elements across the contract and uses this context information along with a Chain-of-Thought pipeline to guide LLMs in identifying the most appropriate role-permission pair for the subject contract and subsequently generating a suitable patch. This patch will then undergo a validity and effectiveness check. To evaluate ACFIX, we built the first benchmark dataset of 118 real-world AC vulnerabilities, and our evaluation revealed that ACFIX successfully repaired 94.92% of them. This represents a significant improvement compared to the baseline GPT-4, which achieved only 52.54%., Comment: This is a technical report from Nanyang Technological University

Quality assurance (QA) tools are receiving more and more attention and are widely used by developers. Given the wide range of solutions for QA technology, it is still a question of evaluating QA tools. Most existing research is limited in the following ways: (i) They compare tools without considering scanning rules analysis. (ii) They disagree on the effectiveness of tools due to the study methodology and benchmark dataset. (iii) They do not separately analyze the role of the warnings. (iv) There is no large-scale study on the analysis of time performance. To address these problems, in the paper, we systematically select 6 free or open-source tools for a comprehensive study from a list of 148 existing Java QA tools. To carry out a comprehensive study and evaluate tools in multi-level dimensions, we first mapped the scanning rules to the CWE and analyze the coverage and granularity of the scanning rules. Then we conducted an experiment on 5 benchmarks, including 1,425 bugs, to investigate the effectiveness of these tools. Furthermore, we took substantial effort to investigate the effectiveness of warnings by comparing the real labeled bugs with the warnings and investigating their role in bug detection. Finally, we assessed these tools' time performance on 1,049 projects. The useful findings based on our comprehensive study can help developers improve their tools and provide users with suggestions for selecting QA tools., Comment: 11 pages, ISSTA-2023