Revisiting the Performance of Deep Learning-Based Vulnerability Detection on Realistic Datasets
0
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- This paper revisits the performance of deep learning-based vulnerability detection on realistic datasets, addressing concerns raised in previous research about the limitations of these models.
- The authors evaluate state-of-the-art deep learning models for vulnerability detection on a diverse set of real-world datasets, including the Vuldetectbench, Uncovering Limits, Vulnerability Detection on CC Code, and Security Weaknesses datasets.
- The paper aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the current capabilities and limitations of deep learning-based vulnerability detection techniques.
Plain English Explanation
The paper explores the performance of deep learning models in detecting software vulnerabilities, which are weaknesses in software that can be exploited by attackers. Previous research had raised concerns about the limitations of these models, and this paper aims to provide a clearer picture of their real-world capabilities.
The authors tested state-of-the-art deep learning models on a diverse set of datasets that reflect the challenges of detecting vulnerabilities in real-world software. These datasets include the Vuldetectbench dataset, which contains a large number of vulnerabilities, and the Uncovering Limits dataset, which focuses on more subtle and difficult-to-detect vulnerabilities.
By evaluating the deep learning models on these realistic datasets, the paper aims to give a better understanding of the current strengths and limitations of using machine learning for vulnerability detection. This information can help security researchers and practitioners make more informed decisions about when and how to use these technologies to improve software security.
Technical Explanation
The paper evaluates the performance of state-of-the-art deep learning models for vulnerability detection on a diverse set of realistic datasets. The authors use the Vuldetectbench dataset, which contains a large number of vulnerabilities, as well as the Uncovering Limits, Vulnerability Detection on CC Code, and Security Weaknesses datasets, which focus on more subtle and difficult-to-detect vulnerabilities.
The authors evaluate the models' performance on these datasets using standard metrics such as precision, recall, and F1-score. They also analyze the factors that contribute to the models' performance, such as the complexity of the vulnerabilities, the quality of the training data, and the architectural choices of the deep learning models.
The results show that while deep learning models can achieve high performance on certain types of vulnerabilities, they still struggle with more complex and subtle vulnerabilities. The authors also find that the models' performance can be heavily influenced by the characteristics of the training data, highlighting the importance of using realistic and diverse datasets for evaluating and improving these techniques.
Critical Analysis
The paper provides a comprehensive evaluation of deep learning-based vulnerability detection models on realistic datasets, addressing concerns raised in previous research about the limitations of these approaches. The authors' use of diverse datasets, including those that focus on more challenging vulnerabilities, is a strength of the study, as it helps to provide a more realistic assessment of the models' capabilities.
However, the paper also acknowledges some limitations of the research. For example, the authors note that their evaluation is limited to a specific set of deep learning architectures and that the performance of these models may vary depending on the specific implementation and hyperparameter choices. Additionally, the paper does not explore the potential for combining deep learning with other techniques, such as static code analysis or fuzzing, which could potentially improve the overall performance of vulnerability detection systems.
Furthermore, the paper does not delve deeply into the factors that contribute to the models' performance, such as the specific types of vulnerabilities that are more or less amenable to deep learning-based detection. A more detailed analysis of these factors could provide valuable insights for researchers and practitioners working to improve the state of the art in this field.
Overall, the paper represents an important contribution to the ongoing discussion around the capabilities and limitations of deep learning-based vulnerability detection. By providing a thorough evaluation on realistic datasets, the authors have taken a significant step towards a more nuanced understanding of the current state of the technology and the areas where further research and development are needed.
Conclusion
This paper provides a comprehensive evaluation of the performance of deep learning-based vulnerability detection models on realistic datasets, addressing concerns raised in previous research about the limitations of these approaches. The authors' use of diverse datasets, including those that focus on more challenging vulnerabilities, allows for a more realistic assessment of the models' capabilities.
The results show that while deep learning models can achieve high performance on certain types of vulnerabilities, they still struggle with more complex and subtle vulnerabilities. The paper also highlights the importance of using realistic and diverse datasets for evaluating and improving these techniques, as the models' performance can be heavily influenced by the characteristics of the training data.
The insights provided in this paper are valuable for security researchers and practitioners working to advance the state of the art in vulnerability detection. By understanding the current capabilities and limitations of deep learning-based approaches, they can make more informed decisions about when and how to apply these technologies to improve software security.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
0
Revisiting the Performance of Deep Learning-Based Vulnerability Detection on Realistic Datasets
Partha Chakraborty, Krishna Kanth Arumugam, Mahmoud Alfadel, Meiyappan Nagappan, Shane McIntosh
The impact of software vulnerabilities on everyday software systems is significant. Despite deep learning models being proposed for vulnerability detection, their reliability is questionable. Prior evaluations show high recall/F1 scores of up to 99%, but these models underperform in practical scenarios, particularly when assessed on entire codebases rather than just the fixing commit. This paper introduces Real-Vul, a comprehensive dataset representing real-world scenarios for evaluating vulnerability detection models. Evaluating DeepWukong, LineVul, ReVeal, and IVDetect shows a significant drop in performance, with precision decreasing by up to 95 percentage points and F1 scores by up to 91 points. Furthermore, Model performance fluctuates based on vulnerability characteristics, with better F1 scores for information leaks or code injection than for path resolution or predictable return values. The results highlight a significant performance gap that needs addressing before deploying deep learning-based vulnerability detection in practical settings. Overfitting is identified as a key issue, and an augmentation technique is proposed, potentially improving performance by up to 30%. Contributions include a dataset creation approach for better model evaluation, Real-Vul dataset, and empirical evidence of deep learning models struggling in real-world settings.
Read more7/4/2024
0
VulDetectBench: Evaluating the Deep Capability of Vulnerability Detection with Large Language Models
Yu Liu, Lang Gao, Mingxin Yang, Yu Xie, Ping Chen, Xiaojin Zhang, Wei Chen
Large Language Models (LLMs) have training corpora containing large amounts of program code, greatly improving the model's code comprehension and generation capabilities. However, sound comprehensive research on detecting program vulnerabilities, a more specific task related to code, and evaluating the performance of LLMs in this more specialized scenario is still lacking. To address common challenges in vulnerability analysis, our study introduces a new benchmark, VulDetectBench, specifically designed to assess the vulnerability detection capabilities of LLMs. The benchmark comprehensively evaluates LLM's ability to identify, classify, and locate vulnerabilities through five tasks of increasing difficulty. We evaluate the performance of 17 models (both open- and closed-source) and find that while existing models can achieve over 80% accuracy on tasks related to vulnerability identification and classification, they still fall short on specific, more detailed vulnerability analysis tasks, with less than 30% accuracy, making it difficult to provide valuable auxiliary information for professional vulnerability mining. Our benchmark effectively evaluates the capabilities of various LLMs at different levels in the specific task of vulnerability detection, providing a foundation for future research and improvements in this critical area of code security. VulDetectBench is publicly available at https://github.com/Sweetaroo/VulDetectBench.
Read more8/22/2024
0
Vulnerability Detection with Code Language Models: How Far Are We?
Yangruibo Ding, Yanjun Fu, Omniyyah Ibrahim, Chawin Sitawarin, Xinyun Chen, Basel Alomair, David Wagner, Baishakhi Ray, Yizheng Chen
In the context of the rising interest in code language models (code LMs) and vulnerability detection, we study the effectiveness of code LMs for detecting vulnerabilities. Our analysis reveals significant shortcomings in existing vulnerability datasets, including poor data quality, low label accuracy, and high duplication rates, leading to unreliable model performance in realistic vulnerability detection scenarios. Additionally, the evaluation methods used with these datasets are not representative of real-world vulnerability detection. To address these challenges, we introduce PrimeVul, a new dataset for training and evaluating code LMs for vulnerability detection. PrimeVul incorporates a novel set of data labeling techniques that achieve comparable label accuracy to human-verified benchmarks while significantly expanding the dataset. It also implements a rigorous data de-duplication and chronological data splitting strategy to mitigate data leakage issues, alongside introducing more realistic evaluation metrics and settings. This comprehensive approach aims to provide a more accurate assessment of code LMs' performance in real-world conditions. Evaluating code LMs on PrimeVul reveals that existing benchmarks significantly overestimate the performance of these models. For instance, a state-of-the-art 7B model scored 68.26% F1 on BigVul but only 3.09% F1 on PrimeVul. Attempts to improve performance through advanced training techniques and larger models like GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 were unsuccessful, with results akin to random guessing in the most stringent settings. These findings underscore the considerable gap between current capabilities and the practical requirements for deploying code LMs in security roles, highlighting the need for more innovative research in this domain.
Read more7/11/2024
0
Uncovering the Limits of Machine Learning for Automatic Vulnerability Detection
Niklas Risse, Marcel Bohme
Recent results of machine learning for automatic vulnerability detection (ML4VD) have been very promising. Given only the source code of a function $f$, ML4VD techniques can decide if $f$ contains a security flaw with up to 70% accuracy. However, as evident in our own experiments, the same top-performing models are unable to distinguish between functions that contain a vulnerability and functions where the vulnerability is patched. So, how can we explain this contradiction and how can we improve the way we evaluate ML4VD techniques to get a better picture of their actual capabilities? In this paper, we identify overfitting to unrelated features and out-of-distribution generalization as two problems, which are not captured by the traditional approach of evaluating ML4VD techniques. As a remedy, we propose a novel benchmarking methodology to help researchers better evaluate the true capabilities and limits of ML4VD techniques. Specifically, we propose (i) to augment the training and validation dataset according to our cross-validation algorithm, where a semantic preserving transformation is applied during the augmentation of either the training set or the testing set, and (ii) to augment the testing set with code snippets where the vulnerabilities are patched. 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, (b) that the performance gained by data augmentation does not generalize beyond the specific augmentations applied during training, and (c) that state-of-the-art ML4VD techniques are unable to distinguish vulnerable functions from their patches.
Read more6/7/2024