Bibliographic record
Abstract
Identifying free open-source software (FOSS) packages on binaries when the source code is unavailable is important for many security applications, such as malware detection, software infringement, and digital forensics. This capability enhances both the accuracy and the efficiency of reverse engineering tasks by avoiding false correlations between irrelevant code bases. Although the FOSS package identification problem belongs to the field of software engineering, conventional approaches rely strongly on practical methods in data mining and database searching. However, various challenges in the use of these methods prevent existing function identification approaches from being effective in the absence of source code. To make matters worse, the introduction of obfuscation techniques, the use of different compilers and compilation settings, and software refactoring techniques has made the automated detection of FOSS packages increasingly difficult. With very few exceptions, the existing systems are not resilient to such techniques, and the exceptions are not sufficiently efficient. To address this issue, we propose FOSSIL , a novel resilient and efficient system that incorporates three components. The first component extracts the syntactical features of functions by considering opcode frequencies and applying a hidden Markov model statistical test. The second component applies a neighborhood hash graph kernel to random walks derived from control-flow graphs, with the goal of extracting the semantics of the functions. The third component applies z-score to the normalized instructions to extract the behavior of instructions in a function. The components are integrated using a Bayesian network model, which synthesizes the results to determine the FOSS function. The novel approach of combining these components using the Bayesian network has produced stronger resilience to code obfuscation. We evaluate our system on three datasets, including real-world projects whose use of FOSS packages is known, malware binaries for which there are security and reverse engineering reports purporting to describe their use of FOSS, and a large repository of malware binaries. We demonstrate that our system is able to identify FOSS packages in real-world projects with a mean precision of 0.95 and with a mean recall of 0.85. Furthermore, FOSSIL is able to discover FOSS packages in malware binaries that match those listed in security and reverse engineering reports. Our results show that modern malware binaries contain 0.10--0.45 of FOSS packages.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.054 | 0.043 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".