On Measuring Vulnerable JavaScript Functions in the Wild
Bibliographic record
Abstract
JavaScript is often rated as the most popular programming language for the development of both client-side and server-side applications, and is currently used in almost all websites. Because of its popularity, JavaScript has become a frequent target for attackers, who exploit vulnerabilities in the source code to take control over the application. To address these JavaScript security issues, such vulnerabilities must be identified first. Existing work mostly deals with package-level vulnerability tracking and measurements. However this approach is limited to detecting usage of already known vulnerabilities. In this paper we develop a vulnerability detection framework that uses vulnerable pattern recognition and textual similarity methods to detect vulnerable functions in real-world projects. We build our framework with the help of a comprehensive dataset of 1,360 verified vulnerable JavaScript functions that we compose based on Snyk vulnerability database and the VulnCode-DB project. Using our framework, we identify 11,148 vulnerable functions in three environments: NPM packages, Chrome web extensions and popular websites. In addition,we conduct an in-depth contextual analysis of the findings in several popular/critical projects and confirm the security exposure of 15 cases. As evident from the results, our approach can shift JavaScript vulnerability detection from the coarse package/library level to function level, and thus improve accuracy of detection and aid timely patching.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".