VDGraph2Vec: Vulnerability Detection in Assembly Code using Message Passing Neural Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Software vulnerability detection is one of the most challenging tasks faced by reverse engineers. Recently, vulnerability detection has received a lot of attention due to a drastic increase in the volume and complexity of software. Reverse engineering is a time-consuming and labor-intensive process for detecting malware and software vulnerabilities. However, with the advent of deep learning and machine learning, it has become possible for researchers to automate the process of identifying potential security breaches in software by developing more intelligent technologies. In this research, we propose VDGraph2Vec, an automated deep learning method to generate representations of assembly code for the task of vulnerability detection. Previous approaches failed to attend to topological characteristics of assembly code while discovering the weakness in the software. VDGraph2Vec embeds the control flow and semantic information of assembly code effectively using the expressive capabilities of message passing neural networks and the RoBERTa model. Our model is able to learn the important features that help distinguish between vulnerable and non-vulnerable software. We carry out our experimental analysis for performance benchmark on three of the most common weaknesses and demonstrate that our model can identify vulnerabilities with high accuracy and outperforms the current state-of-the-art binary vulnerability detection models.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".