Metamorphic Testing for Web System Security
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Security testing aims at verifying that the software meets its security properties. In modern Web systems, however, this often entails the verification of the outputs generated when exercising the system with a very large set of inputs. Full automation is thus required to lower costs and increase the effectiveness of security testing. Unfortunately, to achieve such automation, in addition to strategies for automatically deriving test inputs, we need to address the oracle problem, which refers to the challenge, given an input for a system, of distinguishing correct from incorrect behavior (e.g., the response to be received after a specific HTTP GET request). In this paper, we propose Metamorphic Security Testing for Web-interactions (MST-wi), a metamorphic testing approach that integrates test input generation strategies inspired by mutational fuzzing and alleviates the oracle problem in security testing. It enables engineers to specify metamorphic relations (MRs) that capture many security properties of Web systems. To facilitate the specification of such MRs, we provide a domain-specific language accompanied by an Eclipse editor.MST-wiautomatically collects the input data and transforms the MRs into executable Java code to automatically perform security testing. It automatically tests Web systems to detect vulnerabilities based on the relations and collected data. We provide a catalog of 76 system-agnostic MRs to automate security testing in Web systems. It covers 39% of the OWASP security testing activities not automated by state-of-the-art techniques; further, our MRs can automatically discover 102 different types of vulnerabilities, which correspond to 45% of the vulnerabilities due to violations of security design principles according to the MITRE CWE database. We also define guidelines that enable test engineers to improve the testability of the system under test with respect to our approach. We evaluatedMST-wieffectiveness and scalability with two well-known Web systems (i.e., Jenkins and Joomla). It automatically detected 85% of their vulnerabilities and showed a high specificity (99.81% of the generated inputs do not lead to a false positive); our findings include a new security vulnerability detected in Jenkins. Finally, our results demonstrate that the approach scale, thus enabling automated security testing overnight.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".