MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7132999523

Towards Identifying Vulnerabilities with Delayed Patching and Public Disclosure in Open-Source Communities

2024· dissertation· W7132999523 on OpenAlexaff
Arjun Sridharkumar

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2024
Typedissertation
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicInformation and Cyber Security
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVulnerability (computing)HackerSecure codingSet (abstract data type)Full disclosureVulnerability assessmentQualitative analysisVulnerability management
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The number of open-source software (OSS) projects has been increasing over the last few years. OSS projects are widely used either directly or as a nth dependency. However, OSS projects also have an increasing trend of vulnerabilities. These vulnerabilities are not effectively managed with consideration to timely patching and disclosures, ultimately leading to exploits. Moreover, due to the nature of OSS, the activities, including code changes, discussions, etc, are available to the public and thus can be monitored by malicious hackers to create exploits. Further, there is a large time gap between the vulnerability reporting, discussion, patching, and disclosure stages, which can be misused to create exploits. In this Master’s Thesis, we explore the mismanagement of vulnerabilities, particularly delays in the disclosures and patching process. Further, we analyze the vulnerabilities with extremely large gaps (i.e., more than 365 days and term them as“Delinquent Vulnerabilities”) between the reporting, discussion, and disclosure stages with the help of a thorough qualitative analysis to find the underlying reasons for the delays. We further evaluate the state-of-the-art (SOTA)vulnerability detection models on the collected set of these extremely delayed vulnerabilities. Further, we perform qualitative analysis on the delinquent vulnerabilities not detected by SOTA to derive insights for formulating strategies for more efficient detection of vulnerabilities. Accordingly, we develop a novel vulnerability detection approach.“DelinquentVulnDetector” that incorporates multiple types of artifacts observed during the vulnerability lifecycle to capture a combined representation for vulnerability detection. Lastly, we evaluate DelinquentVulnDetector along with the SOTA on a set of 275 vulnerabilities, wherein DelinquentVulnDetector detects 196 vulnerabilities while all the SOTAs combined can detect 182 DCVEs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0100.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.291 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicInformation and Cyber SecurityFrench-language works237,207