论文标题
从我们所知道的:如何使用嘈杂的历史数据执行脆弱性预测
Learning from What We Know: How to Perform Vulnerability Prediction using Noisy Historical Data
论文作者
论文摘要
脆弱性预测是指识别最有可能脆弱的系统组件的问题。通常,通过对历史数据培训二进制分类器来解决此问题。不幸的是,最近的研究表明,由于以下两个原因,这种方法的表现不佳:a)问题的不平衡性质,b)固有的嘈杂的历史数据,即大多数漏洞的发现比引入的时间晚得多。当他们学会识别实际脆弱的组件是不可掩盖的时,这会误导分类器。为了解决这些问题,我们提出了Trovon,该技术是从已知的脆弱组件中学习的,而不是从通常执行的脆弱和不可剥离的组件中学习的。我们通过将已知脆弱的及其各自的固定组件进行对比来执行此操作。这样,Trovon设法从我们所知道的东西(即漏洞)中学习,从而减少了嘈杂和不平衡数据的影响。我们通过将Trovon与三个安全至关重要的开源系统(即Linux内核,OpenSSL和Wireshark)的现有技术进行比较来评估Trovon,并将其与国家漏洞数据库(NVD)中报道的历史漏洞进行了比较。我们的评估表明,Trovon的预测能力显着优于现有的漏洞预测技术,例如软件量度,导入,功能呼叫,文本挖掘,文本挖掘,devign,LSTM和LSTM-RF,在MATTHEWS相关系数(MCC)中,在清洁培训数据下,在训练数据设置下进行了40.84%的改进,并在35.52%的情况下进行了35.52%的改进。
Vulnerability prediction refers to the problem of identifying system components that are most likely to be vulnerable. Typically, this problem is tackled by training binary classifiers on historical data. Unfortunately, recent research has shown that such approaches underperform due to the following two reasons: a) the imbalanced nature of the problem, and b) the inherently noisy historical data, i.e., most vulnerabilities are discovered much later than they are introduced. This misleads classifiers as they learn to recognize actual vulnerable components as non-vulnerable. To tackle these issues, we propose TROVON, a technique that learns from known vulnerable components rather than from vulnerable and non-vulnerable components, as typically performed. We perform this by contrasting the known vulnerable, and their respective fixed components. This way, TROVON manages to learn from the things we know, i.e., vulnerabilities, hence reducing the effects of noisy and unbalanced data. We evaluate TROVON by comparing it with existing techniques on three security-critical open source systems, i.e., Linux Kernel, OpenSSL, and Wireshark, with historical vulnerabilities that have been reported in the National Vulnerability Database (NVD). Our evaluation demonstrates that the prediction capability of TROVON significantly outperforms existing vulnerability prediction techniques such as Software Metrics, Imports, Function Calls, Text Mining, Devign, LSTM, and LSTM-RF with an improvement of 40.84% in Matthews Correlation Coefficient (MCC) score under Clean Training Data Settings, and an improvement of 35.52% under Realistic Training Data Settings.