Scholarlink

<p>The choice of one’s programming language and relative ecosystem of libraries can affect the likelihood of encountering a critical vulnerability. Simply counting the vulnerabilities by mining a software repository is not enough, and case-control studies are a well-accepted methodology to determine relative risk. Yet, they require the ability to compare ‘equals with equals’ as a library for text processing is likely subject to less security scrutiny than a library for web applications. To compare libraries, we implemented a human-guided protocol to transfer classification categories from an ecosystem to libraries of another ecosystem. By building of this categorization, we performed a case-control study with the vulnerabilities available on Snyk and with status ’reviewed’ in the Github security Advisories till 2024. We mapped 76 Java/Maven libraries and 221 Python/PyPI packages as ’cases’ (libraries with vulnerabilities with a CVSS critical score) compared them against 58 Java/Maven and 166 Python/PyPI ’controls’ (Only with a high CVSS score). We found and overall the odds ratio of ending with a critical vulnerability is slightly higher when using a Java/Maven library in comparison to using a Python/PyPi package (1.13x). We refine the analysis to understand possible reasons for our result by using the CVSS vector metric. A possible explanation is that a vulnerability with low attack complexity has disproportionately higher chances to be critical in Java/Maven (38.9x) than in Python/PyPI (5.9x). Such results might be explained by the lack of past security interest in the Python ecosystem. By using the introduction of the OWASP dependency checker in 2023 for Python as possible indication of community interest, we found a risk reversal: after 2023 the risk of ending with a critical vulnerability (as opposed to just a high severity one) is significantly higher (2.4x) for a Python/PyPI package than for a Java/Maven library. To allow replication and updates, we make the dataset and the protocol individual steps available as open data.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

A methodology to perform cross-ecosystems case-control security studies

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年7月18日

查看全文
  • Yuan Feng,
  • Ranindya Paramitha,
  • Carlos E. Budde,
  • Fabio Massacci

摘要

The choice of one’s programming language and relative ecosystem of libraries can affect the likelihood of encountering a critical vulnerability. Simply counting the vulnerabilities by mining a software repository is not enough, and case-control studies are a well-accepted methodology to determine relative risk. Yet, they require the ability to compare ‘equals with equals’ as a library for text processing is likely subject to less security scrutiny than a library for web applications. To compare libraries, we implemented a human-guided protocol to transfer classification categories from an ecosystem to libraries of another ecosystem. By building of this categorization, we performed a case-control study with the vulnerabilities available on Snyk and with status ’reviewed’ in the Github security Advisories till 2024. We mapped 76 Java/Maven libraries and 221 Python/PyPI packages as ’cases’ (libraries with vulnerabilities with a CVSS critical score) compared them against 58 Java/Maven and 166 Python/PyPI ’controls’ (Only with a high CVSS score). We found and overall the odds ratio of ending with a critical vulnerability is slightly higher when using a Java/Maven library in comparison to using a Python/PyPi package (1.13x). We refine the analysis to understand possible reasons for our result by using the CVSS vector metric. A possible explanation is that a vulnerability with low attack complexity has disproportionately higher chances to be critical in Java/Maven (38.9x) than in Python/PyPI (5.9x). Such results might be explained by the lack of past security interest in the Python ecosystem. By using the introduction of the OWASP dependency checker in 2023 for Python as possible indication of community interest, we found a risk reversal: after 2023 the risk of ending with a critical vulnerability (as opposed to just a high severity one) is significantly higher (2.4x) for a Python/PyPI package than for a Java/Maven library. To allow replication and updates, we make the dataset and the protocol individual steps available as open data.