Path-sensitive vulnerabilities, such as use-after-free, integer overflows, and command injection, pose significant challenges for traditional static analysis tools, which often face trade-offs between precision, scalability, and interpretability. To address these challenges, we present SEVDF (Semantic-Enhanced Vulnerability Detection Framework), a novel methodology that integrates may-analysis taint propagation with large language models (LLMs) to detect path-related vulnerabilities in large C/C++ codebases. SEVDF begins by constructing a program dependency graph and performing a sound but incomplete taint analysis to extract all potential vulnerable paths. After segmentation, deduplication, feasibility check, and semantic summarization by LLMs, the vulnerable paths are reformed and confirmed with LLMs for their inter-procedural feasibility and semantic consistency. We evaluate SEVDF on the Juliet Test Suite (thirteen CWE categories) and a curated real-world dataset of 71 vulnerabilities across 9 projects. SEVDF consistently outperforms the default CodeQL rules, CodeQL rules with all unnecessary constraints removed, and three open-source detectors, which are Infer, Cppcheck and CodeChecker. SEVDF is able to achieve 100% precision on several CWEs while maintaining or improving recall on Juliet benchmark. Moreover, our segment-based design reduces the analysis workload for LLMs by 90.6% compared to direct-path prompting through Logic Unit deduplication, making SEVDF cost-effective for large-scale deployment. Finally, SEVDF uncovered and reported 29 0-day vulnerabilities (12 confirmed to date), including 3 CVEs in VirtualBox, demonstrating practical value.

Static analysis tools have evolved over time to assist in detecting bugs. However, the excessive false warnings can impede developers’ productivity and confidence in the tools. Previous research efforts have explored learning-based approaches to identify bug warnings. Nevertheless, their coarse granularity, focusing on either long-term warnings or function-level alerts, are insensitive to individual bugs. Also, they rely on manually crafted features or solely on source code semantics, which is inadequate for effective learning. In this paper, we propose DeepFWI, a learning-based approach that identifies bug-sensitive warnings at a fine-grained granularity. Specifically, we design a novel LSTM-based model that captures multi-modal semantics of source code and warnings from automated static analysis tools (ASATs) and highlights their correlations with cross-attention. To tackle the data scarcity of training and evaluation, we collected a large-scale dataset of 280,273 warnings. We conducted extensive experiments on the dataset to evaluate DeepFWI. The experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach, with an F1-score 67.06% for confirming true warnings in a finer-grained manner, significantly outperforming all baselines. Additionally, to validate the practicality of DeepFWI from the perspective of developers, we applied DeepFWI to four popular open-source projects. Our approach filtered out the vast majority of warnings, while still successfully surfacing 25 true bug-related warnings that were confirmed through manual analysis.

Smart contract vulnerabilities continue to cause significant financial losses, despite the implementation of security measures such as manual audits and bug bounty platforms. A critical component often required by these security measures is the proof-of-concept (PoC) exploit, which validates vulnerability exploitability, assesses impact severity, and guides developers in fixes. Existing tools have explored automated PoC generation with techniques like symbolic execution, fuzzing, and program synthesis. However, these approaches frequently fail to generate PoCs for vulnerabilities exploited in real-world incidents, primarily due to their limitations in handling complex transaction dependencies, navigating vast on-chain state spaces, or requiring extensive manual specifications. Our migration-based approach extracts critical information from documented security incidents and applies it to generate PoCs for similar vulnerable code. This approach leverages proven exploit patterns rather than generating PoCs from scratch. This approach is motivated by two key observations: the prevalence of code reuse in smart contracts (up to 90% at the function level) and the increasing availability of documented PoCs for real-world incidents. Our approach operates in three phases: (1) abstracting essential components (i.e., environment properties, attack logic, and verification checks) from existing PoCs into templates, (2) given a new target contract, selecting suitable templates with adapted values through clone-detection and property-feasibility analysis, and (3) generating and validating PoCs in simulated environments. Our evaluation demonstrates effectiveness and efficiency across multiple scales. Our approach successfully generates valid PoCs for 62 out of 67 manually validated cases without false positives and completes analysis in 3.8 hours compared to 133.2 and 210.5 hours required by existing tools. Large-scale evaluation on 979,512 contracts identifies 256 vulnerable contracts across blockchain networks with 64 cross-chain cases, demonstrating real-world applicability.

Web3 applications, particularly decentralized finance (DeFi) protocols, have grown rapidly with over $100 billion locked in smart contracts, attracting sophisticated attacks causing billions in losses. When attack occur, security analysts need to perform fault localization to identify vulnerable functions and understand attack vectors. This critical process currently requires an average of 16.7 analyst hours per incident due to complex blockchain execution models, rapidly evolving protocol interactions, and multi-contract attack patterns that exceed existing analytical capabilities. Despite its critical importance, blockchain fault localization has received limited attention due to fundamental challenges requiring semantic understanding of economic models and protocol-specific logic. Existing blockchain-specific tools target only single vulnerability types, while the only comprehensive solution, DAppFL, relies on machine learning model that may miss sophisticated exploits and lacks interpretability in results. Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) demonstrate remarkable code comprehension capabilities, but existing applications focus on proactive vulnerability detection with minimal exploration of post-incident fault localization.We present FaultSeeker, an LLM-empowered framework for blockchain transaction fault localization. Our two-stage architecture combines transaction-level forensics for strategic scoping with coordinated specialist agents for sustained reasoning. This design provides long-term memory management via orchestrator agents and specialized attention allocation through coordinated workers, enabling comprehensive analysis across complex multi-contract transactions without context loss. We evaluate Fault-Seeker on a compiled dataset of 115 real-world malicious transactions with expert-validated annotations spanning diverse attack patterns and complexity levels. Results demonstrate that FaultSeeker significantly outperforms existing approaches, including DAppFL and leading native LLMs (GPT-4o, Claude 3.7 Sonnet, DeepSeek R1), while maintaining practical efficiency (4.4- 8.6 minutes) and cost-effectiveness ($1.55-$4.53 per transaction).

Smart contracts are susceptible to various security issues, among which access control (AC) vulnerabilities are particularly critical. While existing research has proposed multiple detection tools, automatic and appropriate repair of AC vulnerabilities in smart contracts remains a challenge. Unlike commonly supported vulnerability types by existing repair tools, such as reentrancy, which are usually fixed by template-based approaches, the main obstacle of repairing AC vulnerabilities lies in identifying the appropriate roles or permissions amid a long list of non-AC-related source code to generate proper patch code, a task that demands human-level intelligence.In this paper, we employ the state-of-the-art GPT-4 model and enhance it with a novel approach called ACFIX. The key insight is that we can mine common AC practices for major categories of code functionality and use them to guide LLMs in fixing code with similar functionality. To this end, ACFIX involves offline and online phases. In the offline phase, ACFIX mines a taxonomy of common Role-based Access Control practices from 344,251 on-chain contracts, categorizing 49 role-permission pairs from the top 1,000 unique samples. In the online phase, ACFIX tracks AC-related elements across the contract and uses this context information along with a Chain-of-Thought pipeline to guide LLMs in identifying the most appropriate role-permission pair for the subject contract and subsequently generating a suitable patch. To evaluate ACFIX, we built the first benchmark dataset of 118 real-world AC vulnerabilities, and our evaluation revealed that ACFIX successfully repaired 94.92% of them, a major improvement compared to the baseline GPT-4 at only 52.54%. We also conducted a human study to understand the value of ACFIX’s repairs and their differences from human repairs.

Open-source software (OSS) vulnerabilities are increasingly prevalent, emphasizing the importance of security patches. However, in widely used security platforms like NVD, a substantial number of CVE records still lack trace links to patches. Although rank-based approaches have been proposed for security patch tracing, they heavily rely on handcrafted features in a single-step framework, which limits their effectiveness. In this paper, we propose PatchFinder, a two-phase framework with end-to-end correlation learning for better-tracing security patches. In the initial retrieval phase, we employ a hybrid patch retriever to account for both lexical and semantic matching based on the code changes and the description of a CVE, to narrow down the search space by extracting those commits as candidates that are similar to the CVE descriptions. Afterwards, in the re-ranking phase, we design an end-to-end architecture under the supervised fine-tuning paradigm for learning the semantic correlations between CVE descriptions and commits. In this way, we can automatically rank the candidates based on their correlation scores while maintaining low computation overhead. We evaluated our system against 4,789 CVEs from 532 OSS projects. The results are highly promising: PatchFinder achieves a Recall@10 of 80.63% and a Mean Reciprocal Rank (MRR) of 0.7951. Moreover, the Manual Effort@10 required is curtailed to 2.77, marking a 1.94 times improvement over current leading methods. When applying PatchFinder in practice, we initially identified 533 patch commits and submitted them to the official, 482 of which have been confirmed by CVE Numbering Authorities.

To identify security vulnerabilities in Android applications, numerous static application security testing (SAST) tools have been proposed. However, it poses significant challenges to assess their overall performance on diverse vulnerability types. The task is non-trivial and poses considerable challenges. Firstly, the absence of a unified evaluation platform for defining and describing tools’ supported vulnerability types, coupled with the lack of normalization for the intricate and varied reports generated by different tools, significantly adds to the complexity. Secondly, there is a scarcity of adequate benchmarks, particularly those derived from real-world scenarios. To address these problems, we are the first to propose a unified platform namedVulsTotal, supporting various vulnerability types, enabling comprehensive and versatile analysis across diverse SAST tools. Specifically, we begin by meticulously selecting 11 free and open-sourced SAST tools from a pool of 97 existing options, adhering to clearly defined criteria. After that, we invest significant efforts in comprehending the detection rules of each tool, subsequently unifying 67 general/common vulnerability types for Android SAST tools. We also redefine and implement a standardized reporting format, ensuring uniformity in presenting results across all tools. Additionally, to mitigate the problem of benchmarks, we conducted a manual analysis of huge amounts of CVEs to construct a new CVE-based benchmark based on our comprehension of Android app vulnerabilities. Leveraging the evaluation platform, which integrates both existing synthetic benchmarks and newly constructed CVE-based benchmarks from this study, we conducted a comprehensive analysis to evaluate and compare these selected tools from various perspectives, such as general vulnerability type coverage, type consistency, tool effectiveness, and time performance. Our observations yielded impressive findings, like the technical reasons underlying the performance, which provide insights for different stakeholders.

Quality assurance (QA) tools are receiving more and more attention and are widely used by developers. Given the wide range of solutions for QA technology, it is still a question of evaluating QA tools. Most existing research is limited in the following ways: (i) They compare tools without considering scanning rules analysis. (ii) They disagree on the effectiveness of tools due to the study methodology and benchmark dataset. (iii) They do not separately analyze the role of the warnings. (iv) There is no large-scale study on the analysis of time performance. To address these problems, in the paper, we systematically select 6 free or open-source tools for a comprehensive study from a list of 148 existing Java QA tools. To carry out a comprehensive study and evaluate tools in multi-level dimensions, we first mapped the scanning rules to the CWE and analyze the coverage and granularity of the scanning rules. Then we conducted an experiment on 5 benchmarks, including 1,425 bugs, to investigate the effectiveness of these tools. Furthermore, we took substantial effort to investigate the effectiveness of warnings by comparing the real labeled bugs with the warnings and investigating their role in bug detection. Finally, we assessed these tools’ time performance on 1,049 projects. The useful findings based on our comprehensive study can help developers improve their tools and provide users with suggestions for selecting QA tools.

Static application security testing (SAST) takes a significant role in the software development life cycle (SDLC). However, it is challenging to comprehensively evaluate the effectiveness of SAST tools to determine which is the better one for detecting vulnerabilities. In this paper, based on well-defined criteria, we first selected seven free or open-source SAST tools from 161 existing tools for further evaluation. Owing to the synthetic and newly-constructed real-world benchmarks, we evaluated and compared these SAST tools from different and comprehensive perspectives such as effectiveness, consistency, and performance. While SAST tools perform well on synthetic benchmarks, our results indicate that only 12.7% of real-world vulnerabilities can be detected by the selected tools. Even combining the detection capability of all tools, most vulnerabilities (70.9%) remain undetected, especially those beyond resource control and insufficiently neutralized input/output vulnerabilities. The fact is that although they have already built the corresponding detecting rules and integrated them into their capabilities, the detection result still did not meet the expectations. All useful findings unveiled in our comprehensive study indeed help to provide guidance on tool development, improvement, evaluation, and selection for developers, researchers, and potential users.

As the development of Solidity smart contracts has increased in popularity, the reliance on external sources such as third-party packages increases to reduce development costs. However, despite the use of external sources bringing flexibility and efficiency to the development, they could also complicate the process of assuring the security of downstream applications due to the lack of package managers for standardized ways and sources. While previous studies have only focused on code clones without considering how the external components are introduced, the compositions of a smart contract and their characteristics still remain puzzling.