AI-powered coding assistant tools (e.g., ChatGPT, Copilot, and IntelliCode) have revolutionized the software engineering ecosystem. However, prior work has demonstrated that these tools are vulnerable to poisoning attacks. In a poisoning attack, an attacker intentionally injects maliciously crafted insecure code snippets into training datasets to manipulate these tools. The poisoned tools can suggest insecure code to developers, resulting in vulnerabilities in their products that attackers can exploit. However, it is still little understood whether such poisoning attacks against the tools would be practical in real-world settings and how developers address the poisoning attacks during software development. To understand the real-world impact of poisoning attacks on developers who rely on AI-powered coding assistants, we conducted two user studies: an online survey and an in-lab study. The online survey involved 238 participants, including software developers and computer science students. The survey results revealed widespread adoption of these tools among participants, primarily to enhance coding speed, eliminate repetition, and gain boilerplate code. However, the survey also found that developers may misplace trust in these tools because they overlooked the risk of poisoning attacks. The in-lab study was conducted with 30 professional developers. The developers were asked to complete three programming tasks with a representative type of AI-powered coding assistant tool (e.g., ChatGPT or IntelliCode), running on Visual Studio Code. The in-lab study results showed that developers using a poisoned ChatGPT-like tool were more prone to including insecure code than those using an IntelliCode-like tool or no tool. This demonstrates the strong influence of these tools on the security of generated code. Our study results highlight the need for education and improved coding practices to address new security issues introduced by AI-powered coding assistant tools.

Training deep neural networks (DNNs) requires large datasets and powerful computing resources, which has led some owners to restrict redistribution without permission. Watermarking techniques that embed confidential data into DNNs have been used to protect ownership, but these can degrade model performance and are vulnerable to watermark removal attacks. Recently, DeepJudge was introduced as an alternative approach to measuring the similarity between a suspect and a victim model. While DeepJudge shows promise in addressing the shortcomings of watermarking, it primarily addresses situations where the suspect model copies the victim’s architecture. In this study, we introduce DeepTaster, a novel DNN fingerprinting technique, to address scenarios where a victim’s data is unlawfully used to build a suspect model. DeepTaster can effectively identify such DNN model theft attacks, even when the suspect model’s architecture deviates from the victim’s. To accomplish this, DeepTaster generates adversarial images with perturbations, transforms them into the Fourier frequency domain, and uses these transformed images to identify the dataset used in a suspect model. The underlying premise is that adversarial images can capture the unique characteristics of DNNs built with a specific dataset. To demonstrate the effectiveness of DeepTaster, we evaluated the effectiveness of DeepTaster by assessing its detection accuracy on three datasets (CIFAR10, MNIST, and Tiny-ImageNet) across three model architectures (ResNet18, VGG16, and DenseNet161). We conducted experiments under various attack scenarios, including transfer learning, pruning, fine-tuning, and data augmentation. Specifically, in the Multi-Architecture Attack scenario, DeepTaster was able to identify all the stolen cases across all datasets, while DeepJudge failed to detect any of the cases.

This paper explores the usability of Docker Image Vulnerability Scanners (DIVSes) through heuristic evaluations. Docker simplifies the process of software development, distribution, deployment, and execution by providing a container-based execution environment. However, vulnerabilities in Docker images can pose security risks to containers. To mitigate this, DIVSes are crucial in helping developers identify and address these vulnerabilities in the software packages and libraries within Docker images. Despite their importance, research on the usability of DIVSes has been limited. To address this gap, we developed 11 customized heuristics and applied them to three widely-used DIVSes (Grype, Trivy, and Snyk). Our evaluations revealed 239 usability issues within the tools evaluated. Our findings highlight that the evaluated DIVSes do not provide sufficient information to comprehend the risks associated with identified vulnerabilities, prioritize them, or effectively fix them. Our study offers valuable insights and practical recommendations for enhancing the usability of DIVSes, making it easier for developers to identify and address vulnerabilities in Docker images.