Search

The rapid advancement of deep learning has led to the development of Large Language Models (LLMs). In the field of vulnerability repair, previous research has leveraged rule-based fixing, pre-trained models, and LLM's prompt engineering. However, existing approaches have limitations in terms of the integration of code structure with error types. Besides, due to certain features of C/C++ language, vulnerability repair in C/C++ proves to be exceptionally challenging. To address these challenges, we propose NAVRepair, a novel framework that combines the node-type information extracted from Abstract Syntax Trees (ASTs) with error types, specifically targeting C/C++ vulnerabilities. Specifically, our approach employs type analysis to localize the minimum edit node (MEN) and customizes context information collection based on different error types. In the offline stage, NAVRepair parses code patches to locate MENs and designs rules to extract relevant contextual information for each MEN type. In the online repairing stage, it analyzes the suspicious code, combines it with vulnerability type templates derived from the Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE), and generates targeted repair prompts. We evaluate NAVRepair on multiple popular LLMs and demonstrate its effectiveness in improving the performance of code vulnerability repair. Notably, our framework is independent of any specific LLMs and can quickly adapt to new vulnerability types. Extensive experiments validate that NAVRepair achieves excellent results in assisting LLMs to accurately detect and fix C/C++ vulnerabilities. We achieve a 26% higher accuracy compared to an existing LLM-based C/C++ vulnerability repair method. We believe our node type-aware approach has promising application prospects for enhancing real-world C/C++ code security.

Python is widely used in the open-source community, largely owing to the extensive support from diverse third-party libraries within the PyPI ecosystem. Nevertheless, the utilization of third-party libraries can potentially lead to conflicts in dependencies, prompting researchers to develop dependency conflict detectors. Moreover, endeavors have been made to automatically infer dependencies. These approaches focus on version-level checks and inference, based on the assumption that configurations of libraries in the PyPI ecosystem are correct. However, our study reveals that this assumption is not universally valid, and relying solely on version-level checks proves inadequate in ensuring compatible run-time environments. In this paper, we conduct an empirical study to comprehensively study the configuration issues in the PyPI ecosystem. Specifically, we propose PyConf, a source-level detector, for detecting potential configuration issues. PyConf employs three distinct checks, targeting the setup, packing, and usage stages of libraries, respectively. To evaluate the effectiveness of the current automatic dependency inference approaches, we build a benchmark called VLibs, comprising library releases that pass all three checks of PyConf. We identify 15 kinds of configuration issues and find that 183,864 library releases suffer from potential configuration issues. Remarkably, 68% of these issues can only be detected via the source-level check. Our experiment results show that the most advanced automatic dependency inference approach, PyEGo, can successfully infer dependencies for only 65% of library releases. The primary failures stem from dependency conflicts and the absence of required libraries in the generated configurations. Based on the empirical results, we derive six findings and draw two implications for open-source developers and future research in automatic dependency inference., Comment: This paper has been accepted by ICSE 2024