Proceedings of the Institute for System Programming of the RAS
RUS  ENG    JOURNALS   PEOPLE   ORGANISATIONS   CONFERENCES   SEMINARS   VIDEO LIBRARY   PACKAGE AMSBIB  
General information
Latest issue
Archive

Search papers
Search references

RSS
Latest issue
Current issues
Archive issues
What is RSS



Proceedings of ISP RAS:
Year:
Volume:
Issue:
Page:
Find






Personal entry:
Login:
Password:
Save password
Enter
Forgotten password?
Register


Proceedings of the Institute for System Programming of the RAS, 2017, Volume 29, Issue 3, Pages 99–116
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15514/ISPRAS-2017-29(3)-7
(Mi tisp224)
 

This article is cited in 2 scientific papers (total in 2 papers)

Comparative analysis of two approaches to the static taint analysis

M. V. Belyaeva, N. V. Shimchika, V. N. Ignatyeva, A. A. Belevancevba

a Institute for System Programming of the Russian Academy of Sciences
b Lomonosov Moscow State University
Full-text PDF (669 kB) Citations (2)
References:
Abstract: Currently, one of the most efficient ways to find software security problems is taint analysis. It can be based on static analysis and successfully detect errors that lead to vulnerabilities, such as code injection or leaks of private information. Several different ways exist for the implementation of the algorithm for the taint data propagation through the program intermediate representation: based on the dataflow analysis (IFDS) or symbolic execution. In this paper, we describe how to implement both approaches within the existing static analyzer infrastructure to find errors in C# programs, and compare these approaches in different aspects: the scope of application, practical completeness, results quality, performance and scalability. Since both approaches use a common infrastructure for accessing information about the program and are implemented by a single development team, the results of the comparison are significant and can be used to select the best option in the context of the task. Our experiments show that it’s possible to achieve the same completeness regardless of chosen approach. IFDS-based implementation has higher performance comparing with symbolic execution for detectors with small amount of taint data sources. In the case of multiple detectors and a large amount of sources the scalability of IFDS approach is worse than the scalability of symbolic execution.
Keywords: taint analysis, static analysis, IFDS, symbolic execution.
Bibliographic databases:
Document Type: Article
Language: Russian
Citation: M. V. Belyaev, N. V. Shimchik, V. N. Ignatyev, A. A. Belevancev, “Comparative analysis of two approaches to the static taint analysis”, Proceedings of ISP RAS, 29:3 (2017), 99–116
Citation in format AMSBIB
\Bibitem{BelShiIgn17}
\by M.~V.~Belyaev, N.~V.~Shimchik, V.~N.~Ignatyev, A.~A.~Belevancev
\paper Comparative analysis of two approaches to the static taint analysis
\jour Proceedings of ISP RAS
\yr 2017
\vol 29
\issue 3
\pages 99--116
\mathnet{http://mi.mathnet.ru/tisp224}
\crossref{https://doi.org/10.15514/ISPRAS-2017-29(3)-7}
\elib{https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=29438842}
Linking options:
  • https://www.mathnet.ru/eng/tisp224
  • https://www.mathnet.ru/eng/tisp/v29/i3/p99
  • This publication is cited in the following 2 articles:
    Citing articles in Google Scholar: Russian citations, English citations
    Related articles in Google Scholar: Russian articles, English articles
    Proceedings of the Institute for System Programming of the RAS
    Statistics & downloads:
    Abstract page:190
    Full-text PDF :131
    References:29
     
      Contact us:
     Terms of Use  Registration to the website  Logotypes © Steklov Mathematical Institute RAS, 2024