惯性聚合 高效追踪和阅读你感兴趣的博客、新闻、科技资讯
阅读原文 在惯性聚合中打开

推荐订阅源

奇客Solidot–传递最新科技情报
奇客Solidot–传递最新科技情报
Jina AI
Jina AI
博客园 - Franky
Apple Machine Learning Research
Apple Machine Learning Research
酷 壳 – CoolShell
酷 壳 – CoolShell
阮一峰的网络日志
阮一峰的网络日志
量子位
雷峰网
雷峰网
宝玉的分享
宝玉的分享
V
Visual Studio Blog
博客园_首页
小众软件
小众软件
The Cloudflare Blog
让小产品的独立变现更简单 - ezindie.com
让小产品的独立变现更简单 - ezindie.com
大猫的无限游戏
大猫的无限游戏
博客园 - 聂微东
S
SegmentFault 最新的问题
博客园 - 【当耐特】
OSCHINA 社区最新新闻
OSCHINA 社区最新新闻
博客园 - 叶小钗
月光博客
月光博客
博客园 - 三生石上(FineUI控件)
人人都是产品经理
人人都是产品经理
WordPress大学
WordPress大学

cs.SE updates on arXiv.org

VLA Foundry: A Unified Framework for Training Vision-Language-Action Models Evaluating LLM-Generated Obfuscated XSS Payloads for Machine Learning-Based Detection Do Agents Dream of Root Shells? Partial-Credit Evaluation of LLM Agents in Capture the Flag Challenges Refute-or-Promote: An Adversarial Stage-Gated Multi-Agent Review Methodology for High-Precision LLM-Assisted Defect Discovery From Particles to Perils: SVGD-Based Hazardous Scenario Generation for Autonomous Driving Systems Testing Choose Your Own Adventure: Non-Linear AI-Assisted Programming with EvoGraph Human-Machine Co-Boosted Bug Report Identification with Mutualistic Neural Active Learning LLMSniffer: Detecting LLM-Generated Code via GraphCodeBERT and Supervised Contrastive Learning Neurosymbolic Repo-level Code Localization CodeMMR: Bridging Natural Language, Code, and Image for Unified Retrieval Symbolic Guardrails for Domain-Specific Agents: Stronger Safety and Security Guarantees Without Sacrificing Utility Verification Modulo Tested Library Contracts The Semi-Executable Stack: Agentic Software Engineering and the Expanding Scope of SE Scaling Test-Time Compute for Agentic Coding AI-Assisted Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Evaluation Relative to Expert Judgment From Procedural Skills to Strategy Genes: Towards Experience-Driven Test-Time Evolution Atropos: Improving Cost-Benefit Trade-off of LLM-based Agents under Self-Consistency with Early Termination and Model Hotswap Vibe-Coding: Feedback-Based Automated Verification with no Human Code Inspection, a Feasibility Study Benchmarks for Trajectory Safety Evaluation and Diagnosis in OpenClaw and Codex: ATBench-Claw and ATBench-Codex Bounded Autonomy for Enterprise AI: Typed Action Contracts and Consumer-Side Execution AIPC: Agent-Based Automation for AI Model Deployment with Qualcomm AI Runtime Analyzing Chain of Thought (CoT) Approaches in Control Flow Code Deobfuscation Tasks Asking What Matters: Reward-Driven Clarification for Software Engineering Tasks Prompt-Driven Code Summarization: A Systematic Literature Review LinuxArena: A Control Setting for AI Agents in Live Production Software Environments LLMs taking shortcuts in test generation: A study with SAP HANA and LevelDB Large Language Models to Enhance Business Process Modeling: Past, Present, and Future Trends CollabCoder: Plan-Code Co-Evolution via Collaborative Decision-Making for Efficient Code Generation Sentiment analysis for software engineering: How far can zero-shot learning (ZSL) go? Learning from Change: Predictive Models for Incident Prevention in a Regulated IT Environment
Inspection Guidelines to Identify Security Design Flaws
Katja Tuma, Danial Hosseini, Kyriakos Malamas, Riccardo Scandari · 2019-06-05 · via cs.SE updates on arXiv.org

Recent trends in the software development practices (Agile, DevOps, CI) have shortened the development life-cycle causing the need for efficient security-by-design approaches. In this context, software architectures are analyzed for potential vulnerabilities and design flaws. Yet, design flaws are often documented with natural language and require a manual analysis, which is inefficient. Besides low-level vulnerability databases (e.g., CWE, CAPEC) there is little systematized knowledge on security design flaws. The purpose of this work is to provide a catalog of security design flaws and to empirically evaluate the inspection guidelines for detecting security design flaws. To this aim, we present a catalog of 19 security design flaws and conduct empirical studies with master and doctoral students. This paper contributes with: (i) a catalog of security design flaws, (ii) an empirical evaluation of the inspection guidelines with master students, and (iii) a replicated evaluation with doctoral students. We also account for the shortcomings of the inspection guidelines and make suggestions for their improvement with respect to the generalization of guidelines, catalog re-organization, and format of documentation. We record similar precision, recall, and productivity in both empirical studies and discuss the potential for automating the security design flaw detection.