BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Zhengzi Xu

Zhengzi Xu contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Software Engineering

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 17 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
4works
0followers
1topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

4 published item(s)

preprint2024arXiv

ModuleGuard:Understanding and Detecting Module Conflicts in Python Ecosystem

Python has become one of the most popular programming languages for software development due to its simplicity, readability, and versatility. As the Python ecosystem grows, developers face increasing challenges in avoiding module conflicts, which occur when different packages have the same namespace modules. Unfortunately, existing work has neither investigated the module conflict comprehensively nor provided tools to detect the conflict. Therefore, this paper systematically investigates the module conflict problem and its impact on the Python ecosystem. We propose a novel technique called InstSimulator, which leverages semantics and installation simulation to achieve accurate and efficient module extraction. Based on this, we implement a tool called ModuleGuard to detect module conflicts for the Python ecosystem. For the study, we first collect 97 MC issues, classify the characteristics and causes of these MC issues, summarize three different conflict patterns, and analyze their potential threats. Then, we conducted a large-scale analysis of the whole PyPI ecosystem (4.2 million packages) and GitHub popular projects (3,711 projects) to detect each MC pattern and analyze their potential impact. We discovered that module conflicts still impact numerous TPLs and GitHub projects. This is primarily due to developers' lack of understanding of the modules within their direct dependencies, not to mention the modules of the transitive dependencies. Our work reveals Python's shortcomings in handling naming conflicts and provides a tool and guidelines for developers to detect conflicts.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2023arXiv

Compatible Remediation on Vulnerabilities from Third-Party Libraries for Java Projects

With the increasing disclosure of vulnerabilities in open-source software, software composition analysis (SCA) has been widely applied to reveal third-party libraries and the associated vulnerabilities in software projects. Beyond the revelation, SCA tools adopt various remediation strategies to fix vulnerabilities, the quality of which varies substantially. However, ineffective remediation could induce side effects, such as compilation failures, which impede acceptance by users. According to our studies, existing SCA tools could not correctly handle the concerns of users regarding the compatibility of remediated projects. To this end, we propose Compatible Remediation of Third-party libraries (CORAL) for Maven projects to fix vulnerabilities without breaking the projects. The evaluation proved that CORAL not only fixed 87.56% of vulnerabilities which outperformed other tools (best 75.32%) and achieved a 98.67% successful compilation rate and a 92.96% successful unit test rate. Furthermore, we found that 78.45% of vulnerabilities in popular Maven projects could be fixed without breaking the compilation, and the rest of the vulnerabilities (21.55%) could either be fixed by upgrades that break the compilations or even be impossible to fix by upgrading.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Has My Release Disobeyed Semantic Versioning? Static Detection Based on Semantic Differencing

To enhance the compatibility in the version control of Java Third-party Libraries (TPLs), Maven adopts Semantic Versioning (SemVer) to standardize the underlying meaning of versions, but users could still confront abnormal execution and crash after upgrades even if compilation and linkage succeed. It is caused by semantic breaking (SemB) issues, such that APIs directly used by users have identical signatures but inconsistent semantics across upgrades. To strengthen compliance with SemVer rules, developers and users should be alerted of such issues. Unfortunately, it is challenging to detect them statically, because semantic changes in the internal methods of APIs are difficult to capture. Dynamic testing can confirmingly uncover some, but it is limited by inadequate coverage. To detect SemB issues over compatible upgrades (Patch and Minor) by SemVer rules, we conduct an empirical study on 180 SemB issues to understand the root causes, inspired by which, we propose Sembid (Semantic Breaking Issue Detector) to statically detect such issues of TPLs for developers and users. Since APIs are directly used by users, Sembid detects and reports SemB issues based on APIs. For a pair of APIs, Sembid walks through the call chains originating from the API to locate breaking changes by measuring semantic diff. Then, Sembid checks if the breaking changes can affect API's output along call chains. The evaluation showed Sembid achieved 90.26% recall and 81.29% precision and outperformed other API checkers on SemB API detection. We also revealed Sembid detected over 3 times more SemB APIs with better coverage than unit tests, the commonly used solution. Furthermore, we carried out an empirical study on 1,629,589 APIs from 546 version pairs of top Java libraries and found there were 2-4 times more SemB APIs than those with signature-based issues.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Modx: Binary Level Partial Imported Third-Party Library Detection through Program Modularization and Semantic Matching

With the rapid growth of software, using third-party libraries (TPLs) has become increasingly popular. The prosperity of the library usage has provided the software engineers with handful of methods to facilitate and boost the program development. Unfortunately, it also poses great challenges as it becomes much more difficult to manage the large volume of libraries. Researches and studies have been proposed to detect and understand the TPLs in the software. However, most existing approaches rely on syntactic features, which are not robust when these features are changed or deliberately hidden by the adversarial parties. Moreover, these approaches typically model each of the imported libraries as a whole, therefore, cannot be applied to scenarios where the host software only partially uses the library code segments. To detect both fully and partially imported TPLs at the semantic level, we propose ModX, a framework that leverages novel program modularization techniques to decompose the program into finegrained functionality-based modules. By extracting both syntactic and semantic features, it measures the distance between modules to detect similar library module reuse in the program. Experimental results show that ModX outperforms other modularization tools by distinguishing more coherent program modules with 353% higher module quality scores and beats other TPL detection tools with on average 17% better in precision and 8% better in recall.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access