Paper detail

Bridging the Gap: A Comparative Study of Academic and Developer Approaches to Smart Contract Vulnerabilities

In this paper, we investigate the strategies adopted by Solidity developers to fix security vulnerabilities in smart contracts. Vulnerabilities are categorized using the DASP TOP 10 taxonomy, and fixing strategies are extracted from GitHub commits in open-source Solidity projects. Each commit was selected through a two-phase process: an initial filter using natural language processing techniques, followed by manual validation by the authors. We analyzed these commits to evaluate adherence to academic best practices. Our results show that developers often follow established guidelines for well-known vulnerability types such as Reentrancy and Arithmetic. However, in less-documented categories like Denial of Service, Bad Randomness, and Time Manipulation, adherence is significantly lower, suggesting gaps between academic literature and practical development. From non-aligned commits, we identified 27 novel fixing strategies not previously discussed in the literature. These emerging patterns offer actionable solutions for securing smart contracts in underexplored areas. To evaluate the quality of these new fixes, we conducted a questionnaire with academic and industry experts, who assessed each strategy based on Generalizability, Long-term Sustainability, and Effectiveness. Additionally, we performed a post-fix analysis by tracking subsequent commits to the fixed files, assessing the persistence and evolution of the fixes over time. Our findings offer an empirically grounded view of how vulnerabilities are addressed in practice, bridging theoretical knowledge and real-world solutions in the domain of smart contract security.

preprint2026arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.