Paper detail

Checking Smart Contracts with Structural Code Embedding

Smart contracts have been increasingly used together with blockchains to automate financial and business transactions. However, many bugs and vulnerabilities have been identified in many contracts which raises serious concerns about smart contract security, not to mention that the blockchain systems on which the smart contracts are built can be buggy. Thus, there is a significant need to better maintain smart contract code and ensure its high reliability. In this paper, we propose an automated approach to learn characteristics of smart contracts in Solidity, which is useful for clone detection, bug detection and contract validation on smart contracts. Our new approach is based on word embeddings and vector space comparison. We parse smart contract code into word streams with code structural information, convert code elements (e.g., statements, functions) into numerical vectors that are supposed to encode the code syntax and semantics, and compare the similarities among the vectors encoding code and known bugs, to identify potential issues. We have implemented the approach in a prototype, named SmartEmbed. Results show that our tool can effectively identify many repetitive instances of Solidity code, where the clone ratio is around 90\%. Code clones such as type-III or even type-IV semantic clones can also be detected accurately. Our tool can identify more than 1000 clone related bugs based on our bug databases efficiently and accurately. Our tool can also help to efficiently validate any given smart contract against a known set of bugs, which can help to improve the users' confidence in the reliability of the contract. The anonymous replication packages can be accessed at: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1kauLT3y2IiHPkUlVx4FSTda-dVAyL4za/view?usp=sharing, and evaluated it with more than 22,000 smart contracts collected from the Ethereum blockchain.

preprint2020arXivOpen 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.