Paper detail

Negative Results of Fusing Code and Documentation for Learning to Accurately Identify Sensitive Source and Sink Methods An Application to the Android Framework for Data Leak Detection

Apps on mobile phones manipulate all sorts of data, including sensitive data, leading to privacy-related concerns. Recent regulations like the European GDPR provide rules for the processing of personal and sensitive data, like that no such data may be leaked without the consent of the user. Researchers have proposed sophisticated approaches to track sensitive data within mobile apps, all of which rely on specific lists of sensitive source and sink API methods. The data flow analysis results greatly depend on these lists' quality. Previous approaches either used incomplete hand-written lists that quickly became outdated or relied on machine learning. The latter, however, leads to numerous false positives, as we show. This paper introduces CoDoC, a tool that aims to revive the machine-learning approach to precisely identify privacy-related source and sink API methods. In contrast to previous approaches, CoDoC uses deep learning techniques and combines the source code with the documentation of API methods. Firstly, we propose novel definitions that clarify the concepts of sensitive source and sink methods. Secondly, based on these definitions, we build a new ground truth of Android methods representing sensitive source, sink, and neither (i.e., no source or sink) methods that will be used to train our classifier. We evaluate CoDoC and show that, on our validation dataset, it achieves a precision, recall, and F1 score of 91% in 10-fold cross-validation, outperforming the state-of-the-art SuSi when used on the same dataset. However, similarly to existing tools, we show that in the wild, i.e., with unseen data, CoDoC performs poorly and generates many false positive results. Our findings, together with time-tested results of previous approaches, suggest that machine-learning models for abstract concepts such as privacy fail in practice despite good lab results.

preprint2023arXivOpen 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.