How Effective are Smart Contract Analysis Tools? Evaluating Smart Contract Static Analysis Tools Using Bug Injection

Security attacks targeting smart contracts have been on the rise, which have led to financial loss and erosion of trust. Therefore, it is important to enable developers to discover security vulnerabilities in smart contracts before deployment. A number of static analysis tools have been developed for finding security bugs in smart contracts. However, despite the numerous bug-finding tools, there is no systematic approach to evaluate the proposed tools and gauge their effectiveness. This paper proposes SolidiFI, an automated and systematic approach for evaluating smart contract static analysis tools. SolidiFI is based on injecting bugs (i.e., code defects) into all potential locations in a smart contract to introduce targeted security vulnerabilities. SolidiFI then checks the generated buggy contract using the static analysis tools, and identifies the bugs that the tools are unable to detect (false-negatives) along with identifying the bugs reported as false-positives. SolidiFI is used to evaluate six widely-used static analysis tools, namely, Oyente, Securify, Mythril, SmartCheck, Manticore and Slither, using a set of 50 contracts injected by 9369 distinct bugs. It finds several instances of bugs that are not detected by the evaluated tools despite their claims of being able to detect such bugs, and all the tools report many false positivesComment: ISSTA 202

A New Paradigm in Split Manufacturing: Lock the FEOL, Unlock at the BEOL

Split manufacturing was introduced as an effective countermeasure against hardware-level threats such as IP piracy, overbuilding, and insertion of hardware Trojans. Nevertheless, the security promise of split manufacturing has been challenged by various attacks, which exploit the well-known working principles of physical design tools to infer the missing BEOL interconnects. In this work, we advocate a new paradigm to enhance the security for split manufacturing. Based on Kerckhoff's principle, we protect the FEOL layout in a formal and secure manner, by embedding keys. These keys are purposefully implemented and routed through the BEOL in such a way that they become indecipherable to the state-of-the-art FEOL-centric attacks. We provide our secure physical design flow to the community. We also define the security of split manufacturing formally and provide the associated proofs. At the same time, our technique is competitive with current schemes in terms of layout overhead, especially for practical, large-scale designs (ITC'99 benchmarks).Comment: DATE 2019 (https://www.date-conference.com/conference/session/4.5

IntRepair: Informed Repairing of Integer Overflows

Integer overflows have threatened software applications for decades. Thus, in this paper, we propose a novel technique to provide automatic repairs of integer overflows in C source code. Our technique, based on static symbolic execution, fuses detection, repair generation and validation. This technique is implemented in a prototype named IntRepair. We applied IntRepair to 2,052C programs (approx. 1 million lines of code) contained in SAMATE's Juliet test suite and 50 synthesized programs that range up to 20KLOC. Our experimental results show that IntRepair is able to effectively detect integer overflows and successfully repair them, while only increasing the source code (LOC) and binary (Kb) size by around 1%, respectively. Further, we present the results of a user study with 30 participants which shows that IntRepair repairs are more than 10x efficient as compared to manually generated code repairsComment: Accepted for publication at the IEEE TSE journal. arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:1710.0372