Manual vs. Automated Vulnerability Assessment: A Case Study
James A. Kupsch, Barton P. Miller · 2009
Abstract. The dream of every software development team is to assess the security of their software using only a tool. In this paper, we attempt to evaluate and quantify the effectiveness of automated source code anal-ysis tools by comparing such tools to the results of an in-depth manual evaluation of the same system. We present our manual vulnerability as-sessment methodology, and the results of applying this to a major piece of software. We then analyze the same software using two commercial products, Coverity Prevent and Fortify SCA, that perform static source code analysis. These tools found only a few of the fifteen serious vulner-abilities discovered in the manual assessment, with none of the problems found by these tools requiring a deep understanding of the code. Each tool reported thousands of defects that required human inspection, with only a small number being security related. And, of this small number of security-related defects, there did not appear to be any that indicated significant vulnerabilities beyond those found by the manual assessment. 1