Program analysis tools often produce large volumes of candidate vulnerability reports that require costly manual review, creating a practical challenge: how can security analysts prioritize the reports most likely to be true vulnerabilities? This paper investigates whether machine learning can be applied to prioritizing vulnerabilities reported by program analysis tools. We focus on Node$.$js packages and collect a benchmark of 1,883 Node$.$js packages, each containing one reported ACE or ACI vulnerability. We evaluate a variety of machine learning approaches, including classical models, graph neural networks (GNNs), large language models (LLMs), and hybrid models that combine GNNs and LLMs, trained on data derived from program analysis tool outputs (NodeMedic-FINE in our case study). The top LLM achieves $F_{1}{=}0.915$, while the best provenance-graph-based method achieves $F_{1}{=}0.904$. On the reports that the upstream tool flags but cannot automatically confirm, at a target of recovering 90% of the exploitable reports, the leading model eliminates 75% of the benign reports from manual review. If the best model is tuned to operate at a precision level of 0.8 (i.e., allowing 20% false positives among all warnings), our approach can report 99.2% of exploitable taint flows while missing only 0.8%, demonstrating strong potential for real-world vulnerability triage.

翻译：暂无翻译