IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/abq/ijist1/v4y2022i2p499-511.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analysis of Code Vulnerabilities in Repositories of GitHub and Rosettacode: A comparative Study

Author

Listed:
  • Abdul Malik, Muhammad Shumail Naveed

    (Department of Computer Science & Information Technology, University of Balochistan, Quetta, Pakistan. Department of Computer Science, Government Postgraduate Science College Quetta, Pakistan)

Abstract

Open-source code hosted online at programming portals is present in 99% of commercial software and is common practice among developers for rapid prototyping and cost-effective development. However, research reports the presence of vulnerabilities, which result in catastrophic security compromise, and the individual, organization, and even national secrecy are all victims of this circumstance. One of the frustrating aspects of vulnerabilities is that vulnerabilities manifest themselves in hidden ways that software developers are unaware of. One of the most critical tasks in ensuring software security is vulnerability detection, which jeopardizes core security concepts like integrity, authenticity, and availability. This study aims to explore security-related vulnerabilities in programming languages such as C, C++, and Java and present the disparities between them hosted at popular code repositories. To attain this purpose, 708 programs were examined by severity-based guidelines. A total of 1371 vulnerable codes were identified, of which 327 in C, 51 in C++, and 993 in Java. Statistical analysis also indicated a substantial difference between them, as there is ample evidence that the Kruskal-Wallis H-test p-value (.000) is below the 0.05 significance level. The Mann-Whitney Test mean rank for GitHub (Mean-rank=676.05) and Rosettacode (Mean-rank=608.64) are also different. The novelty of this article is to identify security vulnerabilities and grasp the nature severity of vulnerability in popular code repositories. This study eventually manifests a guideline for choosing a secure programming language as a successful testing technique that targets vulnerabilities more liable to breaching security.

Suggested Citation

  • Abdul Malik, Muhammad Shumail Naveed, 2022. "Analysis of Code Vulnerabilities in Repositories of GitHub and Rosettacode: A comparative Study," International Journal of Innovations in Science & Technology, 50sea, vol. 4(2), pages 499-511, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:abq:ijist1:v:4:y:2022:i:2:p:499-511
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journal.50sea.com/index.php/IJIST/article/view/289/642
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journal.50sea.com/index.php/IJIST/article/view/289
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:abq:ijist1:v:4:y:2022:i:2:p:499-511. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Iqra Nazeer (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.