arXiv subjects

Ezekiel Soremekun

Publications and source records attributed to Ezekiel Soremekun.

18 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

AKRASIA: Stealthy Backdoor Attack on Reasoning-based Code LLMs

We present AKRASIA, a stealthy, inference-time backdoor attack against reasoning-based Code LLMs. AKRASIA aims to achieve a backdoor target (e.g., malicious code execution) in reasoning LLMs while evading automated defenses and human inspection. To achieve this, AKRASIA probes the victim LLM to construct a code-level backdoor trigger. It then employs in-context learning for backdoor learning, and model unfaithfulness to conceal the backdoor trigger, and generate plausible reasoning. We evaluate AKRASIA using four backdoor targets six (6) reasoning LLMs, three coding tasks/datasets and three defense methods. AKRASIA has up to 99.34% average attack success rate on SOTA LLMs and mantains up to 97.23% average accuracy. AKRASIA evades the SOTA defense, retaining up to 98.82% average ASR in most (14/18) defense settings. It evades human inspection, successfully hiding the backdoor trigger and reasoning steps in up to 80% of settings. Our findings motivate the need to defend LLMs against reasoning backdoors.

cs.CR↗

arXiv2026

MUCOCO: Automated Consistency Testing of Code LLMs

Code LLMs often portray inconsistent program behaviors. Developers typically employ benchmarks to assess Code LLMs, but most benchmarks are hand-crafted, static and do not target consistency property. In this work, we pose the scientific question: how can we automatically discover inconsistent program behaviors in Code LLMs? To address this challenge, we propose an automated consistency testing method, called MUCOCO, which employs semantic-preserving mutation analysis to expose inconsistent behaviors in code LLMs. Given a coding query, MUCOCO automatically transforms its program into semantically equivalent programs (aka mutants) and detects inconsistencies between the mutants and the original program (e.g., different output or test failure). We evaluate MUCOCO using four (4) coding tasks and seven (7) LLMs. Results show that MUCOCO is effective in exposing inconsistency and outperforms the closest baseline (TURBULENCE). About one in seven (15%) inputs generated by MUCOCO exposed inconsistencies. Our work motivates the need to test Code LLMs for consistency property

cs.SE↗

arXiv2026

ShadowPickle: Evading Machine Learning Model Scanners via Stealthy Pickle Deserialization Attacks

Model hosting hubs (e.g., Hugging Face) are vulnerable to supply chain attacks that enable remote code execution on trusted user environments. Attackers often distribute malicious Pre-trained ML models (PTMs) via model hubs. In this paper, we present novel attacks against PTMs and model hubs called SHADOWPICKLE. SHADOWPICKLE includes three (3) stealthy pickle deserialization attacks that enable malicious behaviors and evade state-of-the-art (SOTA) model scanners. These attacks leverage the external module import mechanism of the Pickle Virtual Machine (VM) to execute malicious payloads during deserialization. Additionally, we provide PICKLEBENCH, a dynamic and extensible benchmark for automatically injecting SHADOWPICKLE into arbitrary benign PTM models. Our evaluation shows that SHADOWPICKLE evades ten SOTA scanners, and four model hubs. SHADOWPICKLE (Overwritten) has a 63% evasion rate across scanners, and up to 50% higher evasion rates than existing attacks. Besides, PICKLEBENCH is up to 25.6% more challenging than three SOTA benchmarks. Finally, we provide security recommendations for mitigating our attacks and improving the effectiveness of existing scanners. Our findings highlight the limitations of existing PTM scanners and suggest directions for improvements.

cs.CR↗

arXiv2026

Malicious ML Model Detection by Learning Dynamic Behaviors

Pre-trained machine learning models (PTMs) are commonly provided via Model Hubs (e.g., Hugging Face) in standard formats like Pickles to facilitate accessibility and reuse. However, this ML supply chain setting is susceptible to malicious attacks that are capable of executing arbitrary code on trusted user environments, e.g., during model loading. To detect malicious PTMs, state-of-the-art detectors (e.g., PickleScan) rely on rules, heuristics, or static analysis, but ignore runtime model behaviors. Consequently, they either miss malicious models due to under-approximation (blacklisting) or miscategorize benign models due to over-approximation (static analysis or whitelisting). To address this challenge, we propose a novel technique (DynaHug) which detects malicious PTMs by learning the behavior of benign PTMs using dynamic analysis and machine learning (ML). DynaHug trains an ML classifier (one-class SVM (OCSVM)) on the runtime behaviours of task-specific benign models. We evaluate DynaHug using over 25,000 benign and malicious PTMs from different sources including Hugging Face and MalHug. We also compare DynaHug to several state-of-the-art detectors including static, dynamic and LLM-based detectors. Results show that DynaHug is up to 44% more effective than existing baselines in terms of F1-score. Our ablation study demonstrates that our design decisions (dynamic analysis, OCSVM, clustering) contribute positively to DynaHug's effectiveness.

cs.CR↗

arXiv2025

Knowledge-based Consistency Testing of Large Language Models

In this work, we systematically expose and measure the inconsistency and knowledge gaps of Large Language Models (LLMs). Specifically, we propose an automated testing framework (called KonTest) which leverages a knowledge graph to construct test cases. KonTest probes and measures the inconsistencies in the LLM's knowledge of the world via a combination of semantically-equivalent queries and test oracles (metamorphic or ontological oracle). KonTest further mitigates knowledge gaps via a weighted LLM model ensemble. Using four state-of-the-art LLMs (Falcon, Gemini, GPT3.5, and Llama2), we show that KonTest generates 19.2% error inducing inputs (1917 errors from 9979 test inputs). It also reveals a 16.5% knowledge gap across all tested LLMs. A mitigation method informed by KonTest's test suite reduces LLM knowledge gap by 32.48%. Our ablation study further shows that GPT3.5 is not suitable for knowledge-based consistency testing because it is only 60%-68% effective in knowledge construction.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

Directed Grammar-Based Test Generation

To effectively test complex software, it is important to generate goal-specific inputs, i.e., inputs that achieve a specific testing goal. However, most state-of-the-art test generators are not designed to target specific goals. Notably, grammar-based test generators, which (randomly) produce syntactically valid inputs via an input specification (i.e., grammar) have a low probability of achieving an arbitrary testing goal. This work addresses this challenge by proposing an automated test generation approach (called FdLoop) which iteratively learns relevant input properties from existing inputs to drive the generation of goal-specific inputs. Given a testing goal, FdLoop iteratively selects, evolves and learn the input distribution of goal-specific test inputs via test feedback and a probabilistic grammar. We concretize FdLoop for four testing goals, namely unique code coverage, input-to-code complexity, program failures (exceptions) and long execution time. We evaluate FdLoop using three (3) well-known input formats (JSON, CSS and JavaScript) and 20 open-source software. In most (86%) settings, FdLoop outperforms all five tested baselines namely the baseline grammar-based test generators (random, probabilistic and inverse-probabilistic methods), EvoGFuzz and DynaMosa. FdLoop is (up to) twice (2X) as effective as the best baseline (EvoGFuzz) in inducing erroneous behaviors. In addition, we show that the main components of FdLoop (i.e., input mutator, grammar mutator and test feedbacks) contribute positively to its effectiveness. Finally, our evaluation demonstrates that FdLoop effectively achieves single testing goals (revealing erroneous behaviors, generating complex inputs, or inducing long execution time) and scales to multiple testing goals across varying parameter settings.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2025

HInter: Exposing Hidden Intersectional Bias in Large Language Models

Large Language Models (LLMs) may portray discrimination towards certain individuals, especially those characterized by multiple attributes (aka intersectional bias). Discovering intersectional bias in LLMs is challenging, as it involves complex inputs on multiple attributes (e.g. race and gender). To address this challenge, we propose HInter, a test technique that synergistically combines mutation analysis, dependency parsing and metamorphic oracles to automatically detect intersectional bias in LLMs. HInter generates test inputs by systematically mutating sentences using multiple mutations, validates inputs via a dependency invariant and detects biases by checking the LLM response on the original and mutated sentences. We evaluate HInter using six LLM architectures and 18 LLM models (GPT3.5, Llama2, BERT, etc) and find that 14.61% of the inputs generated by HInter expose intersectional bias. Results also show that our dependency invariant reduces false positives (incorrect test inputs) by an order of magnitude. Finally, we observed that 16.62% of intersectional bias errors are hidden, meaning that their corresponding atomic cases do not trigger biases. Overall, this work emphasize the importance of testing LLMs for intersectional bias.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

End-user Comprehension of Transfer Risks in Smart Contracts

Smart contracts are increasingly used in critical use cases (e.g., financial transactions). Thus, it is pertinent to ensure that end-users understand the transfer risks in smart contracts. To address this, we investigate end-user comprehension of risks in the most popular Ethereum smart contract (i.e., USD Tether (USDT)) and their prevalence in the top ERC-20 smart contracts. We focus on five transfer risks with severe impact on transfer outcomes and user objectives, including users being blacklisted, contract being paused, and contract being arbitrarily upgraded. Firstly, we conducted a user study investigating end-user comprehension of smart contract transfer risks with 110 participants and USDT/MetaMask. Secondly, we performed manual and automated source code analysis of the next top (78) ERC-20 smart contracts (after USDT) to identify the prevalence of these risks. Results show that end-users do not comprehend real risks: most (up to 71.8% of) users believe contract upgrade and blacklisting are highly severe/surprising. More importantly, twice as many users find it easier to discover successful outcomes than risky outcomes using the USDT/MetaMask UI flow. These results hold regardless of the self-rated programming and Web3 proficiency of participants. Furthermore, our source code analysis demonstrates that the examined risks are prevalent in up to 19.2% of the top ERC-20 contracts. Additionally, we discovered (three) other risks with up to 25.6% prevalence in these contracts. This study informs the need to provide explainable smart contracts, understandable UI and relevant information for risky outcomes.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2025

Latent Mutants: A large-scale study on the Interplay between mutation testing and software evolution

In this paper we apply mutation testing in an in-time fashion, i.e., across multiple project releases. Thus, we investigate how the mutants of the current version behave in the future versions of the programs. We study the characteristics of what we call latent mutants, i.e., the mutants that are live in one version and killed in later revisions, and explore whether they are predictable with these properties. We examine 131,308 mutants generated by Pitest on 13 open-source projects. Around 11.2% of these mutants are live, and 3.5% of them are latent, manifesting in 104 days on average. Using the mutation operators and change-related features we successfully demonstrate that these latent mutants are identifiable, predicting them with an accuracy of 86% and a balanced accuracy of 67% using a simple random forest classifier.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2024

Distribution-aware Fairness Test Generation

Ensuring that all classes of objects are detected with equal accuracy is essential in AI systems. For instance, being unable to identify any one class of objects could have fatal consequences in autonomous driving systems. Hence, ensuring the reliability of image recognition systems is crucial. This work addresses how to validate group fairness in image recognition software. We propose a distribution-aware fairness testing approach (called DistroFair) that systematically exposes class-level fairness violations in image classifiers via a synergistic combination of out-of-distribution (OOD) testing and semantic-preserving image mutation. DistroFair automatically learns the distribution (e.g., number/orientation) of objects in a set of images. Then it systematically mutates objects in the images to become OOD using three semantic-preserving image mutations - object deletion, object insertion and object rotation. We evaluate DistroFair using two well-known datasets (CityScapes and MS-COCO) and three major, commercial image recognition software (namely, Amazon Rekognition, Google Cloud Vision and Azure Computer Vision). Results show that about 21% of images generated by DistroFair reveal class-level fairness violations using either ground truth or metamorphic oracles. DistroFair is up to 2.3x more effective than two main baselines, i.e., (a) an approach which focuses on generating images only within the distribution (ID) and (b) fairness analysis using only the original image dataset. We further observed that DistroFair is efficient, it generates 460 images per hour, on average. Finally, we evaluate the semantic validity of our approach via a user study with 81 participants, using 30 real images and 30 corresponding mutated images generated by DistroFair. We found that images generated by DistroFair are 80% as realistic as real-world images.

cs.CV↗

arXiv2023

Towards Backdoor Attacks and Defense in Robust Machine Learning Models

The introduction of robust optimisation has pushed the state-of-the-art in defending against adversarial attacks. Notably, the state-of-the-art projected gradient descent (PGD)-based training method has been shown to be universally and reliably effective in defending against adversarial inputs. This robustness approach uses PGD as a reliable and universal "first-order adversary". However, the behaviour of such optimisation has not been studied in the light of a fundamentally different class of attacks called backdoors. In this paper, we study how to inject and defend against backdoor attacks for robust models trained using PGD-based robust optimisation. We demonstrate that these models are susceptible to backdoor attacks. Subsequently, we observe that backdoors are reflected in the feature representation of such models. Then, this observation is leveraged to detect such backdoor-infected models via a detection technique called AEGIS. Specifically, given a robust Deep Neural Network (DNN) that is trained using PGD-based first-order adversarial training approach, AEGIS uses feature clustering to effectively detect whether such DNNs are backdoor-infected or clean. In our evaluation of several visible and hidden backdoor triggers on major classification tasks using CIFAR-10, MNIST and FMNIST datasets, AEGIS effectively detects PGD-trained robust DNNs infected with backdoors. AEGIS detects such backdoor-infected models with 91.6% accuracy (11 out of 12 tested models), without any false positives. Furthermore, AEGIS detects the targeted class in the backdoor-infected model with a reasonably low (11.1%) false positive rate. Our investigation reveals that salient features of adversarially robust DNNs could be promising to break the stealthy nature of backdoor attacks.

cs.CV↗

arXiv2022

Input Repair via Synthesis and Lightweight Error Feedback

Often times, input data may ostensibly conform to a given input format, but cannot be parsed by a conforming program, for instance, due to human error or data corruption. In such cases, a data engineer is tasked with input repair, i.e., she has to manually repair the corrupt data such that it follows a given format, and hence can be processed by the conforming program. Such manual repair can be time-consuming and error-prone. In particular, input repair is challenging without an input specification (e.g., input grammar) or program analysis. In this work, we show that incorporating lightweight failure feedback (e.g., input incompleteness) to parsers is sufficient to repair any corrupt input data with maximal closeness to the semantics of the input data. We propose an approach (called FSYNTH) that leverages lightweight error-feedback and input synthesis to repair invalid inputs. FSYNTH is grammar-agnostic, and it does not require program analysis. Given a conforming program, and any invalid input, FSYNTH provides a set of repairs prioritized by the distance of the repair from the original input. We evaluate FSYNTH on 806 (real-world) invalid inputs using four well-known input formats, namely INI, TinyC, SExp, and cJSON. In our evaluation, we found that FSYNTH recovers 91% of valid input data. FSYNTH is also highly effective and efficient in input repair: It repairs 77% of invalid inputs within four minutes. It is up to 35% more effective than DDMax, the previously best-known approach. Overall, our approach addresses several limitations of DDMax, both in terms of what it can repair, as well as in terms of the set of repairs offered.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2022

Software Fairness: An Analysis and Survey

In the last decade, researchers have studied fairness as a software property. In particular, how to engineer fair software systems? This includes specifying, designing, and validating fairness properties. However, the landscape of works addressing bias as a software engineering concern is unclear, i.e., techniques and studies that analyze the fairness properties of learning-based software. In this work, we provide a clear view of the state-of-the-art in software fairness analysis. To this end, we collect, categorize and conduct an in-depth analysis of 164 publications investigating the fairness of learning-based software systems. Specifically, we study the evaluated fairness measure, the studied tasks, the type of fairness analysis, the main idea of the proposed approaches, and the access level (e.g., black, white, or grey box). Our findings include the following: (1) Fairness concerns (such as fairness specification and requirements engineering) are under-studied; (2) Fairness measures such as conditional, sequential, and intersectional fairness are under-explored; (3) Unstructured datasets (e.g., audio, image, and text) are barely studied for fairness analysis; and (4) Software fairness analysis techniques hardly employ white-box, in-processing machine learning (ML) analysis methods. In summary, we observed several open challenges including the need to study intersectional/sequential bias, policy-based bias handling, and human-in-the-loop, socio-technical bias mitigation.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2022

GraphCode2Vec: Generic Code Embedding via Lexical and Program Dependence Analyses

Code embedding is a keystone in the application of machine learning on several Software Engineering (SE) tasks. To effectively support a plethora of SE tasks, the embedding needs to capture program syntax and semantics in a way that is generic. To this end, we propose the first self-supervised pre-training approach (called GraphCode2Vec) which produces task-agnostic embedding of lexical and program dependence features. GraphCode2Vec achieves this via a synergistic combination of code analysis and Graph Neural Networks. GraphCode2Vec is generic, it allows pre-training, and it is applicable to several SE downstream tasks. We evaluate the effectiveness of GraphCode2Vec on four (4) tasks (method name prediction, solution classification, mutation testing and overfitted patch classification), and compare it with four (4) similarly generic code embedding baselines (Code2Seq, Code2Vec, CodeBERT, GraphCodeBERT) and 7 task-specific, learning-based methods. In particular, GraphCode2Vec is more effective than both generic and task-specific learning-based baselines. It is also complementary and comparable to GraphCodeBERT (a larger and more complex model). We also demonstrate through a probing and ablation study that GraphCode2Vec learns lexical and program dependence features and that self-supervised pre-training improves effectiveness.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2022

Astraea: Grammar-based Fairness Testing

Software often produces biased outputs. In particular, machine learning (ML) based software are known to produce erroneous predictions when processing discriminatory inputs. Such unfair program behavior can be caused by societal bias. In the last few years, Amazon, Microsoft and Google have provided software services that produce unfair outputs, mostly due to societal bias (e.g. gender or race). In such events, developers are saddled with the task of conducting fairness testing. Fairness testing is challenging; developers are tasked with generating discriminatory inputs that reveal and explain biases. We propose a grammar-based fairness testing approach (called ASTRAEA) which leverages context-free grammars to generate discriminatory inputs that reveal fairness violations in software systems. Using probabilistic grammars, ASTRAEA also provides fault diagnosis by isolating the cause of observed software bias. ASTRAEA's diagnoses facilitate the improvement of ML fairness. ASTRAEA was evaluated on 18 software systems that provide three major natural language processing (NLP) services. In our evaluation, ASTRAEA generated fairness violations with a rate of ~18%. ASTRAEA generated over 573K discriminatory test cases and found over 102K fairness violations. Furthermore, ASTRAEA improves software fairness by ~76%, via model-retraining.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2021

Mutation Testing in Evolving Systems: Studying the relevance of mutants to code evolution

When software evolves, opportunities for introducing faults appear. Therefore, it is important to test the evolved program behaviors during each evolution cycle. We conduct an exploratory study to investigate the properties of commit-relevant mutants, i.e., the test elements of commit-aware mutation testing, by offering a general definition and an experimental approach to identify them. We thus, aim at investigating the prevalence, location, comparative advantages of commit-aware mutation testing over time (i.e., the program evolution) and the predictive power of several commit-related features to understand the essential properties for its best-effort application case. Our approach utilizes the impact of mutants and the effects of one mutant on another in capturing and analyzing the implicit interactions between the changed and unchanged code parts. The study analyses millions of mutants (over 10 million), 288 commits, five (5) different open-source software projects involving over 68,213 CPU days of computation and sets a ground truth where we perform our analysis. Our analysis shows that commit-relevant mutants are located mainly outside of program commit change (81%), while an effective selection of commit-relevant mutants can reduce the number of mutants by up to 93%. In addition, we demonstrate that commit relevant mutation testing is significantly more effective and efficient than state-of-the-art baselines. Our analysis of the predictive power of mutants and commit-related features in predicting commit-relevant mutants found that most proxy features do not reliably predict commit-relevant mutants. This empirical study highlights the properties of commit-relevant mutants and demonstrates the importance of identifying and selecting commit-relevant mutants when testing evolving software systems.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2021

Locating Faults with Program Slicing: An Empirical Analysis

Statistical fault localization is an easily deployed technique for quickly determining candidates for faulty code locations. If a human programmer has to search the fault beyond the top candidate locations, though, more traditional techniques of following dependencies along dynamic slices may be better suited. In a large study of 457 bugs (369 single faults and 88 multiple faults) in 46 open source C programs, we compare the effectiveness of statistical fault localization against dynamic slicing. For single faults, we find that dynamic slicing was eight percentage points more effective than the best performing statistical debugging formula; for 66% of the bugs, dynamic slicing finds the fault earlier than the best performing statistical debugging formula. In our evaluation, dynamic slicing is more effective for programs with single fault, but statistical debugging performs better on multiple faults. Best results, however, are obtained by a hybrid approach: If programmers first examine at most the top five most suspicious locations from statistical debugging, and then switch to dynamic slices, on average, they will need to examine 15% (30 lines) of the code. These findings hold for 18 most effective statistical debugging formulas and our results are independent of the number of faults (i.e. single or multiple faults) and error type (i.e. artificial or real errors).

cs.SE↗

arXiv2018

Inputs from Hell: Generating Uncommon Inputs from Common Samples

Generating structured input files to test programs can be performed by techniques that produce them from a grammar that serves as the specification for syntactically correct input files. Two interesting scenarios then arise for effective testing. In the first scenario, software engineers would like to generate inputs that are as similar as possible to the inputs in common usage of the program, to test the reliability of the program. More interesting is the second scenario where inputs should be as dissimilar as possible from normal usage. This is useful for robustness testing and exploring yet uncovered behavior. To provide test cases for both scenarios, we leverage a context-free grammar to parse a set of sample input files that represent the program's common usage, and determine probabilities for individual grammar production as they occur during parsing the inputs. Replicating these probabilities during grammar-based test input generation, we obtain inputs that are close to the samples. Inverting these probabilities yields inputs that are strongly dissimilar to common inputs, yet still valid with respect to the grammar. Our evaluation on three common input formats (JSON, JavaScript, CSS) shows the effectiveness of these approaches in obtaining instances from both sets of inputs.

cs.SE↗