these-ammii/thesis
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages 1 Wiki Activity Actions

remove doplon in figure/tab/section reference

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
Jean-Marie Mineau 2025-06-24 12:32:02 +02:00
parent d730d1f4a7
commit 6d9096e314
Signed by: histausse
GPG key ID: B66AEEDA9B645AD2
4 changed files with 26 additions and 25 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

15
3_rasta/3_experiments.typ
View file

@ -20,11 +20,11 @@
) <fig:rasta-exit>
Figures@fig:rasta-exit-drebin and@fig:rasta-exit compare the Drebin and Rasta datasets.
@fig:rasta-exit-drebin and @fig:rasta-exit compare the Drebin and Rasta datasets.
They represent the success/failure rate (green/orange) of the tools.
We distinguished failure to compute a result from timeout (blue) and crashes of our evaluation framework (in grey, probably due to out of memory kills of the container itself).
Because it may be caused by a bug in our own analysis stack, exit status represented in grey (Other) are considered as unknown errors and not as failure of the tool.
#todo[We discuss further errors for which we have information in the logs in Section/*@sec:rasta-failure-analysis*/.]
#todo[We discuss further errors for which we have information in the logs in /*@*/sec:rasta-failure-analysis.]
Results on the Drebin datasets shows that 11 tools have a high success rate (greater than 85%).
The other tools have poor results.
@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ Three tools (androguard_dad, blueseal, saaf) that were performing well (higher t
Regarding IC3, the fork with a simpler build process and support for modern OS has a lower success rate than the original tool.
Two tools should be discussed in particular.
//Androguard and Flowdroid have a large community of users, as shown by the numbers of GitHub stars in Table~\ref{tab:sources}.
//Androguard and Flowdroid have a large community of users, as shown by the numbers of GitHub stars in @tab:rasta-sources.
Androguard has a high success rate which is not surprising: it used by a lot of tools, including for analyzing application uploaded to the Androzoo repository.
//Because of that, it should be noted that our dataset is biased in favour of Androguard. // Already in discution
Nevertheless, when using Androguard decompiler (DAD) to decompile an APK, it fails more than 50% of the time.
@ -50,9 +50,9 @@ is #mypercent(54.9, 100). When including the two defective tools, this ratio dr
#highlight()[
*RQ1 answer:*
On a recent dataset we consider that \resultunusable of the tools are unusable.
For the tools that we could run, \resultratio of analysis are finishing successfully.
//(those with less than 50\% of successful execution and including the two tools that we were unable to build).
On a recent dataset we consider that #resultunusable of the tools are unusable.
For the tools that we could run, #resultratio of analysis are finishing successfully.
//(those with less than 50% of successful execution and including the two tools that we were unable to build).
]
/*
@ -85,7 +85,8 @@ For the tools that we could run, \resultratio of analysis are finishing successf
For investigating the effect of application dates on the tools, we computed the date of each APK based on the minimum date between the first upload in AndroZoo and the first analysis in VirusTotal.
Such a computation is more reliable than using the dex date that is often obfuscated when packaging the application.
Then, for the sake of clarity of our results, we separated the tools that have mainly Java source code from those that use other languages.
Among the ones that are Java based programs, most of them use the Soot framework which may correlate the obtained results. @fig:rasta-exit-evolution-java (resp. @fig:rasta-exit-evolution-not-java) compares the success rate of the tools between 2010 and 2023 for Java based tools (resp. non Java based tools).
Among the ones that are Java based programs, most of them use the Soot framework which may correlate the obtained results.
@fig:rasta-exit-evolution-java (resp. @fig:rasta-exit-evolution-not-java) compares the success rate of the tools between 2010 and 2023 for Java based tools (resp. non Java based tools).
For Java based tools, a clear decrease of finishing rate can be observed globally for all tools.
For non-Java based tools, 2 of them keep a high success rate (Androguard, Mallodroid).
The result is expected for Androguard, because the analysis is relatively simple and the tool is largely adopted, as previously mentioned.