Microsoft: Our AI can spot security flaws from just the titles of developers’ bug reports

Microsoft has revealed how it’s applying machine learning to the challenge of correctly identifying which bug reports are actually security-related.

Its goal is to correctly identify security bugs at scale using a machine-learning model to analyze just the label of bug reports.

According to Microsoft, its 47,000 developers generate about 30,000 bugs a month, but only some of the flaws have security implications that need to be addressed during the development cycle.

Microsoft says its machine-learning model correctly distinguishes between security and non-security bugs 99% of the time. It can also accurately identify critical security bugs 97% of the time.

The model allows Microsoft to label and prioritize bugs without necessarily throwing more human resources at the challenge. Fortunately for Microsoft, it has a trove of 13 million work items and bugs it’s collected since 2001 to train its machine-learning model on.

Microsoft used a supervised learning approach to teach a machine-learning model how to classify data from pre-labeled data and then used that model to label data that wasn’t already classified.

Importantly, the classifier is able to classify bug reports just from the title of the bug report, allowing it to get around the problem of handling sensitive information within bug reports such as passwords or personal information.

“We train classifiers for the identification of security bug reports (SBRs) based solely on the title of the reports,” explain Mayana Pereira, a Microsoft data scientist, and Scott Christiansen from Microsoft’s Customer Security and Trust division in a new paper titled Identifying Security Bug Reports Based Solely on Report Titles and Noisy Data.

“To the best of our knowledge this is the first work to do so. Previous works either used the complete bug report or enhanced the bug report with additional complementary features,” they write.

“Classifying bugs based solely on the tile is particularly relevant when the complete bug reports cannot be made available due to privacy concerns. For example, it is notorious the case of bug reports that contain passwords and other sensitive data.”

Microsoft still relies on security experts who are involved in training, retraining, and evaluating the model, as well as approving training data that its data scientists fed into the machine-learning model.

“By applying machine learning to our data, we accurately classify which work items are security bugs 99% of the time. The model is also 97% accurate at labeling critical and non-critical security bugs. This level of accuracy gives us confidence that we are catching more security vulnerabilities before they are exploited,” Pereira and Christiansen said in a blogpost.

Microsoft plans to share its methodology on GitHub in the coming months.

Hot this week

The Hidden Dangers of Over Reliance on Security Tools

Adding more security tools can increase complexity and blind spots instead of improving protection, so focus on integration and training over new purchases.

How Poor MFA Setup Increases Your Attack Surface

Multi-factor authentication is essential for security, but flawed implementation can expose your organization to greater risks than having no MFA at all. Learn how to properly configure MFA to avoid common pitfalls and strengthen your defenses.

The Blind Spots in Your Vulnerability Management Program

Automated vulnerability scanning often creates dangerous blind spots by missing nuanced threats that require human analysis, leading to false confidence in security postures.

Multi Factor Authentication Myths That Put Your Data at Risk

Multi-factor authentication creates a false sense of security when implemented without understanding its vulnerabilities, particularly in global contexts where method choices matter more than checkbox compliance.

The Overlooked Flaws in Multi Factor Authentication

Multi factor authentication is often presented as a security panacea, but hidden flaws and implementation gaps can leave organizations vulnerable despite compliance checkboxes.

Topics

The Hidden Dangers of Over Reliance on Security Tools

Adding more security tools can increase complexity and blind spots instead of improving protection, so focus on integration and training over new purchases.

How Poor MFA Setup Increases Your Attack Surface

Multi-factor authentication is essential for security, but flawed implementation can expose your organization to greater risks than having no MFA at all. Learn how to properly configure MFA to avoid common pitfalls and strengthen your defenses.

The Blind Spots in Your Vulnerability Management Program

Automated vulnerability scanning often creates dangerous blind spots by missing nuanced threats that require human analysis, leading to false confidence in security postures.

Multi Factor Authentication Myths That Put Your Data at Risk

Multi-factor authentication creates a false sense of security when implemented without understanding its vulnerabilities, particularly in global contexts where method choices matter more than checkbox compliance.

The Overlooked Flaws in Multi Factor Authentication

Multi factor authentication is often presented as a security panacea, but hidden flaws and implementation gaps can leave organizations vulnerable despite compliance checkboxes.

The Hidden Costs of Security Compliance

Compliance frameworks often create security blind spots by prioritizing checkbox exercises over real threat mitigation, leading to breaches despite passing audits.

The Illusion of AI in Cybersecurity

AI security tools often create alert fatigue instead of protection, but focusing on human oversight and measured deployment can turn them into effective assets.

The Overlooked Risk of Shadow IT

Shadow IT poses a greater risk than many external threats by bypassing security controls, and managing it effectively requires understanding employee needs rather than simply blocking unauthorized tools.
spot_img

Related Articles

Popular Categories