Software vulnerabilities are a major cyber threat and it is important to detect them. One important approach to detecting vulnerabilities is to use deep learning while treating a program function as a whole, known as function-level vulnerability detectors. However, the limitation of this approach is not understood. In this paper, we investigate its limitation in detecting one class of vulnerabilities known as inter-procedural vulnerabilities, where the to-be-patched statements and the vulnerability-triggering statements belong to different functions. For this purpose, we create the first Inter-Procedural Vulnerability Dataset (InterPVD) based on C/C++ open-source software, and we propose a tool dubbed VulTrigger for identifying vulnerability-triggering statements across functions. Experimental results show that VulTrigger can effectively identify vulnerability-triggering statements and inter-procedural vulnerabilities. Our findings include: (i) inter-procedural vulnerabilities are prevalent with an average of 2.8 inter-procedural layers; and (ii) function-level vulnerability detectors are much less effective in detecting to-be-patched functions of inter-procedural vulnerabilities than detecting their counterparts of intra-procedural vulnerabilities.

Deep learning has been widely used in source code classification tasks, such as code classification according to their functionalities, code authorship attribution, and vulnerability detection. Unfortunately, the black-box nature of deep learning makes it hard to interpret and understand why a classifier (i.e., classification model) makes a particular prediction on a given example. This lack of interpretability (or explainability) might have hindered their adoption by practitioners because it is not clear when they should or should not trust a classifier's prediction. The lack of interpretability has motivated a number of studies in recent years. However, existing methods are neither robust nor able to cope with out-of-distribution examples. In this paper, we propose a novel method to produce Robust interpreters for a given deep learning-based code classifier; the method is dubbed Robin. The key idea behind Robin is a novel hybrid structure combining an interpreter and two approximators, while leveraging the ideas of adversarial training and data augmentation. Experimental results show that on average the interpreter produced by Robin achieves a 6.11% higher fidelity (evaluated on the classifier), 67.22% higher fidelity (evaluated on the approximator), and 15.87x higher robustness than that of the three existing interpreters we evaluated. Moreover, the interpreter is 47.31% less affected by out-of-distribution examples than that of LEMNA.