Granted Patent B1

US 12,386,981 · App. 19/020,659 · Granted Aug 12, 2025

Inventors: Joseph Hejderup (Palo Alto, CA); Philip Hamer (Palo Alto, CA); Georgios Apostolopoulos (San Jose, CA); Dimitrios Styliadis (San Jose, CA)

Assignee: Endor Labs Inc

G06F21/577G06F21/6218G06F21/552G06F21/565G06F21/70

Abstract

Claims (100)

1. A computer-implemented method, comprising:

selecting a package in a software project;

determining a set of dependencies associated with the package, wherein:

dependencies are located, over a device network, in third-party libraries; and

determining the set of dependencies associated with the package comprises:

ignoring test dependencies; and

ignoring unused dependencies;

generating a partial call graph for individual dependencies in the set of dependencies to create a set of partial call graphs;

stitching together the set of partial call graphs to create a complete call graph of the package;

determining unreachable code in the package based on the complete call graph;

determining a set of upgrade candidates for a particular dependency in the set of dependencies;

based on determining that number of upgrade candidates in the set of upgrade candidates is greater than a predetermined threshold, heuristically selecting a subset of the upgrade candidates;

selecting an upgrade candidate in the subset of the upgrade candidates;

determining issues associated with upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate comprises determining security vulnerabilities based on the complete call graph;

emulating a state of a dependency graph associated with upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate;

determining diamond dependencies in the dependency graph associated with upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate;

determining a number of vulnerabilities addressed by upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate;

determining a severity of vulnerabilities addressed by upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate;

determining a risk-benefit score associated with each upgrade candidate in the subset of the upgrade candidates based at least in part on:

the issues associated with upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate;

the diamond dependencies in the dependency graph associated with upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate;

the number of vulnerabilities addressed by upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate; and

the severity of the vulnerabilities addressed by upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate;

prioritizing said each upgrade candidate in the subset of the upgrade candidates based on the associated risk-benefit score to create a prioritized subset of the upgrade candidates; and

providing, on a display device, the prioritized subset of the upgrade candidates to a developer associated with the package.

2. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein

heuristically selecting the subset of the upgrade candidates comprises:

selecting a predetermined number of early versions of the upgrade candidates; and

selecting a predetermined number of later versions of the upgrade candidates.

3. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein determining the issues associated with upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate comprises: determining an activity score indicating an amount of development activity associated with a third-party package in which the upgrade candidate is included.

4. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein determining the issues associated with upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate comprises: determining a security score indicating a number of security-related issues associated with a third-party package in which the upgrade candidate is included.

5. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein determining the issues associated with upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate comprises: determining a popularity score indicating an amount of usage received by a particular third-party package based at least in part on: tracking source code management system metrics; and how many other packages have a dependency on the particular package.

6. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein determining the issues associated with upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate comprises: determining a code quality score indicating how well a particular third-party package complies with best practices for code development.

7. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein determining the issues associated with upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate comprises: determining a number of licenses associated with the upgrade.

8. A server comprising:

one or more processors; and

one or more non-transitory computer readable media storing instructions executable by the one or more processors to perform operations comprising:

selecting a package in a software project;

determining a set of dependencies associated with the package,

wherein:

dependencies are located, over a device network, in third-party libraries;

determining the set of dependencies associated with the package comprises:

ignoring test dependencies; and

ignoring unused dependencies;

generating a partial call graph for individual dependencies in the set of dependencies to create a set of partial call graphs;

stitching together the set of partial call graphs to create a complete call graph of the package;

determining unreachable code in the package based on the complete call graph;

determining a set of upgrade candidates for a particular dependency in the set of dependencies;

based on determining that number of upgrade candidates in the set of upgrade candidates is greater than a predetermined threshold, heuristically selecting a subset of the upgrade candidates;

selecting an upgrade candidate in the subset of the upgrade candidates;

determining issues associated with upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate comprises determining security vulnerabilities based on the complete call graph;

emulating a state of a dependency graph associated with upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate;

determining diamond dependencies in the dependency graph associated with upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate;

determining a number of vulnerabilities addressed by upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate;

determining a severity of vulnerabilities addressed by upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate;

determining a risk-benefit score associated with each upgrade candidate in the subset of the upgrade candidates based at least in part on:

the issues associated with upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate;

the diamond dependencies in the dependency graph associated with upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate;

the number of vulnerabilities addressed by upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate; and

the severity of the vulnerabilities addressed by upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate;

prioritizing said each upgrade candidate in the subset of the upgrade candidates based on the associated risk-benefit score to create a prioritized subset of the upgrade candidates; and

providing, on a display device, the prioritized subset of the upgrade candidates to a developer associated with the package.

9. The server of claim 8 , wherein heuristically selecting the subset of the upgrade candidates comprises: selecting a predetermined number of early versions of the upgrade candidates; and selecting a predetermined number of later versions of the upgrade candidates.

10. The server of claim 8 , wherein determining the issues associated with upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate comprises:

determining an activity score indicating an amount of development activity associated with a third-party package in which the upgrade candidate is included.

11. The server of claim 8 , wherein determining the issues associated with upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate comprises: determining a number of breaking changes that would result from upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate.

12. The server of claim 8 , wherein determining the set of dependencies associated with the package comprises: determining a security score indicating a number of security-related issues associated with a third-party package in which the upgrade candidate is included.

13. The server of claim 8 , wherein determining the issues associated with upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate comprises: determining a code quality score indicating how well a particular third-party package complies with best practices for code development.

14. The server of claim 8 , wherein determining the issues associated with upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate comprises: determining a number of licenses associated with the upgrade candidate.

15. One or more non-transitory computer readable media capable of storing instructions executable by one or more processors to perform operations comprising:

selecting a package in a software project;

determining a set of dependencies associated with the package,

wherein:

dependencies are located, over a device network, in third-party libraries;

determining the set of dependencies associated with the package comprises:

ignoring test dependencies; and

ignoring unused dependencies;

generating a partial call graph for individual dependencies in the set of dependencies to create a set of partial call graphs;

stitching together the set of partial call graphs to create a complete call graph of the package;

determining unreachable code in the package based on the complete call graph;

determining a set of upgrade candidates for a particular dependency in the set of dependencies;

based on determining that number of upgrade candidates in the set of upgrade candidates is greater than a predetermined threshold, heuristically selecting a subset of the upgrade candidates;

selecting an upgrade candidate in the subset of the upgrade candidates;

determining issues associated with upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate comprises determining security vulnerabilities based on the complete call graph;

emulating a state of a dependency graph associated with upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate;

determining diamond dependencies in the dependency graph associated with upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate;

determining a number of vulnerabilities addressed by upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate;

determining a severity of the vulnerabilities addressed by upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate;

determining a risk-benefit score associated with each upgrade candidate in the subset of the upgrade candidates based at least in part on:

the issues associated with upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate;

the diamond dependencies in the dependency graph associated with upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate;

the number of vulnerabilities addressed by upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate; and

the severity of the vulnerabilities addressed by upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate;

prioritizing said each upgrade candidate in the subset of the upgrade candidates based on the associated risk-benefit score to create a prioritized subset of the upgrade candidates; and

providing, on a display device, the prioritized subset of the upgrade candidates to a developer associated with the package.

16. The one or more non-transitory computer readable media of claim 15 , wherein determining the issues associated with upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate comprises: determining a number of breaking changes that would result from upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate.

17. The one or more non-transitory computer readable media of claim 15 , wherein determining the issues associated with upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate comprises: determining an activity score indicating an amount of development activity associated with a third-party package in which the upgrade candidate is included.

18. The one or more non-transitory computer readable media of claim 15 , wherein determining the issues associated with upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate comprises: determining a security score indicating a number of security-related issues associated with a third-party package in which the upgrade candidate is included.

19. The one or more non-transitory computer readable media of claim 15 , wherein determining the issues associated with upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate comprises: determining a popularity score indicating an amount of usage received by a particular third-party package based at least in part on: tracking source code management system metrics; and how many other packages have a dependency on the particular package.

20. The one or more non-transitory computer readable media of claim 15 , wherein determining the issues associated with upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate comprises: determining a number of licenses associated with the upgrade candidate.

Assignments (1)

Continuity (2)

References Cited (22)

Cited By (1)

US 12,724,904