Granted Patent B1

US 12,361,141 · App. 18/951,189 · Granted Jul 15, 2025

Inventors: Georgios Apostolopoulos (San Jose, CA); Philip Hamer (Palo Alto, CA)

Assignee: Endor Labs Inc

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

Abstract

Claims (99)

1. A computer-implemented method, executed by one or more processors, comprising:

selecting a package in a software project stored in a device database;

determining a set of dependencies associated with the package, wherein dependencies are located, over a device network, in third-party libraries;

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 by:

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

selecting a predetermined number of later versions 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;

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 determining the issues associated with upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate comprises:

determining a number of breaking changes associated with upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate.

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 candidate.

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 stored in a database;

determining a set of dependencies associated with the package, wherein dependencies are located, over a device network, in third-party libraries;

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 by:

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

selecting a predetermined number of later versions 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;

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: the third-party libraries include at least one open-source library.

10. 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.

11. The server of claim 8 , wherein determining the set of dependencies associated with the package comprises:

ignoring test dependencies; and

ignoring unused dependencies.

12. The server of claim 8 , further comprising:

determining a recommended upgrade candidate for each dependency in the set of dependencies across multiple projects with each project of the multiple projects including one or more packages; and

determining a set of upgrade candidates for the multiple projects.

13. 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.

14. 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 that is stored in a device database;

determining a set of dependencies associated with the package, wherein dependencies are located, over a device network, in third-party libraries;

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 by:

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

selecting a predetermined number of later versions 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;

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.

15. The one or more non-transitory computer readable media of claim 14 , wherein determining the issues associated with upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate comprises:

determining a number of breaking changes associated with upgrading the package to use the upgrade candidate.

16. The one or more non-transitory computer readable media of claim 14 , 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.

17. The one or more non-transitory computer readable media of claim 14 , 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.

18. The one or more non-transitory computer readable media of claim 14 , 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.

19. The one or more non-transitory computer readable media of claim 14 , 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.

Assignments (1)

Continuity (3)

References Cited (39)