Files
Open_Ultra_SAST/benchmarks/measurements
Marius CiepluchandClaude Opus 5 b0500ecfa0 measure(contributor-scan): first ontology coverage run, and it found a family we do not have
NodeGoat models 18 of 175 distinct call names, covering 12 percent of 1,185 calls. That share is not
a score: most of what a program calls is not security-relevant, and a high number would mean the
tables were too loose. It is a baseline to move deliberately.

The top product candidate is res.render, 23 calls with five in a method that reads untrusted input.
Task 14.3 reasoned its way to that same gap by hand and declined to model it as a flow sink; the
instrument found it in one run, which is the validation that matters. It also surfaced Math.random in
the user data-access module, and weak randomness is a weakness class this ontology has no family for
at all -- so no family census could have found it, because the family list is itself the blind spot.
That is the kind of gap only a coverage instrument finds.

It had to be taught what is not an API. The first run ranked _tmp_3.push and __ecma.Array.factory
first, which is how the frontend lowers a destructuring and an array literal, and a Cypress suite and
a Gruntfile held four of the next five. Both are separated now, because noise at the top of a
worklist is how a worklist stops being read.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01EmM1j46qgKMh3zqD1QMwEo
2026-09-21 17:19:59 +02:00
..