MANDO: Multi-Level Heterogeneous Graph Embeddings for Fine-Grained Detection of Smart Contract Vulnerabilities
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Learning heterogeneous graphs consisting of different types of nodes and edges enhances the results of homogeneous graph techniques. An interesting example of such graphs is control-flow graphs representing possible software code execution flows. As such graphs represent more semantic information of code, developing techniques and tools for such graphs can be highly beneficial for detecting vulnerabilities in software for its reliability. However, existing heterogeneous graph techniques are still insufficient in handling complex graphs where the number of different types of nodes and edges is large and variable. This paper concentrates on the Ethereum smart contracts as a sample of software codes represented by heterogeneous contract graphs built upon both control-flow graphs and call graphs containing different types of nodes and links. We propose MANDO, a new heterogeneous graph representation to learn such heterogeneous contract graphs' structures. MANDO extracts customized metapaths, which compose relational connections between different types of nodes and their neighbors. Moreover, it develops a multi-metapath heterogeneous graph attention network to learn multi-level embeddings of different types of nodes and their metapaths in the heterogeneous contract graphs, which can capture the code semantics of smart contracts more accurately and facilitate both fine-grained line-level and coarse-grained contract-level vulnerability detection. Our extensive evaluation of large smart contract datasets shows that MANDO improves the vulnerability detection results of other techniques at the coarse-grained contract level. More importantly, it is the first learning-based approach capable of identifying vulnerabilities at the fine-grained line-level, and significantly improves the traditional code analysis-based vulnerability detection approaches by 11.35% to 70.81% in terms of F1-score.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 33 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 Aug 2022.
Builds on
19 of 33 references.
References · 19
- 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
- 2016Semi-Supervised Classification with Graph Convolutional Networkscited by 11,361
- 2017Graph Attention Networkscited by 8,923
- 2016node2vec: Scalable Feature Learning for Networkscited by 1,918
- 2019Heterogeneous Graph Attention Networkcited by 734
- 2015LINE: Large-scale Information Network Embeddingcited by 582
- 2019Slither: A Static Analysis Framework For Smart Contractscited by 89
- 2018Securify: Practical Security Analysis of Smart Contractscited by 61
- 2019Manticore: A User-Friendly Symbolic Execution Framework for Binaries and Smart Contractscited by 37
- 2020VulDeeLocator: A Deep Learning-based Fine-grained Vulnerability Detectorcited by 37
- 2016A Survey of Symbolic Execution Techniquescited by 36
- 2019Empirical Review of Automated Analysis Tools on 47,587 Ethereum Smart Contractscited by 36
7 more
- 2021Combining Graph Neural Networks with Expert Knowledge for Smart Contract Vulnerability Detectioncited by 34
- 2019A Survey on Ethereum Systems Security: Vulnerabilities, Attacks and Defensescited by 25
- 2021Smart Contract Vulnerability Detection: From Pure Neural Network to Interpretable Graph Feature and Expert Pattern Fusioncited by 24
- 2020How Effective are Smart Contract Analysis Tools? Evaluating Smart Contract Static Analysis Tools Using Bug Injectioncited by 20
- 2020SmartBugs: A Framework to Analyze Solidity Smart Contractscited by 18
- 2020eThor: Practical and Provably Sound Static Analysis of Ethereum Smart Contractscited by 11
- 2020Checking Smart Contracts with Structural Code Embeddingcited by 10
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 1; 2024: 2; 2025: 0; 2026: 1.
4 papers.
- 2024A Survey of Source Code Representations for Machine Learning-Based Cybersecurity Taskscited by 5
- 2023Usenix'23 Extended Version: Smart Learning to Find Dumb Contractscited by 2
- 2024Vulnerability Detection in Smart Contracts: A Comprehensive Surveycited by 0
- 2026AttackPathGNN: Cross-function vulnerability detection in smart contracts using state interference graphs and conjunction poolingcited by 0
- 2026AttackPathGNN: Cross-function vulnerability detection in smart contracts using state interference graphs and conjunction pooling4 Jun 2026
- 2024Vulnerability Detection in Smart Contracts: A Comprehensive Survey8 Jul 2024
- 2024A Survey of Source Code Representations for Machine Learning-Based Cybersecurity Tasks15 Mar 2024
- 2023Usenix'23 Extended Version: Smart Learning to Find Dumb Contracts21 Apr 2023