Uncovering Similar but Different Packages in PyPI and Potential Security Threats
Sunha Park, Soojin Han, Seunghoon Woo
Abstract
In this study, we present a large-scale, in-depth study of package replication in PyPI. As a vital platform, PyPI streamlines Python package distribution for developers. However, beyond small-scale code cloning, we observe that many replicated packages exist on PyPI, which duplicate most of the codebase from existing packages. Such replication not only confuses developers but also propagates known vulnerabilities and enables the creation of new malicious packages. To address this issue, we comprehensively examine the characteristics and potential threats of replicated packages. Using one-third of the entire PyPI repository (200K packages), we investigate replication from three perspectives: replication of popular packages, vulnerable packages, and malicious packages. Our experiments reveal three critical findings about package replication in PyPI: (1) by identifying 1,361 replicated packages of the top 3K popular projects, we show that replication frequently redistributes substantial portions of existing packages under different maintainers; (2) by uncovering 256 previously unknown replicated vulnerable packages, we demonstrate that replication creates vulnerability blind spots that current detection tools rarely catch; (3) by analyzing 3,883 known malicious packages, we found that 186 (4.79%) replicated popular ones, and this pattern further led us to identify seven previously unknown replicated malicious packages, highlighting its role as an attack vector for malware distribution through minor modifications and code injection.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext dbad981f-ebf5-49a3-beae-77cf7851ccddBuilds on18
- VUDDY: A Scalable Approach for Vulnerable Code Clone DiscoverySeulbae Kim, Seunghoon Woo, Heejo Lee, Hakjoo OhS&P 2017 · 388 citations
- CodeT5+: Open Code Large Language Models for Code Understanding and GenerationYue Wang, Hung Le, Akhilesh Gotmare, Nghi D. Q. Bui et al.EMNLP 2023 · 339 citations
- An Empirical Comparison of Pre-Trained Models of Source CodeChangan Niu, Chuanyi Li, Vincent Ng, Dongxiao Chen et al.ICSE 2023 · 71 citations
- LastPyMile: identifying the discrepancy between sources and packagesDuc-Ly Vu, Fabio Massacci, Ivan Pashchenko, Henrik Plate et al.FSE 2021 · 53 citations
- NIL: large-scale detection of large-variance clonesTasuku Nakagawa, Yoshiki Higo, Shinji KusumotoFSE 2021 · 41 citations
Related papers
- An Empirical Study of Malicious Code In PyPI EcosystemWenbo Guo, Zhengzi Xu, Chengwei Liu, Cheng Huang et al.ASE 2023 · 31 citations
- A Needle is an Outlier in a Haystack: Hunting Malicious PyPI Packages with Code ClusteringWentao Liang, Xiang Ling, Jingzheng Wu, Tianyue Luo et al.ASE 2023 · 15 citations
- Bloat beneath Python's Scales: A Fine-Grained Inter-Project Dependency AnalysisGeorgios-Petros Drosos, Thodoris Sotiropoulos, Diomidis Spinellis, Dimitris MitropoulosFSE 2024 · 6 citations
- Insight: Exploring Cross-Ecosystem Vulnerability ImpactsMeiqiu Xu, Ying Wang, Shing-Chi Cheung, Hai Yu et al.ASE 2022 · 12 citations
- Cutting the Gordian Knot: Detecting Malicious PyPI Packages via a Knowledge-Mining FrameworkWenbo Guo, Chengwei Liu, Ming Kang, Yiran Zhang et al.USENIX Security 2026 · 1 citation
