The good news is there's a natural statistical power distribution: most alerts come from few vulnerabilities in the most popular (and often large) libraries, so you get significant lift just by writing rules starting with libraries.
The good news is there's a natural statistical power distribution: most alerts come from few vulnerabilities in the most popular (and often large) libraries, so you get significant lift just by writing rules starting with libraries.
Not all of it has to be manual. Some vulnerabilities come with enough information to deduce vulnerability reachability with a high degree of confidence with some slightly clever automation.
Not all vulns come with this information, but as time goes on the percentage that do is increasing. I'm very optimistic that automation + a bit of human curation can drastically improve the S/N for open source library vulns.
A nice property of this is: you only have to solve it once per vuln. If you look at the total set of vulns (and temporarily ignore super old C stuff) it's not insurmountable at all.
Ya I get that, but surely you don't have 100% coverage. What does your code do for the advisories which you don't have coverage for? Alert? Ignore?