Papers › A Broad Comparative Evaluation of Software Debloating Tools
A Broad Comparative Evaluation of Software Debloating Tools
Michael D. Brown, Adam Meily, Brian Fairservice, Akshay Sood, Jonathan Dorn, Eric Kilmer, Ronald Eytchison
The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.
Software debloating tools seek to improve program security and performance by removing unnecessary code, called bloat. While many techniques have been proposed, several barriers to their adoption have emerged. Namely, debloating tools are highly specialized, making it difficult for adopters to find the right type of tool for their needs. This is further hindered by a lack of established metrics and comparative evaluations between tools. To close this information gap, we surveyed 10 years of debloating literature and several tools currently under commercial development to taxonomize knowledge about the debloating ecosystem. We then conducted a broad comparative evaluation of 10 debloating tools to determine their relative strengths and weaknesses. Our evaluation, conducted on a diverse set of 20 benchmark programs, measures tools across 12 performance, security, and correctness metrics. Our evaluation surfaces several concerning findings that contradict the prevailing narrative in the debloating literature. First, debloating tools lack the maturity required to be used on real-world software, evidenced by a slim 22% overall success rate for creating passable debloated versions of medium- and high-complexity benchmarks. Second, debloating tools struggle to produce sound and robust programs. Using our novel differential fuzzing tool, DIFFER, we discovered that only 13% of our debloating attempts produced a sound and robust debloated program. Finally, our results indicate that debloating tools typically do not improve the performance or security posture of debloated programs by a significant degree according to our evaluation metrics. We believe that our contributions in this paper will help potential adopters better understand the landscape of tools and will motivate future research and development of more capable debloating tools.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections