Modern software systems are increasingly complex, presenting significant challenges in quality assurance. Just-intime vulnerability prediction (JIT-VP) is a proactive approach to identifying vulnerable commits and providing early warnings about potential security risks. However, we observe that current JIT-VP evaluations rely on an idealized setting, where the evaluation datasets are artificially balanced, consisting exclusively of vulnerability-introducing and vulnerability-fixing commits.

To address this limitation, this study assesses the effectiveness of JIT-VP techniques under a more realistic setting that includes both vulnerability-related and vulnerability-neutral commits. To enable a reliable evaluation, we introduce a large-scale public dataset comprising over one million commits from FFmpeg and the Linux kernel. Our empirical analysis of eight state-of-theart JIT-VP techniques reveals a significant decline in predictive performance when applied to real-world conditions; for example, the average PR-AUC on Linux drops 98% from 0.805 to 0.016.

This discrepancy is mainly attributed to the severe class imbalance in real-world datasets, where vulnerability-introducing commits constitute only a small fraction of all commits. To mitigate this issue, we explore the effectiveness of widely adopted techniques for handling dataset imbalance, including customized loss functions, oversampling, and undersampling. Surprisingly, our experimental results indicate that these techniques are ineffective in addressing the imbalance problem in JIT-VP. These findings underscore the importance of realistic evaluations of JIT-VP and the need for domain-specific techniques to address data imbalance in such scenarios.