Static Code Analysis for Identification and Prioritization of Code Quality Remediation in a Resource-Constrained University Academic Information System

Muhammad Ridho Kurniawan Pratama; Deni Utama; Rauhil Fahmi; Ali Idrus

doi:10.34148/teknika.v15i1.1458

Authors

Muhammad Ridho Kurniawan Pratama Information Systems and Technology, Faculty of Engineering, Universitas Negeri Jakarta, Jakarta, DKI Jakarta, Indonesia
Deni Utama Information Systems and Technology, Faculty of Engineering, Universitas Negeri Jakarta, Jakarta, DKI Jakarta, Indonesia
Rauhil Fahmi Information Systems and Technology, Faculty of Engineering, Universitas Negeri Jakarta, Jakarta, DKI Jakarta, Indonesia
Ali Idrus Information Systems and Technology, Faculty of Engineering, Universitas Negeri Jakarta, Jakarta, DKI Jakarta, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.34148/teknika.v15i1.1458

Keywords:

Static Code Analysis, Software Quality, Technical Debt, University Information Systems

Abstract

Software quality directly impacts organizational effectiveness, yet university information systems in developing nations frequently face compounded challenges, including resource constraints, limited developer expertise, and inadequate quality assurance mechanisms. Although static code analysis systematically detects software defects, translating technical findings into actionable, context-appropriate strategies remains problematic for resource-limited academic institutions. This research investigated structural quality, security vulnerabilities, and maintainability characteristics of a university academic information system, formulating contextually informed recommendations that reconcile technical assessment outcomes with institutional constraints. The case study employed four sequential phases: organizational context evaluation, quantification of code-complexity metrics, comprehensive quality assessment via static analysis, and development of context-sensitive recommendations. Correlation analysis examined relationships between structural complexity indicators and maintainability degradation. Examination of 127 PHP files revealed 9,628 quality defects, with maintainability issues accounting for 89.9%, alongside 18 critical security vulnerabilities and severe complexity, with individual methods reaching cyclomatic complexity values of 263. Strong positive correlations emerged between complexity metrics and maintainability problems (r = 0.938, p < 0.001), indicating that complexity is a reliable predictor of quality deterioration. Issue distribution patterns across all examined files suggested systemic quality degradation rather than isolated problematic modules. Findings document critical security exposures, excessive structural complexity, and pervasive maintainability deficiencies, validating significant associations between complexity and maintenance burden. The study proposes a bifurcated improvement approach encompassing tactical measures targeting immediate technical debt, including security vulnerabilities and architectural complexity, complemented by strategic interventions, providing academic information system managers with a prioritized remediation action calibrated to institutional resource constraints.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

[1] O. Gordieiev, D. Gordieieva, A. Rainer, and O. Pishchukhina, “Relationship between factors influencing the software development process and software defects,” in 2023 13th International Conference on Dependable Systems, Services and Technologies (DESSERT), IEEE, Oct. 2023, pp. 1–7. doi: 10.1109/DESSERT61349.2023.10416445.

[2] A. Nabot and A. Al-Qerem, “Impact of software quality on organizational performance,” Array, vol. 27, p. 100476, Sep. 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.array.2025.100476.

[3] A. Al-Qerem et al., “Enhancing Organizational Performance: Synergy of Cyber-Physical Systems, Cloud Services, and Crowdsensing,” International Journal of Crowd Science, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 44–55, Jan. 2025, doi: 10.26599/IJCS.2023.9100033.

[4] I. Obi, J. Butler, S. Haniyur, B. Hassan, M.-A. Storey, and B. Murphy, “Identifying Factors Contributing to ‘Bad Days’ for Software Developers: A Mixed-Methods Study,” in 2025 IEEE/ACM 47th International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice (ICSE-SEIP), IEEE, Apr. 2025, pp. 1–11. doi: 10.1109/ICSE-SEIP66354.2025.00006.

[5] A. G. Erol, M. Yilmaz, and P. M. Clarke, “Sleepless in the Code: Exploring the Relationship Between Occupational Anxiety and Sleep Patterns in the Software Industry,” in Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol. 2179 CCIS, 2024, pp. 33–47. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-71139-8_3.

[6] M. M. Ahmed, M. Khudari, A. M. Hussein, and J. Jais, “Quality of Work Life, Job Enrichment and their Impact on Employee Retention: Exploratory Research in Private Colleges in Baghdad,” WSEAS TRANSACTIONS ON BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS, vol. 20, pp. 848–858, Apr. 2023, doi: 10.37394/23207.2023.20.78.

[7] M. Kuutila, M. Mäntylä, U. Farooq, and M. Claes, “Time pressure in software engineering: A systematic review,” Inf. Softw. Technol., vol. 121, p. 106257, May 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.infsof.2020.106257.

[8] R. Gilal, M. Omar, and M. M. Rejab, “The key factors contribute to time pressure in software development projects: A review,” International Journal of ADVANCED AND APPLIED SCIENCES, vol. 10, no. 10, pp. 155–165, Oct. 2023, doi: 10.21833/ijaas.2023.10.018.

[9] B. Johnson, T. Zimmermann, and C. Bird, “The Effect of Work Environments on Productivity and Satisfaction of Software Engineers,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 736–757, Apr. 2021, doi: 10.1109/TSE.2019.2903053.

[10] S. Khalid, U. Qamar, U. Rahseed, and W. H. Butt, “Relationship between Organization’s Physical and Psychological Environment and Employees’ Mental Satisfaction: An Empirical Analysis of Employee Turnover in Software Industry,” in 2022 16th International Conference on Open Source Systems and Technologies (ICOSST), IEEE, Dec. 2022, pp. 1–6. doi: 10.1109/ICOSST57195.2022.10016849.

[11] A. Subarno, C. D. S. Indrawati, and P. Ninghardjanti, “The influence of physical and non-physical factors on employee well-being in office spaces: A comprehensive study of the work environment,” IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci., vol. 1462, no. 1, p. 012023, Mar. 2025, doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/1462/1/012023.

[12] L. Piersiala, “Digital Technological Solutions in Knowledge Transfer in Higher Education,” European Conference on Knowledge Management, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 659–664, Sep. 2024, doi: 10.34190/eckm.25.1.2379.

[13] E. Acheampong and J. D. De-Graft, “Investigation into the Challenges Associated with the Delivery of Library Services on Mobile Technology Platform,” IAFOR Journal of Literature & Librarianship, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 78–93, Jul. 2020, doi: 10.22492/ijl.9.1.04.

[14] O. A. Taufik, O. Y. Pamungkas, S. Suprapto, A. K. Ahmad, D. W. Andini, and P. Cahyandaru, “Mapping Determinants of Success through Information Systems in Higher Education: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach,” Educational Process International Journal, vol. 14, no. 1, 2025, doi: 10.22521/edupij.2025.14.67.

[15] M. K. Asamoah and J. D. Ansong, “Building resilience in higher education by addressing infrastructure and financial resource challenges in Ghana,” SN Social Sciences, vol. 5, no. 7, p. 78, Jun. 2025, doi: 10.1007/s43545-025-01110-z.

[16] F. Hamad, M. Al-Fadel, and H. Fakhouri, “The provision of smart service at academic libraries and associated challenges,” Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, vol. 55, no. 4, pp. 960–971, Dec. 2023, doi: 10.1177/09610006221114173.

[17] S. Mat’ašová, M. Chovanec, R. Rusnáková, and D. Čatloch, “Enhancing Code Quality Through Static Analysis: Optimizing the Flava Tool for Detecting Code Smells and Errors Using SonarQube Integration,” in 2024 International Conference on Emerging eLearning Technologies and Applications (ICETA), IEEE, Oct. 2024, pp. 431–438. doi: 10.1109/ICETA63795.2024.10850845.

[18] M. Adnan and M. Afzal, “A novel approach to super quality software development using workflows,” in 2016 IEEE 7th Annual Ubiquitous Computing, Electronics & Mobile Communication Conference (UEMCON), IEEE, Oct. 2016, pp. 1–3. doi: 10.1109/UEMCON.2016.7777855.

[19] U. Rosyidi, “Managing Corporate Higher Education: Indonesia’s Greatest Challenge,” The New Educational Review, vol. 53, no. 3, pp. 39–48, Sep. 2018, doi: 10.15804/tner.2018.53.3.03.

[20] L. D. Prasojo, L. Yuliana, and L. A. Prihandoko, “Research Performance in Higher Education: A PLS-SEM Analysis of Research Atmosphere, Collaboration, Funding, Competence, and Output, Especially for Science and Engineering Facilities in Indonesian Universities,” ASEAN Journal of Science and Engineering, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 123–144, Jan. 2025, doi: 10.17509/ajse.v5i1.81224.

[21] D. Azar, H. Harmanani, and R. Korkmaz, “A hybrid heuristic approach to optimize rule-based software quality estimation models,” Inf. Softw. Technol., vol. 51, no. 9, pp. 1365–1376, Sep. 2009, doi: 10.1016/j.infsof.2009.05.003.

[22] R. Ozakinci and A. Tarhan, “The Role of Process in Early Software Defect Prediction: Methods, Attributes and Metrics,” 2016, pp. 287–300. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-38980-6_21.

[23] J. Voas and W. W. Agresti, “Software quality from a behavioral perspective,” IT Prof., vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 46–50, Jul. 2004, doi: 10.1109/MITP.2004.45.

[24] J. S. Challa, A. Paul, Y. Dada, V. Nerella, and P. R. Srivastava, “Quantification of Software Quality Parameters Using Fuzzy Multi Criteria Approach,” in 2011 International Conference on Process Automation, Control and Computing, IEEE, Jul. 2011, pp. 1–6. doi: 10.1109/PACC.2011.5978957.

[25] T. Wahyuningrum and K. Mustofa, “A Systematic Mapping Review of Software Quality Measurement: Research Trends, Model, and Method,” International Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering (IJECE), vol. 7, no. 5, p. 2847, Oct. 2017, doi: 10.11591/ijece.v7i5.pp2847-2854.

[26] L. Aversano and M. Tortorella, “Evaluating the Quality of Free/Open Source Systems: A Case Study,” in (eds) Enterprise Information Systems. ICEIS 2010. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 73, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2011, pp. 119–134. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-19802-1_9.

[27] Kilsup Lee and Sung Jong Lee, “A Quantitative Software Quality Evaluation Model for the Artifacts of Component Based Development,” in Sixth International Conference on Software Engineering, Artificial Intelligence, Networking and Parallel/Distributed Computing and First ACIS International Workshop on Self-Assembling Wireless Networks (SNPD/SAWN’05), IEEE, 2005, pp. 20–25. doi: 10.1109/SNPD-SAWN.2005.7.

[28] N. F. I. Abdul Hamid and M. K. Hasan, “Software Quality Model for Telecommunication Industry in Malaysia,” J. Teknol., vol. 63, no. 1, pp. 13–19, Jul. 2013, doi: 10.11113/jt.v63.1354.

[29] A.-J. Molnar and S. Motogna, “Longitudinal Evaluation of Open-Source Software Maintainability,” ENASE 2020 - Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Approaches to Software Engineering, Mar. 2020, [Online]. Available: http://arxiv.org/abs/2003.00447

[30] W. Mallouli, “Security Testing as part of Software Quality Assurance: Principles and Challenges,” in 2022 IEEE International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation Workshops (ICSTW), IEEE, Apr. 2022, pp. 29–29. doi: 10.1109/ICSTW55395.2022.00019.

[31] B. Wang, G. Ping, and D. Lv, “Multi-objective Software Quality Optimization Evaluation Model Based on Genetic Algorithm,” in 2025 International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Engineering Management (ICAIEM), IEEE, Jun. 2025, pp. 11–15. doi: 10.1109/ICAIEM66060.2025.11139275.

[32] A.-J. Molnar, A. Neamţu, and S. Motogna, “Longitudinal Evaluation of Software Quality Metrics in Open-Source Applications,” in Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Approaches to Software Engineering, SCITEPRESS - Science and Technology Publications, 2019, pp. 80–91. doi: 10.5220/0007725600800091.

[33] Y. Ghanim, “Toward a Specialized Quality Management Maturity Assessment Model,” in Proceedings of the 2nd Africa and Middle East Conference on Software Engineering, New York, NY, USA: ACM, May 2016, pp. 1–8. doi: 10.1145/2944165.2944166.

[34] M. M. Alam, S. I. Priti, K. Fatema, M. Hasan, and S. Alam, “CMMI in Practice: Enhancing Organizational Performance Through Holistic Approaches,” in Studies in Big Data, vol. 163, 2024, pp. 15–28. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-73632-2_2.

[35] Y. Alqadri, E. K. Budiardjo, A. Ferdinansyah, and M. F. Rokhman, “The CMMI-Dev Implementation Factors for Software Quality Improvement,” in Proceedings of the 2020 2nd Asia Pacific Information Technology Conference, New York, NY, USA: ACM, Jan. 2020, pp. 34–40. doi: 10.1145/3379310.3379327.

[36] S. L. Ramírez‐Mora, H. Oktaba, and J. Patlán Pérez, “Group maturity, team efficiency, and team effectiveness in software development: A case study in a CMMI‐DEV Level 5 organization,” Journal of Software: Evolution and Process, vol. 32, no. 4, Apr. 2020, doi: 10.1002/smr.2232.

[37] R. Ferenc, P. Hegedűs, and T. Gyimóthy, “Software Product Quality Models,” in Evolving Software Systems, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2014, pp. 65–100. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-45398-4_3.

[38] J.-L. Letouzey, “The SQALE method for evaluating Technical Debt,” in 2012 Third International Workshop on Managing Technical Debt (MTD), IEEE, Jun. 2012, pp. 31–36. doi: 10.1109/MTD.2012.6225997.

[39] D. Nikolic, D. Stefanovic, D. Dakic, S. Sladojevic, and S. Ristic, “Analysis of the Tools for Static Code Analysis,” in 2021 20th International Symposium INFOTEH-JAHORINA (INFOTEH), IEEE, Mar. 2021, pp. 1–6. doi: 10.1109/INFOTEH51037.2021.9400688.

[40] D. Stefanovic, D. Nikolic, D. Dakic, I. Spasojevic, and S. Ristic, “Static Code Analysis Tools: A Systematic Literature Review,” in Annals of DAAAM and Proceedings of the International DAAAM Symposium, vol. 31, no. 1, 2020, pp. 0565–0573. doi: 10.2507/31st.daaam.proceedings.078.

[41] T. Sonnekalb et al., “A Static Analysis Platform for Investigating Security Trends in Repositories,” in 2023 IEEE/ACM 1st International Workshop on Software Vulnerability (SVM), IEEE, May 2023, pp. 1–5. doi: 10.1109/SVM59160.2023.00005.

[42] A. K. Singh, D. Tomar, V. Ammasai, and U. Manogaran, “Enhancing software development efficiency: A study of static code analysis tools integrated with version control systems,” in AIP Conference Proceedings, 2025, p. 020012. doi: 10.1063/5.0262307.

[43] S. Ghosh and R. Raj, “Fine-Tuning Large Language Models for Context-Aware Static Code Analysis and Defect Classification,” in Automating Software Defect Detection Through Machine Learning and LLMs, IGI Global Scientific Publishing, 2025, pp. 249–288. doi: 10.4018/979-8-3373-4460-7.ch008.

[44] T. Akinyemi, E. Solomon, A. Woubie, and K. Lippert, “A Comprehensive Review of Static Memory Analysis,” IEEE Access, vol. 12, pp. 170204–170226, 2024, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3482253.

[45] D. Liu, J. Calver, and M. Craig, “A Static Analysis Tool in CS1: Student Usage and Perceptions of PythonTA,” in Proceedings of the 26th Australasian Computing Education Conference, New York, NY, USA: ACM, Jan. 2024, pp. 172–181. doi: 10.1145/3636243.3636262.

[46] E. A. AlOmar, S. A. AlOmar, and M. W. Mkaouer, “On the use of static analysis to engage students with software quality improvement: An experience with PMD,” in 2023 IEEE/ACM 45th International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering Education and Training (ICSE-SEET), IEEE, May 2023, pp. 179–191. doi: 10.1109/ICSE-SEET58685.2023.00023.

[47] M. Nachtigall, M. Schlichtig, and E. Bodden, “Evaluation of Usability Criteria Addressed by Static Analysis Tools on a Large Scale,” in Lecture Notes in Informatics (LNI), Proceedings - Series of the Gesellschaft fur Informatik (GI), Bonn: Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V., 2023, pp. 95–96.

[48] M. Nachtigall, M. Schlichtig, and E. Bodden, “A large-scale study of usability criteria addressed by static analysis tools,” in Proceedings of the 31st ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis, New York, NY, USA: ACM, Jul. 2022, pp. 532–543. doi: 10.1145/3533767.3534374.

[49] D. Nikolic, A. Todoric, D. Dakic, T. Vuckovic, and D. Stefanovic, “Challenges in Integrating Static Code Analysis into Domain-Specific Language,” in Annals of DAAAM and Proceedings of the International DAAAM Symposium, vol. 34, no. 1, 2023, pp. 0335–0340. doi: 10.2507/34th.daaam.proceedings.045.

[50] C. Vassallo, S. Panichella, F. Palomba, S. Proksch, H. C. Gall, and A. Zaidman, “How developers engage with static analysis tools in different contexts,” Empir. Softw. Eng., vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 1419–1457, Mar. 2020, doi: 10.1007/s10664-019-09750-5.

[51] T. J. McCabe, “A Complexity Measure,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. SE-2, no. 4, pp. 308–320, Dec. 1976, doi: 10.1109/TSE.1976.233837.

[52] S. R. Chidamber and C. F. Kemerer, “A metrics suite for object oriented design,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 20, no. 6, pp. 476–493, Jun. 1994, doi: 10.1109/32.295895.

[53] H. A. N. Nikeshala, “Transforming Software Complexity Analysis with the ECB Metric,” in 2024 12th International Conference in Software Engineering Research and Innovation (CONISOFT), IEEE, Oct. 2024, pp. 156–164. doi: 10.1109/CONISOFT63288.2024.00029.

[54] T. H. A. N. N, “Software Complexity Analysis with the Advanced CB Metric,” in 2024 International Conference on Information and Communication Technology for Development for Africa (ICT4DA), IEEE, Nov. 2024, pp. 136–141. doi: 10.1109/ICT4DA62874.2024.10777285.

[55] Y. Tashtoush, N. Abu-El-Rub, O. Darwish, S. Al-Eidi, D. Darweesh, and O. Karajeh, “A Notional Understanding of the Relationship between Code Readability and Software Complexity,” Information, vol. 14, no. 2, p. 81, Jan. 2023, doi: 10.3390/info14020081.

[56] Y. Hu, H. Jiang, and Z. Hu, “Measuring code maintainability with deep neural networks,” Front. Comput. Sci., vol. 17, no. 6, p. 176214, Dec. 2023, doi: 10.1007/s11704-022-2313-0.

[57] G. Rakić, M. Tóth, and Z. Budimac, “Toward recursion aware complexity metrics,” Inf. Softw. Technol., vol. 118, p. 106203, Feb. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.infsof.2019.106203.

[58] M. Alenezi, M. Zarour, and M. Akour, “Complexity and Nesting Evolution in Open Source Software Systems: Experimental Study,” Recent Advances in Computer Science and Communications, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 572–578, Oct. 2020, doi: 10.2174/2213275912666190204134206.

[59] A. V. Gorchakov, L. A. Demidova, and P. N. Sovietov, “A Rule-Based Algorithm and Its Specializations for Measuring the Complexity of Software in Educational Digital Environments,” Computers, vol. 13, no. 3, p. 75, Mar. 2024, doi: 10.3390/computers13030075.

[60] A. Raninen, T. Toroi, H. Vainio, and J. J. Ahonen, “Defect Data Analysis as Input for Software Process Improvement,” in Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), vol. 7343 LNCS, 2012, pp. 3–16. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-31063-8_2.

[61] R. Ghafoor Hussain, K.-C. Yow, and M. Gori, “Leveraging an Enhanced CodeBERT-Based Model for Multiclass Software Defect Prediction via Defect Classification,” IEEE Access, vol. 13, pp. 24383–24397, 2025, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3525069.