Concolic (concrete+symbolic) execution has recently gained popularity as an effective means to uncover non-trivial vulnerabilities in software, such as subtle buffer overflows. However, symbolic execution tools that are designed to optimize statement coverage often fail to cover potentially vulnerable code because of complex system interactions and scalability issues of constraint solvers. In this paper, we present a tool (MACKE) that is based on the modular interactions inferred by static code analysis, which is combined with symbolic execution and directed inter-procedural path exploration. This provides an advantage in terms of statement coverage and ability to uncover more vulnerabilities. Our tool includes a novel feature in the form of interactive vulnerability report generation that helps developers prioritize bug fixing based on severity scores. A demo of our tool is available at https://youtu.be/icC3jc3mHEU.

Background/Context: Gathering empirical knowledge is a time consuming task and the results from empirical studies often are soon outdated by new technological solutions. As a result, the impact of empirical results on software engineering practice is often not guaranteed.Objective/Aim: In this paper, we summarise the ongoing discussion on "Empirical Software Engineering 2.0" as a way to improve the impact of empirical results on industrial practices. We propose a way to combine data mining and analysis with domain knowledge to enable fast feedback cycles in empirical software engineering research.Method: We identify the key concepts on gathering fast feedback in empirical software engineering by following an experience-based line of reasoning by argument. Based on the identified key concepts, we design and execute a small proof of concept with a company to demonstrate potential benefits of the approach.Results: In our example, we observed that a simple double feedback mechanism notably increased the precision of the data analysis and improved the quality of the knowledge gathered.Conclusion: Our results serve as a basis to foster discussion and collaboration within the research community for a development of the idea.

Context: Requirements engineering process improvement (REPI) approaches have gained much attention in research and practice. Goal: So far, there is no comprehensive view on the research in REPI in terms of solutions and current state of reported evidence. We aims to provide an overview on the existing solutions, their underlying principles and their research type facets, i.e. their state of empirical evidence. Method: To this end, we conducted a systematic mapping study of the REPI publication space. Results: This paper reports on the first findings regarding research type facets of the contributions as well as selected methodological principles. We found a strong focus in the existing research on solution proposals for REPI approaches that concentrate on normative assessments and benchmarks of the RE activities rather than on holistic RE improvements according to individual goals of companies. Conclusions: We conclude, so far, that there is a need to broaden the work and to investigate more problem-driven REPI which also targets the improvement of the quality of the underlying RE artefacts, which currently seem out of scope.