VLDB 2026 Research / reviewers in the wild / expert
Ying Li 0104
dblp:22/1805-104
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
0as first author
3since 2021 · last 2023
0000-0002-2628-3737ORCID · conflict
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Security and privacy · 3 · 3 since 2021
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | CarpetFuzz: Automatic Program Option Constraint Extraction from Documentation for Fuzzing
Dawei Wang 0021, Ying Li 0104, Zhiyu Zhang 0017, Kai Chen 0012 |
USENIX Security Symposium | 2 |
| 2023 | Jeu de mots paronomasia: a StackOverflow-driven bug discovery approachabstractAbstract Locating bug code snippets (short for BugCode) has been a complex problem throughout the history of software security, mainly because the constraints that define BugCode are obscure and hard to summarize. Previously, security analysts attempted to define such constraints manually (e.g., limiting buffer size to detect overflow), but were limited to the types of BugCode. Recent researchers address this problem by extracting constraints from program documentation, which shows the potential for API misuse. But for bugs beyond the scope of API misuse, such an approach becomes less effective since the corresponding constraints are not defined in documents, not to mention the programs without documentation In this paper, inspired by the fact that expert programmers often correct the BugCode on open forums such as StackOverflow, we design an approach to automatically extract knowledge from StackOverflow and leverage it to detect BugCode. As we all know, the contexts in StackOverflow come from ordinary developers. Their writing tends to be loosely organized and in various styles, which are more challenging to analyze than program documentation. To address the challenges, we design a custom tokenization approach to segment sentences and employ sentiment analysis to find the Controversial Sentences (CSs) that typically contain the constraints we need for code analysis. Then we use constituency parsing to extract knowledge from CSs, which helps locate BugCode. We evaluated our system on 41,144 comments from the questions tagged with Java and Android. The results show that our approach achieves 95.5% precision in discovering CSs. We have discovered 276 pieces of BugCode proved to be true through manual validation including an assigned CVE. 89.3% of the discovered bugs remained in the current version of answers, which are unknown to users. Yi Yang 0100, Ying Li 0104, Kai Chen 0012 |
Cybersecur. | 2 |
| 2022 | Clues in Tweets: Twitter-Guided Discovery and Analysis of SMS SpamabstractWith its critical role in business and service delivery through mobile devices, SMS (Short Message Service) has long been abused for spamming, which is still on the rise today possibly due to the emergence of A2P bulk messaging. The effort to control SMS spam has been hampered by the lack of up-to-date information about illicit activities. In our research, we proposed a novel solution to collect recent SMS spam data, at a large scale, from Twitter, where users voluntarily report the spam messages they receive. For this purpose, we designed and implemented SpamHunter, an automated pipeline to discover SMS spam reporting tweets and extract message content from the attached screenshots. Leveraging SpamHunter, we collected from Twitter a dataset of 21,918 SMS spam messages in 75 languages, spanning over four years. To our best knowledge, this is the largest SMS spam dataset ever made public. More importantly, SpamHunter enables us to continuously monitor emerging SMS spam messages, which facilitates the ongoing effort to mitigate SMS spamming. We also performed an in-depth measurement study that sheds light on the new trends in the spammer's strategies, infrastructure and spam campaigns. We also utilized our spam SMS data to evaluate the robustness of the spam countermeasures put in place by the SMS ecosystem, including anti-spam services, bulk SMS services, and text messaging apps. Our evaluation shows that such protection cannot effectively handle those spam samples: either introducing significant false positives or missing a large number of newly reported spam messages. Xianghang Mi, Ying Li 0104, XiaoFeng Wang 0001, Kai Chen 0012 |
CCS | 3 |