Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Jonas Zabel
dblp:426/3957
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper |
Software testing · 100% |
Topics — the 5 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Software testing › fuzzing
binary fuzzing |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Terminator: Enabling Efficient Fuzzing of Closed-Source GUI Programs by Automatic Coverage-Guided Termination · ASE 2025 |
Software testing › fuzzing
coverage-guided fuzzing |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Terminator: Enabling Efficient Fuzzing of Closed-Source GUI Programs by Automatic Coverage-Guided Termination · ASE 2025 |
Software testing
fuzzing |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Terminator: Enabling Efficient Fuzzing of Closed-Source GUI Programs by Automatic Coverage-Guided Termination · ASE 2025 |
Software testing › fuzzing
GUI fuzzing |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Terminator: Enabling Efficient Fuzzing of Closed-Source GUI Programs by Automatic Coverage-Guided Termination · ASE 2025 |
Software testing › test infrastructure
test harness |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | Terminator: Enabling Efficient Fuzzing of Closed-Source GUI Programs by Automatic Coverage-Guided Termination · ASE 2025 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
coverage-guided termination · 0.9binary instrumentation · 0.9
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Terminator: Enabling Efficient Fuzzing of Closed-Source GUI Programs by Automatic Coverage-Guided TerminationabstractWhen fuzzing a proprietary file-processing program, one typically executes the whole program repeatedly with sampled input files, and distinguishes between normal and abnormal termination. While this works well for many command-line utilities, it is more complicated for programs that usually do not terminate after input file processing. Many real-world applications are examples of such programs, in particular, those with a graphical user interface (GUI), such as image editors, media players and document viewers. In these cases, the fuzzer has to define the scope of the execution and forcefully terminate the program under test.In order to efficiently fuzz test file-processing programs with a GUI, a standard approach is to define a dedicated testing harness, which executes the file processing in isolation and strips irrelevant program parts. However, this either requires the source code of the program or an expert’s effort in reverse engineering. Alternative approaches work on the unmodified binary of the program, and use a heuristic to decide when the input processing is likely done. For example, one can terminate the program after a fixed timeout or once its CPU usage has dropped below a threshold. We show that these heuristics, while simple to implement, are inefficient and ineffective.We present Terminator, a fully-automated approach to facilitate efficient fuzzing of closed-source file-processing programs with a GUI. Terminator modifies the binary of the program under test so that it automatically terminates when code coverage stops increasing without user interaction. Consequently, Terminator (1) ensures that the program terminates soon after the input processing instead of waiting for user interaction, and, at the same time, (2) prevents premature termination during input processing. We show that Terminator outperforms the timeout and CPU usage heuristics and significantly increases fuzzing efficiency. Jonas Zabel, Philip Kolvenbach, Steven Arzt |
ASE | 1 |