Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Freya Gassmann
dblp:128/9223
· DBLP profile ↗
4ranked-venue papers
0as first author
2since 2021 · last 2026
0000-0003-2433-8551ORCID · corroborated
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Security and privacy · 3 · 1 since 2021Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 1 · 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.
| Network and information security
1 paper |
Systems and software security · 44% Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis · 28% Usable security · 28% | |
| Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper |
Collaborative and social computing · 77% Human-robot interaction · 23% |
Topics — the 5 heaviest of 7, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis
security analysis |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Shedding Light on CVSS Scoring Inconsistencies: A User-Centric Study on Evaluating Widespread Security Vulnerabilities · SP 2024 |
Systems and software security › vulnerability management
vulnerability severity scoring |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Shedding Light on CVSS Scoring Inconsistencies: A User-Centric Study on Evaluating Widespread Security Vulnerabilities · SP 2024 |
Human-robot interaction › multi-party interaction
power dynamics |
0.3 | 1 | 2026 | "Technically speaking I'm at the top of the hierarchy": How System Administrators Think About Power · CHI 2026 |
Systems and software security › vulnerability management › vulnerability severity scoring
CVSS |
0.2 | 1 | 2024 | Shedding Light on CVSS Scoring Inconsistencies: A User-Centric Study on Evaluating Widespread Security Vulnerabilities · SP 2024 |
Systems and software security
vulnerability management |
0.2 | 1 | 2024 | Shedding Light on CVSS Scoring Inconsistencies: A User-Centric Study on Evaluating Widespread Security Vulnerabilities · SP 2024 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
user study · 0.8online survey · 0.8
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | "Technically speaking I'm at the top of the hierarchy": How System Administrators Think About Power
Lydia Weinberger, Carolin Lämmle, Andreas Hammer 0003, Christian Eichenmüller, Freya Gassmann, Zinaida Benenson |
CHI | 5 |
| 2024 | Shedding Light on CVSS Scoring Inconsistencies: A User-Centric Study on Evaluating Widespread Security VulnerabilitiesabstractThe Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) is a popular method for evaluating the severity of vulnerabilities in vulnerability management. In the evaluation process, a numeric score between 0 and 10 is calculated, 10 being the most severe (critical) value. The goal of CVSS is to provide comparable scores across different evaluators. However, previous works indicate that CVSS might not reach this goal: If a vulnerability is evaluated by several analysts, their scores often differ. This raises the following questions: Are CVSS evaluations consistent? Which factors influence CVSS assessments? We systematically investigate these questions in an online survey with 196 CVSS users. We show that specific CVSS metrics are inconsistently evaluated for widespread vulnerability types, including Top 3 vulnerabilities from the "2022 CWE Top 25 Most Dangerous Software Weaknesses" list. In a follow-up survey with 59 participants, we found that for the same vulnerabilities from the main study, 68% of these users gave different severity ratings. Our study reveals that most evaluators are aware of the problematic aspects of CVSS, but they still see CVSS as a useful tool for vulnerability assessment. Finally, we discuss possible reasons for inconsistent evaluations and provide recommendations on improving the consistency of scoring. Julia Wunder, Andreas Kurtz 0004, Christian Eichenmüller, Freya Gassmann, Zinaida Benenson |
SP | 4 |
| 2020 | Long-Term Observation on Browser Fingerprinting: Users' Trackability and PerspectiveabstractAbstract Browser fingerprinting as a tracking technique to recognize users based on their browsers’ unique features or behavior has been known for more than a decade. We present the results of a 3-year online study on browser fingerprinting with more than 1,300 users. This is the first study with ground truth on user level, which allows the assessment of trackability based on fingerprints of multiple browsers and devices per user. Based on our longitudinal observations of 88,000 measurements with over 300 considered browser features, we optimized feature sets for mobile and desktop devices. Further, we conducted two user surveys to determine the representativeness of our user sample based on users’ demographics and technical background, and to learn how users perceive browser fingerprinting and how they protect themselves. Gaston Pugliese, Christian Riess, Freya Gassmann, Zinaida Benenson |
Proc. Priv. Enhancing Technol. | 3 |
| 2014 | Differences between Android and iPhone Users in Their Security and Privacy Awareness
Lena Reinfelder, Zinaida Benenson, Freya Gassmann |
TrustBus | 3 |