Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Freya Gassmann

dblp:128/9223 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
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

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis
security analysis
0.812024
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
0.812024
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
0.312026
"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
0.212024
Shedding Light on CVSS Scoring Inconsistencies: A User-Centric Study on Evaluating Widespread Security Vulnerabilities · SP 2024
Systems and software security
vulnerability management
0.212024
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
YearPublicationVenuePosition
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
CHI5
2024 Shedding Light on CVSS Scoring Inconsistencies: A User-Centric Study on Evaluating Widespread Security Vulnerabilities
abstract
The 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
SP4
2020 Long-Term Observation on Browser Fingerprinting: Users' Trackability and Perspective
abstract
Abstract 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
TrustBus3