Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Suzanne Millstein
dblp:153/5835
· DBLP profile ↗
4ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2021
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 3 · 1 since 2021Security and privacy · 1
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
4 papers |
Program analysis · 36% Program verification · 28% Programming languages and type systems · 27% | |
| Network and information security
2 papers |
Systems and software security · 50% Web and mobile security · 50% |
Topics — the 15 heaviest of 15, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Program analysis
static analysis |
0.5 | 2 | 2018 | Lightweight verification of array indexing · ISSTA 2018 Static Analysis of Implicit Control Flow: Resolving Java Reflection and Android Intents (T) · ASE 2015 |
Program verification › concurrent program verification
determinism verification |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Verifying Determinism in Sequential Programs · ICSE 2021 |
Programming languages and type systems › type systems › refinement types
type qualifiers |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Verifying Determinism in Sequential Programs · ICSE 2021 |
Programming languages and type systems
type systems |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Verifying Determinism in Sequential Programs · ICSE 2021 |
Program analysis › error detection
array bounds checking |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Lightweight verification of array indexing · ISSTA 2018 |
Program verification › automated verification
lightweight verification |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Lightweight verification of array indexing · ISSTA 2018 |
Empirical software engineering › mining software repositories › mobile app analysis
android app analysis |
0.2 | 1 | 2015 | Static Analysis of Implicit Control Flow: Resolving Java Reflection and Android Intents (T) · ASE 2015 |
Program analysis
control flow analysis |
0.2 | 1 | 2015 | Static Analysis of Implicit Control Flow: Resolving Java Reflection and Android Intents (T) · ASE 2015 |
Program analysis
security analysis |
0.2 | 1 | 2015 | Static Analysis of Implicit Control Flow: Resolving Java Reflection and Android Intents (T) · ASE 2015 |
Systems and software security › information flow control
information flow type system |
0.2 | 1 | 2014 | Collaborative Verification of Information Flow for a High-Assurance App Store · CCS 2014 |
Program verification › security property verification
information flow verification |
0.2 | 1 | 2014 | Collaborative Verification of Information Flow for a High-Assurance App Store · CCS 2014 |
Software testing
flaky test |
0.1 | 1 | 2021 | Verifying Determinism in Sequential Programs · ICSE 2021 |
Web and mobile security › mobile security
android security |
0.1 | 1 | 2015 | Static Analysis of Implicit Control Flow: Resolving Java Reflection and Android Intents (T) · ASE 2015 |
Web and mobile security
mobile security |
0.1 | 1 | 2015 | Static Analysis of Implicit Control Flow: Resolving Java Reflection and Android Intents (T) · ASE 2015 |
Web and mobile security › mobile application security
app store security |
0.1 | 1 | 2014 | Collaborative Verification of Information Flow for a High-Assurance App Store · CCS 2014 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
static analysis · 0.9type system · 0.5reflection resolution · 0.4intent resolution · 0.4information-flow type system · 0.4declassification auditing · 0.4verification · 0.3
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | Verifying Determinism in Sequential ProgramsabstractWhen a program is nondeterministic, it is difficult to test and debug. Nondeterminism occurs even in sequential programs: e.g., by iterating over the elements of a hash table. We have created a type system that expresses determinism specifications in a program. The key ideas in the type system are type qualifiers for nondeterminism, order-nondeterminism, and determinism; type well-formedness rules to restrict collection types; and enhancements to polymorphism that improve precision when analyzing collection operations. While state of-the-art nondeterminism detection tools rely on observing output from specific runs, our approach soundly verifies determinism at compile time. We implemented our type system for Java. Our type checker, the Determinism Checker, warns if a program is nondeterministic or verifies that the program is deterministic. In case studies of 90097 lines of code, the Determinism Checker found 87 previously-unknown nondeterminism errors, even in programs that had been heavily vetted by developers who were greatly concerned about nondeterminism errors. In experiments, the Determinism Checker found all of the non-concurrency-related nondeterminism that was found by state-of-the-art dynamic approaches for detecting flaky tests. Rashmi Mudduluru, Jason Waataja, Suzanne Millstein, Michael D. Ernst |
ICSE | 3 |
| 2018 | Lightweight verification of array indexingabstractIn languages like C, out-of-bounds array accesses lead to security vulnerabilities and crashes. Even in managed languages like Java, which check array bounds at run time, out-of-bounds accesses cause exceptions that terminate the program. Martin Kellogg, Vlastimil Dort, Suzanne Millstein, Michael D. Ernst |
ISSTA | 3 |
| 2015 | Static Analysis of Implicit Control Flow: Resolving Java Reflection and Android Intents (T)abstractImplicit or indirect control flow is a transfer of control between procedures using some mechanism other than an explicit procedure call. Implicit control flow is a staple design pattern that adds flexibility to system design. However, it is challenging for a static analysis to compute or verify properties about a system that uses implicit control flow. This paper presents static analyses for two types of implicit control flow that frequently appear in Android apps: Java reflection and Android intents. Our analyses help to resolve where control flows and what data is passed. This information improves the precision of downstream analyses, which no longer need to make conservative assumptions about implicit control flow. We have implemented our techniques for Java. We enhanced an existing security analysis with a more precise treatment of reflection and intents. In a case study involving ten real-world Android apps that use both intents and reflection, the precision of the security analysis was increased on average by two orders of magnitude. The precision of two other downstream analyses was also improved. Paulo Barros, René Just, Suzanne Millstein, Paul Vines, Werner Dietl, Marcelo d'Amorim, Michael D. Ernst |
ASE | 3 |
| 2014 | Collaborative Verification of Information Flow for a High-Assurance App StoreabstractCurrent app stores distribute some malware to unsuspecting users, even though the app approval process may be costly and time-consuming. High-integrity app stores must provide stronger guarantees that their apps are not malicious. We propose a verification model for use in such app stores to guarantee that the apps are free of malicious information flows. In our model, the software vendor and the app store auditor collaborate -- each does tasks that are easy for her/him, reducing overall verification cost. The software vendor provides a behavioral specification of information flow (at a finer granularity than used by current app stores) and source code annotated with information-flow type qualifiers. A flow-sensitive, context-sensitive information-flow type system checks the information flow type qualifiers in the source code and proves that only information flows in the specification can occur at run time. The app store auditor uses the vendor-provided source code to manually verify declassifications. Michael D. Ernst, René Just, Suzanne Millstein, Werner Dietl, Stuart Pernsteiner, Franziska Roesner, Karl Koscher, Paulo Barros, Ravi Bhoraskar, Seungyeop Han, Paul Vines, Edward XueJun Wu |
CCS | 3 |