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

Jeremy Hu

dblp:224/2390 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2018
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Security 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.

Network and information security
1 paper
Systems and software security · 100%
Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Empirical software engineering · 67% Software testing · 33%

Topics — the 5 heaviest of 6, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Systems and software security › vulnerability discovery
human factors in vulnerability discovery
0.312018
Hackers vs. Testers: A Comparison of Software Vulnerability Discovery Processes · IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy 2018
Systems and software security
vulnerability discovery
0.312018
Hackers vs. Testers: A Comparison of Software Vulnerability Discovery Processes · IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy 2018
Empirical software engineering
developer studies
0.112018
Hackers vs. Testers: A Comparison of Software Vulnerability Discovery Processes · IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy 2018
Empirical software engineering › practitioner studies
security practitioner study
0.112018
Hackers vs. Testers: A Comparison of Software Vulnerability Discovery Processes · IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy 2018
Software testing › non-functional testing
security testing
0.112018
Hackers vs. Testers: A Comparison of Software Vulnerability Discovery Processes · IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy 2018

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

semi-structured interview study · 0.7
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2018 Hackers vs. Testers: A Comparison of Software Vulnerability Discovery Processes
abstract
Identifying security vulnerabilities in software is a critical task that requires significant human effort. Currently, vulnerability discovery is often the responsibility of software testers before release and white-hat hackers (often within bug bounty programs) afterward. This arrangement can be ad-hoc and far from ideal; for example, if testers could identify more vulnerabilities, software would be more secure at release time. Thus far, however, the processes used by each group - and how they compare to and interact with each other - have not been well studied. This paper takes a first step toward better understanding, and eventually improving, this ecosystem: we report on a semi-structured interview study (n=25) with both testers and hackers, focusing on how each group finds vulnerabilities, how they develop their skills, and the challenges they face. The results suggest that hackers and testers follow similar processes, but get different results due largely to differing experiences and therefore different underlying knowledge of security concepts. Based on these results, we provide recommendations to support improved security training for testers, better communication between hackers and developers, and smarter bug bounty policies to motivate hacker participation.
Daniel Votipka, Rock Stevens, Elissa M. Redmiles, Jeremy Hu, Michelle L. Mazurek
IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy4