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

Seth M. Rabin

dblp:224/9249 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2021
—ORCID · none

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

Security and privacy · 2 · 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
Empirical software engineering · 100%
Network and information security
1 paper
Systems and software security · 100%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Systems and software security
reverse engineering
0.412020
An Observational Investigation of Reverse Engineers' Processes · USENIX Security Symposium 2020
Empirical software engineering
developer studies
0.412020
An Observational Investigation of Reverse Engineers' Processes · USENIX Security Symposium 2020
Empirical software engineering › developer studies
observational study
0.412020
An Observational Investigation of Reverse Engineers' Processes · USENIX Security Symposium 2020
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2021 An Investigation of Online Reverse Engineering Community Discussions in the Context of Ghidra
abstract
Reverse engineering is a complex task. As with many other expert tasks, reverse engineers rely on colleagues and the broader reverse engineering community to provide guidance and develop knowledge necessary to achieve their goals. For example, it is common for reverse engineers to reach out for help to understand and effectively use new tools. Thus far, however, there has been limited investigation of the way knowledge is developed in this community and new tools are adopted. This paper takes a first step toward understanding reverse engineering community dynamics around tool adoption, using the release of the National Security Agency's Ghidra reverse engineering framework as a point of focus. In this paper, we review discussions about Ghidra to identify what features reverse engineers are most interested in, how reverse engineers develop knowledge about Ghidra together online, and whether these dynamics differ between forums. In total, we analyze 1590 reverse engineering discussions between 688 reverse engineers over 3 forums (i.e., Twitter, Reddit, and StackExchange). Our results suggest reverse engineers are most interested in features that allow them to customize Ghidra. We also observe limited evidence of collective sensemaking on the forums, with few reverse engineers participating in multiple discussions threads and most acting as either knowledge producers or consumers. Finally, we found that the forums operated similarly, but Twitter was most often used to announce information (e.g., tutorial links, tool overviews, vulnerabilities in Ghidra) and reverse engineers used StackExchange mostly to get support for specific problems. Reddit acted as a middle option. Based on these results, we make recommendations to improve reverse engineering tool development, improve community participation during adoption, and suggest directions for future work.
Daniel Votipka, Mary Nicole Dugay Punzalan, Seth M. Rabin, Yla R. Tausczik, Michelle L. Mazurek
EuroS&P3
2020 An Observational Investigation of Reverse Engineers' Processes
Daniel Votipka, Seth M. Rabin, Kristopher K. Micinski, Jeffrey S. Foster, Michelle L. Mazurek
USENIX Security Symposium2