Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Jakob Lichtenberg
dblp:31/1648
· DBLP profile ↗
4ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2020
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 3Theory of computation · 3Systems, architecture and hardware · 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
2 papers |
Program analysis · 38% Program verification · 31% Operating systems · 30% |
Topics — the 5 heaviest of 6, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Program analysis
static analysis |
0.1 | 2 | 2010 | Thorough static analysis of device drivers · EuroSys 2006 The Static Driver Verifier Research Platform · CAV 2010 |
Program analysis › error detection
API usage error detection |
0.1 | 1 | 2006 | Thorough static analysis of device drivers · EuroSys 2006 |
Operating systems › i/o › i/o subsystem
device drivers |
0.1 | 1 | 2006 | Thorough static analysis of device drivers · EuroSys 2006 |
Operating systems › i/o › i/o subsystem › device drivers
device driver verification |
0.1 | 1 | 2006 | Thorough static analysis of device drivers · EuroSys 2006 |
Program verification
model checking |
0.0 | 1 | 2006 | Thorough static analysis of device drivers · EuroSys 2006 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
static analysis engine · 0.1API usage rules · 0.1
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | Angelic Checking within Static Driver Verifier: Towards high-precision defects without (modeling) costabstractMicrosoft's Static Driver Verifier (SDV) pioneered the use of software model checking for ensuring that device drivers correctly use operating system (OS) APIs.However, the verification methodology has been difficult to extend in order to support either (a) new classes of drivers for which SDV does not already have a harness and stubs, or (b) memory-corruption properties.Any attempt to apply SDV out-of-the-box results in either false alarms due to the lack of environment modeling, or scalability issues when finding deeply nested bugs in the presence of a very large number of memory accesses.In this paper, we describe our experience designing and shipping a new class of checks known as angelic checks through SDV with the aid of angelic verification (AV) [1] technology, over a period of 4 years.AV pairs a precise inter-procedural assertion checker with automatic inference of likely specifications for the environment.AV helps compensate for the lack of environment modeling and regains scalability by making it possible to find deeply nested bugs, even for complex memorycorruption properties.These new rules have together found over a hundred confirmed defects during internal deployment at Microsoft, including several previously unknown high-impact potential security vulnerabilities.AV considerably increases the reach of SDV, both in terms of drivers as well as rules that it can support effectively. Shuvendu K. Lahiri, Akash Lal, Sridhar Gopinath, Alexander Nutz, Vladimir Levin, Rahul Kumar 0002, Nate Deisinger, Jakob Lichtenberg, Chetan Bansal |
FMCAD | 8 |
| 2016 | CloudSDV Enabling Static Driver Verifier Using Microsoft Azure
Rahul Kumar 0002, Thomas Ball 0001, Jakob Lichtenberg, Nate Deisinger, Apoorv Upreti, Chetan Bansal |
IFM | 3 |
| 2010 | The Static Driver Verifier Research Platform
Thomas Ball 0001, Ella Bounimova, Vladimir Levin, Rahul Kumar 0002, Jakob Lichtenberg |
CAV | 5 |
| 2006 | Thorough static analysis of device driversabstractBugs in kernel-level device drivers cause 85% of the system crashes in the Windows XP operating system [44]. One of the sources of these errors is the complexity of the Windows driver API itself: programmers must master a complex set of rules about how to use the driver API in order to create drivers that are good clients of the kernel. We have built a static analysis engine that finds API usage errors in C programs. The Static Driver Verifier tool (SDV) uses this engine to find kernel API usage errors in a driver. SDV includes models of the OS and the environment of the device driver, and over sixty API usage rules. SDV is intended to be used by driver developers "out of the box." Thus, it has stringent requirements: (1) complete automation with no input from the user; (2) a low rate of false errors. We discuss the techniques used in SDV to meet these requirements, and empirical results from running SDV on over one hundred Windows device drivers. Thomas Ball 0001, Ella Bounimova, Byron Cook, Vladimir Levin, Jakob Lichtenberg, Con McGarvey, Bohus Ondrusek, Sriram K. Rajamani, Abdullah Ustuner |
EuroSys | 5 |