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

Owura Asare

dblp:318/1376 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
2as first author
2since 2021 · last 2024
0000-0002-6755-605XORCID · corroborated

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

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 2 · 2 first-author · 2 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
Program synthesis and code generation · 87% Software testing · 13%
Network and information security
1 paper
Usable security · 100%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Usable security › security behavior
developer security behavior
0.812024
A User-centered Security Evaluation of Copilot · ICSE 2024
Program synthesis and code generation
code generation with language models
0.812024
A User-centered Security Evaluation of Copilot · ICSE 2024
Program synthesis and code generation › code generation with language models
secure code generation
0.812024
A User-centered Security Evaluation of Copilot · ICSE 2024

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

user study · 1.5
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2024 A User-centered Security Evaluation of Copilot
abstract
Code generation tools driven by artificial intelligence have recently become more popular due to advancements in deep learning and natural language processing that have increased their capabilities. The proliferation of these tools may be a double-edged sword because while they can increase developer productivity by making it easier to write code, research has shown that they can also generate insecure code. In this paper, we perform a user-centered evaluation GitHub's Copilot to better understand its strengths and weaknesses with respect to code security. We conduct a user study where participants solve programming problems (with and without Copilot assistance) that have potentially vulnerable solutions. The main goal of the user study is to determine how the use of Copilot affects participants' security performance. In our set of participants (n=25), we find that access to Copilot accompanies a more secure solution when tackling harder problems. For the easier problem, we observe no effect of Copilot access on the security of solutions. We also observe no disproportionate impact of Copilot use on particular kinds of vulnerabilities. Our results indicate that there are potential security benefits to using Copilot, but more research is warranted on the effects of the use of code generation tools on technically complex problems with security requirements.
Owura Asare, Meiyappan Nagappan, N. Asokan
ICSE1
2023 Is GitHub's Copilot as bad as humans at introducing vulnerabilities in code?
Owura Asare, Meiyappan Nagappan, N. Asokan
Empir. Softw. Eng.1