Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Sidney Karin
dblp:53/1118
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2007
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Security and privacy · 2
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 |
Network security · 33% Digital forensics and information hiding · 33% Malware analysis · 33% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Malware analysis › malware behavior analysis
API call sequence analysis |
0.1 | 1 | 2007 | Analysis of Computer Intrusions Using Sequences of Function Calls · IEEE Trans. Dependable Secur. Comput. 2007 |
Digital forensics and information hiding
digital forensics |
0.1 | 1 | 2007 | Analysis of Computer Intrusions Using Sequences of Function Calls · IEEE Trans. Dependable Secur. Comput. 2007 |
Network security › intrusion detection and prevention
intrusion detection |
0.1 | 1 | 2007 | Analysis of Computer Intrusions Using Sequences of Function Calls · IEEE Trans. Dependable Secur. Comput. 2007 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
sequence analysis · 0.1anomaly detection · 0.1
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2007 | Analysis of Computer Intrusions Using Sequences of Function CallsabstractThis paper demonstrates the value of analyzing sequences of function calls for forensic analysis. Although this approach has been used for intrusion detection (that is, determining that a system has been attacked), its value in isolating the cause and effects of the attack has not previously been shown. We also look for not only the presence of unexpected events but also the absence of expected events. We tested these techniques using reconstructed exploits in su, ssh, and lpr, as well as proof-of-concept code, and, in all cases, were able to detect the anomaly and the nature of the vulnerability. Sean Peisert, Matt Bishop, Sidney Karin, Keith Marzullo |
IEEE Trans. Dependable Secur. Comput. | 3 |
| 2005 | Principles-driven forensic analysisabstractIt is possible to enhance our understanding of what has happened on a computer system by using forensic techniques that do not require prediction of the nature of the attack, the skill of the attacker, or the details of the system resources or objects affected. These techniques address five fundamental principles of computer forensics. These principles include recording data about the entire operating system, particularly user space events and environments, and interpreting events at different layers of abstraction, aided by the context in which they occurred. They also deal with modeling the recorded data as a multi-resolution, finite state machine so that results can be established to a high degree of certainty rather than merely inferred. Sean Peisert, Sidney Karin, Matt Bishop, Keith Marzullo |
NSPW | 2 |