References of "Li, Li"
     in
Bookmark and Share    
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailShould You Consider Adware as Malware in Your Study?
Gao, Jun UL; Li, Li; Kong, Pingfan UL et al

in 26th edition of the IEEE International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution and Reengineering (2019, February 24)

Empirical validations of research approaches eventually require a curated ground truth. In studies related to Android malware, such a ground truth is built by leveraging Anti-Virus (AV) scanning reports ... [more ▼]

Empirical validations of research approaches eventually require a curated ground truth. In studies related to Android malware, such a ground truth is built by leveraging Anti-Virus (AV) scanning reports which are often provided free through online services such as VirusTotal. Unfortunately, these reports do not offer precise information for appropriately and uniquely assigning classes to samples in app datasets: AV engines indeed do not have a consensus on specifying information in labels. Furthermore, labels often mix information related to families, types, etc. In particular, the notion of “adware” is currently blurry when it comes to maliciousness. There is thus a need to thoroughly investigate cases where adware samples can actually be associated with malware (e.g., because they are tagged as adware but could be considered as malware as well). In this work, we present a large-scale analytical study of Android adware samples to quantify to what extent “adware should be considered as malware”. Our analysis is based on the Androzoo repository of 5 million apps with associated AV labels and leverages a state-of-the-art label harmonization tool to infer the malicious type of apps before confronting it against the ad families that each adware app is associated with. We found that all adware families include samples that are actually known to implement specific malicious behavior types. Up to 50% of samples in an ad family could be flagged as malicious. Overall the study demonstrates that adware is not necessarily benign. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 115 (12 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailFraudDroid: Automated Ad Fraud Detection for Android Apps
Dong, Feng; Wang, Haoyu; Li, Li et al

in ACM Joint European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering (ESEC/FSE 2018) (2018, November)

Detailed reference viewed: 94 (3 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailMoonlightBox: Mining Android API Histories for Uncovering Release-time Inconsistencies
Li, Li; Bissyande, Tegawendé François D Assise UL; Klein, Jacques UL

in 29th IEEE International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering (ISSRE) (2018, October)

Detailed reference viewed: 82 (4 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailAutomated Testing of Android Apps: A Systematic Literature Review
Kong, Pingfan UL; Li, Li; Gao, Jun UL et al

in IEEE Transactions on Reliability (2018)

Automated testing of Android apps is essential for app users, app developers and market maintainer communities alike. Given the widespread adoption of Android and the specificities of its development ... [more ▼]

Automated testing of Android apps is essential for app users, app developers and market maintainer communities alike. Given the widespread adoption of Android and the specificities of its development model, the literature has proposed various testing approaches for ensuring that not only functional requirements but also non-functional requirements are satisfied. In this paper, we aim at providing a clear overview of the state-of-the-art works around the topic of Android app testing, in an attempt to highlight the main trends, pinpoint the main methodologies applied and enumerate the challenges faced by the Android testing approaches as well as the directions where the community effort is still needed. To this end, we conduct a Systematic Literature Review (SLR) during which we eventually identified 103 relevant research papers published in leading conferences and journals until 2016. Our thorough examination of the relevant literature has led to several findings and highlighted the challenges that Android testing researchers should strive to address in the future. After that, we further propose a few concrete research directions where testing approaches are needed to solve recurrent issues in app updates, continuous increases of app sizes, as well as the Android ecosystem fragmentation. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 114 (22 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailA Closer Look at Real-World Patches
Liu, Kui UL; Kim, Dongsun UL; Koyuncu, Anil UL et al

in 34th IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME) (2018, September)

Bug fixing is a time-consuming and tedious task. To reduce the manual efforts in bug fixing, researchers have presented automated approaches to software repair. Unfortunately, recent studies have shown ... [more ▼]

Bug fixing is a time-consuming and tedious task. To reduce the manual efforts in bug fixing, researchers have presented automated approaches to software repair. Unfortunately, recent studies have shown that the state-of-the-art techniques in automated repair tend to generate patches only for a small number of bugs even with quality issues (e.g., incorrect behavior and nonsensical changes). To improve automated program repair (APR) techniques, the community should deepen its knowledge on repair actions from real-world patches since most of the techniques rely on patches written by human developers. Previous investigations on real-world patches are limited to statement level that is not sufficiently fine-grained to build this knowledge. In this work, we contribute to building this knowledge via a systematic and fine-grained study of 16,450 bug fix commits from seven Java open-source projects. We find that there are opportunities for APR techniques to improve their effectiveness by looking at code elements that have not yet been investigated. We also discuss nine insights into tuning automated repair tools. For example, a small number of statement and expression types are recurrently impacted by real-world patches, and expression-level granularity could reduce search space of finding fix ingredients, where previous studies never explored. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 105 (23 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailCiD: Automating the Detection of API-related Compatibility Issues in Android Apps
Li, Li; Bissyande, Tegawendé François D Assise UL; Wang, Haoyu et al

in International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis (ISSTA) (2018, July)

Detailed reference viewed: 95 (3 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailFaCoY - A Code-to-Code Search Engine
Kim, Kisub UL; Kim, Dongsun UL; Bissyande, Tegawendé François D Assise UL et al

in International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE 2018) (2018, May 27)

Code search is an unavoidable activity in software development. Various approaches and techniques have been explored in the literature to support code search tasks. Most of these approaches focus on ... [more ▼]

Code search is an unavoidable activity in software development. Various approaches and techniques have been explored in the literature to support code search tasks. Most of these approaches focus on serving user queries provided as natural language free-form input. However, there exists a wide range of use-case scenarios where a code-to-code approach would be most beneficial. For example, research directions in code transplantation, code diversity, patch recommendation can leverage a code-to-code search engine to find essential ingredients for their techniques. In this paper, we propose FaCoY, a novel approach for statically finding code fragments which may be semantically similar to user input code. FaCoY implements a query alternation strategy: instead of directly matching code query tokens with code in the search space, FaCoY first attempts to identify other tokens which may also be relevant in implementing the functional behavior of the input code. With various experiments, we show that (1) FaCoY is more effective than online code-to-code search engines; (2) FaCoY can detect more semantic code clones (i.e., Type-4) in BigCloneBench than the state-of-theart; (3) FaCoY, while static, can detect code fragments which are indeed similar with respect to runtime execution behavior; and (4) FaCoY can be useful in code/patch recommendation. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 111 (14 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailCharacterising Deprecated Android APIs
Li, Li; Gao, Jun UL; Bissyande, Tegawendé François D Assise UL et al

in 15th International Conference on Mining Software Repositories (MSR 2018) (2018, May)

Detailed reference viewed: 82 (6 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailOn Vulnerability Evolution in Android Apps
Gao, Jun UL; Li, Li; Pingfan, Kong et al

Poster (2018)

Detailed reference viewed: 66 (22 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailA verification framework for stateful security protocols
Li, Li; Dong, Naipeng; Pang, Jun UL et al

in Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Formal Engineering Methods (2017)

Detailed reference viewed: 74 (1 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailSymbolic analysis of an electric vehicle charging protocol.
Li, Li; Pang, Jun UL; Liu, Yang et al

in Proceedings of 19th IEEE Conference on Engineering of Complex Computer Systems (ICECCS) (2014)

Detailed reference viewed: 59 (0 UL)