A system and language for building system-specific, static analyses

By Seth Hallem, B. Chelf, Yichen Xie, Dawson R. Engler. ACM-SIGPLAN Symposium on Programming Language Design and Implementation, 2002

360 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Artificial Intelligence, Information Systems, Software

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/34f08c2907249b068c680421583c5264970eda1c

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Artificial Intelligence

In Information Systems

In Software

Citations in the corpus

Securing web application code by static analysis and runtime protection (2004, background): “The recognition of this problem is reflected by the recent burst of efforts that aim to improve Web application security via numerous different approaches.”
Static Detection of Security Vulnerabilities in Scripting Languages (2006, methodology): “Other tainting analysis that are proven effective on C code include CQual [4], MECA [21], and MC [6, 2].”
Finding bugs is easy (2004, methodology): “Often, these techniques rely on formal methods and sophisticated program analysis.”
Thorough static analysis of device drivers (2006, methodology): “Tools from the Meta Compilation project at Stanford use heuristic analyses [29, 15, 33] as well, and they have successfully found many errors in Linux.”
/*icomment: bugs or bad comments?*/ (2007, methodology): “Before the checking process, for certain rules such as lock-related rules, similar to many previous rule checkers [20], the user needs to specify the actions (e.”
The software model checker Blast (2007, background): “The specification is usually given by program instrumentation that defines a monitor automaton [5,7,41, 79], which observes if a program execution violates the desired property, such as adherence to a locking or security discipline.”
ESP: path-sensitive program verification in polynomial time (2002, background): “Recent extensions to Metal incorporate some degree of inter-procedural analysis and path-sensitivity [16].”
DART: directed automated random testing (2005, methodology): “Examples of such tools are Prefix/Prefast [6], MC [16], Klocwork [22], and Polyspace [33].”
RacerX: effective, static detection of race conditions and deadlocks (2003, methodology): “We do not discuss these results further: our checker is conceptually no different than that described by in previous work [20], though it is a completely different implementation.”
Refinement-based context-sensitive points-to analysis for Java (2006, neutral): “In static veriﬁcation , imprecise points-to information generates many false positives; consequently, veriﬁers often ignore the effects of pointers [18,29], for-feiting soundness.”
CP-Miner: finding copy-paste and related bugs in large-scale software code (2006, background): “Index Terms—Software analysis, code reuse, code duplication, debugging aids, data mining.”
Compositional dynamic test generation (2007, methodology): “This paper addresses this major limitation and proposes to perform dynamic test generation compositionally, by adapting known techniques for interprocedural static analysis (e.g., [RHS95]) that have been used to make static analysis scalable to very large programs (e.g., [BPS00, DLS02, HCXE02 , CDW”
CP-Miner: A Tool for Finding Copy-paste and Related Bugs in Operating System Code (2004, methodology): “This bug is a semantic error, and therefore it cannot be easily detected by memory-related bug detection tools including static checkers [9, 14, 17, 32] or dynamic tools such as Purify [19], Valgrind [36], and CCured [12].”