activity
20182021
most citedBuild It, Break It, Fix It: Contesting Secure Development

24 citations · 29 across the 3 of their papers we have counts for

collaborators

5 papers

cs.CR20212 cited

Strategies and Perceived Risks of Sending Sensitive Documents

Noel Warford, Collins W. Munyendo, Ashna Mediratta +2

People are frequently required to send documents, forms, or other materials containing sensitive data (e.g., personal information, medical records, financial data) to remote partie…

cs.CY2020

Measuring Non-Expert Comprehension of Machine Learning Fairness Metrics

Debjani Saha, Candice Schumann, Duncan C. McElfresh +3

Bias in machine learning has manifested injustice in several areas, such as medicine, hiring, and criminal justice. In response, computer scientists have developed myriad definitio…

cs.CR20193 cited

An Observational Investigation of Reverse Engineers' Processes

Daniel Votipka, Seth M. Rabin, Kristopher Micinski +2

Reverse engineering is a complex process essential to software-security tasks such as vulnerability discovery and malware analysis. Significant research and engineering effort has…

cs.CR201924 cited

Build It, Break It, Fix It: Contesting Secure Development

James Parker, Michael Hicks, Andrew Ruef +5

Typical security contests focus on breaking or mitigating the impact of buggy systems. We present the Build-it, Break-it, Fix-it (BIBIFI) contest, which aims to assess the ability…

cs.GT2018

Dancing Pigs or Externalities? Measuring the Rationality of Security Decisions

Elissa M. Redmiles, Michelle L. Mazurek, John P. Dickerson

Accurately modeling human decision-making in security is critical to thinking about when, why, and how to recommend that users adopt certain secure behaviors. In this work, we cond…