Sie haben Javascript deaktiviert!
Sie haben versucht eine Funktion zu nutzen, die nur mit Javascript möglich ist. Um sämtliche Funktionalitäten unserer Internetseite zu nutzen, aktivieren Sie bitte Javascript in Ihrem Browser.

Der Campus im Frühling. Bildinformationen anzeigen

Der Campus im Frühling.

Foto: Universität Paderborn, Kamil Glabica.

Felix Pauck

 Felix Pauck

Spezifikation und Modellierung von Softwaresystemen


+49 5251 60-1765
+49 5251 60-3993

Verfügbarkeit (Arbeitszeit):
Montag - Freitag
07:00 bis ~15:30

Pohlweg 51
33098 Paderborn

Liste im Research Information System öffnen


Reproducing Taint-Analysis Results with ReproDroid

F. Pauck, E. Bodden, H. Wehrheim, in: Software Engineering 2020, Fachtagung des GI-Fachbereichs Softwaretechnik, 24.-28. Februar 2020, Innsbruck, Austria, Gesellschaft f{\"{u}}r Informatik e.V., 2020, pp. 123-124


Together Strong: Cooperative Android App Analysis

F. Pauck, H. Wehrheim, in: Proceedings of the 2019 27th ACM Joint Meeting on European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering, 2019, pp. 374-384

Recent years have seen the development of numerous tools for the analysis of taint flows in Android apps. Taint analyses aim at detecting data leaks, accidentally or by purpose programmed into apps. Often, such tools specialize in the treatment of specific features impeding precise taint analysis (like reflection or inter-app communication). This multitude of tools, their specific applicability and their various combination options complicate the selection of a tool (or multiple tools) when faced with an analysis instance, even for knowledgeable users, and hence hinders the successful adoption of taint analyses. In this work, we thus present CoDiDroid, a framework for cooperative Android app analysis. CoDiDroid (1) allows users to ask questions about flows in apps in varying degrees of detail, (2) automatically generates subtasks for answering such questions, (3) distributes tasks onto analysis tools (currently DroidRA, FlowDroid, HornDroid, IC3 and two novel tools) and (4) at the end merges tool answers on subtasks into an overall answer. Thereby, users are freed from having to learn about the use and functionality of all these tools while still being able to leverage their capabilities. Moreover, we experimentally show that cooperation among tools pays off with respect to effectiveness, precision and scalability.

When Are Software Verification Results Valid for Approximate Hardware?

T. Isenberg, M. Jakobs, F. Pauck, H. Wehrheim, in: Tests and Proofs - 13th International Conference, {TAP} 2019, Held as Part of the Third World Congress on Formal Methods 2019, Porto, Portugal, October 9-11, 2019, Proceedings, 2019, pp. 3-20


Android App Merging for Benchmark Speed-Up and Analysis Lift-Up

F. Pauck, S. Zhang, in: 2019 34th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering Workshop (ASEW), 2019

In the field of software analysis a trade-off between scalability and accuracy always exists. In this respect, Android app analysis is no exception, in particular, analyzing large or many apps can be challenging. Dealing with many small apps is a typical challenge when facing micro-benchmarks such as DROIDBENCH or ICC-BENCH. These particular benchmarks are not only used for the evaluation of novel tools but also in continuous integration pipelines of existing mature tools to maintain and guarantee a certain quality-level. Considering this latter usage it becomes very important to be able to achieve benchmark results as fast as possible. Hence, benchmarks have to be optimized for this purpose. One approach to do so is app merging. We implemented the Android Merge Tool (AMT) following this approach and show that its novel aspects can be used to produce scaled up and accurate benchmarks. For such benchmarks Android app analysis tools do not suffer from the scalability-accuracy trade-off anymore. We show this throughout detailed experiments on DROIDBENCH employing three different analysis tools (AMANDROID, ICCTA, FLOWDROID). Benchmark execution times are largely reduced without losing benchmark accuracy. Moreover, we argue why AMT is an advantageous successor of the state-of-the-art app merging tool (APKCOMBINER) in analysis lift-up scenarios.


Do Android taint analysis tools keep their promises?

F. Pauck, E. Bodden, H. Wehrheim, in: Proceedings of the 2018 26th ACM Joint Meeting on European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering - ESEC/FSE 2018, ACM Press, 2018


Do Android Taint Analysis Tools Keep their Promises?

F. Pauck, E. Bodden, H. Wehrheim, in: arXiv:1804.02903, 2018

In recent years, researchers have developed a number of tools to conduct taint analysis of Android applications. While all the respective papers aim at providing a thorough empirical evaluation, comparability is hindered by varying or unclear evaluation targets. Sometimes, the apps used for evaluation are not precisely described. In other cases, authors use an established benchmark but cover it only partially. In yet other cases, the evaluations differ in terms of the data leaks searched for, or lack a ground truth to compare against. All those limitations make it impossible to truly compare the tools based on those published evaluations. We thus present ReproDroid, a framework allowing the accurate comparison of Android taint analysis tools. ReproDroid supports researchers in inferring the ground truth for data leaks in apps, in automatically applying tools to benchmarks, and in evaluating the obtained results. We use ReproDroid to comparatively evaluate on equal grounds the six prominent taint analysis tools Amandroid, DIALDroid, DidFail, DroidSafe, FlowDroid and IccTA. The results are largely positive although four tools violate some promises concerning features and accuracy. Finally, we contribute to the area of unbiased benchmarking with a new and improved version of the open test suite DroidBench.

Validity of Software Verification Results on Approximate Hardware

T. Isenberg, M. Jakobs, F. Pauck, H. Wehrheim, IEEE Embedded Systems Letters (2018), pp. 22-25

Approximate computing (AC) is an emerging paradigm for energy-efficient computation. The basic idea of AC is to sacrifice high precision for low energy by allowing hardware to carry out “approximately correct” calculations. This provides a major challenge for software quality assurance: programs successfully verified to be correct might be erroneous on approximate hardware. In this letter, we present a novel approach for determining under what conditions a software verification result is valid for approximate hardware. To this end, we compute the allowed tolerances for AC hardware from successful verification runs. More precisely, we derive a set of constraints which—when met by the AC hardware—guarantees the verification result to carry over to AC. On the practical side, we furthermore: 1) show how to extract tolerances from verification runs employing predicate abstraction as verification technology and 2) show how to check such constraints on hardware designs. We have implemented all techniques, and exemplify them on example C programs and a number of recently proposed approximate adders.


Cooperative static analysis of Android applications

F. Pauck, Masterarbeit, Universität Paderborn, 2017


PAndA 2 : Analyzing Permission Use and Interplay in Android Apps (Tool Paper)

M. Jakobs, M. Töws, F. Pauck, in: Workshop on Formal and Model-Driven Techniques for Developing Trustworthy Systems, 2016

We present PAndA2, an extendable, static analysis tool for Android apps which examines permission related security threats like overprivilege, existence of permission redelegation and permission flows. PAndA2 comes along with a textual and graphical visualization of the analysis result and even supports the comparison of analysis results for different android app versions.


Liste im Research Information System öffnen

Die Universität der Informationsgesellschaft