MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2105248826 · doi:10.1109/taicpart.2009.34

Grammar Based Testing of HTML Injection Vulnerabilities in RSS Feeds

2009· article· en· W2105248826 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Hoffman, Hongyi Wang, Mitch Chang, David Ly‐Gagnon

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Testing and Debugging Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceProgramming languageXMLMarkup languageRule-based machine translationCompilerCode generationGrammarParsingXHTMLContext (archaeology)Context-free grammarSyntaxNatural language processingWorld Wide WebLinguisticsOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Grammar based test generation (GBTG) has seen extensive study and considerable practical use since the 1970s. GBTG was introduced to generate source code for testing compilers from context-free grammars specifying language syntax. More recently, GBTG has been applied to many other testing problems, including the generation of eXtensible Markup Language (XML) documents. Recent research has shown how to integrate covering-array generation into GBTG tools. While the integration offers considerable power to the tester, there are few practical demonstrations in the literature. We present a case study showing how to use grammars and covering arrays for effective input generation. The generated tests have been used to systematically evaluate an RSS feed parser for HTML injection vulnerabilities.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.234 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoftware Testing and Debugging TechniquesFrench-language works237,207