Meeting Times |
Days: Weds and Fridays at 2:30 pm
Location: FB331
Description |
This graduate-level course focuses on selected research topics in systems security covering papers from operating systems, networking, and computer security and forensics venues. The course is structured as a research seminar where students jointly present (with me) research papers to their peers. Introduction to Computer Security (COMP535) or equivalent is strongly advised as a prerequisite for this course. In addition, familiarity with low-level systems programming (e.g., C and assembly) will be necessary to understand the details of some of the assigned papers.
Course Project |
The course project will entail submitting (to me) a workshop-quality research paper outlining novel ideas. This project can involve application of concepts learned from existing research papers, but MUST depict original ideas. Validation of prior work is also permitted, but in those cases, a more thorough analysis of the original work's strengths and weaknesses must be undertaken. There will be several checkpoints throughout the semester, one of which includes a short survey paper on work related to your chosen topic. The course project constitutes 60% of your final grade. Graduate students will be required to use LaTeX when preparing their interim and final reports. Several ideas for potential projects will be suggested, but students are encouraged to work on topics that they are passionate about. Depending on the size of course enrollment, students may be required to work in small groups (of max 3 persons) on the course project. Of course, the more people on a project, the higher my expectations :)
Readings and Presentations |
Students are required to read the papers assigned during the semester and be able to competently discuss the material in class. Each student will be responsible for presenting one lecture (depending on the class size) -- that lecture will be based on the assigned paper(s) for the week including as much relevant related work as necessary to distill the work presented in that paper. The presenter will provide a comprehensive overview of the topic suitable for a 1-hour talk. Additionally, each student will be responsible for submitting a constructive critique of the main paper(s) assigned each week; We may be using an online review management system (hotCRP) for submitting reviews. Additionally, for each assigned paper, students must also suggest (1) at least two thought-provoking questions regarding the material covered in the paper (2) an in-depth discussion of possible directions for future work based on the ideas / topic of the paper. These questions must critically evaluate the paper (e.g., questioning the assumptions, questioning whether the experiments were lacking (and why), discussing flaws or omissions in the analysis, areas for improvement, etc.). This summary will be turned in to the moderator (and myself) each Tuesday session.
The moderator is responsible for recapping (within 15 mins) the discussion that transpired on the Tuesday session or pertinent points raised in the reviews. Occasionally, the moderator will also be responsible for presenting any supplimentary material not covered by the presenter. Hence, the expectation is that the moderator, the presenter, and myself will work closely in preparing the material for a given week. The moderator will lead the general discussions on Thursday. Notes on the week's discussion must also be compiled by the moderator and submitted to the course mailing list no later than 1 week after the Thursday lecture.
Office Hours |
Thursday 1 - 3 pm or by appointment.
Mailing List |
Registered students will automatically be added to the course mailing list.
Grading |
This is intended to be an INTERACTIVE class, and as such, class participation will play a significant role in the course grading criteria. (If you've taken COMP535 before, then you know what I mean. And yes, like COMP535, you can also expect to be coding!) Students will be graded on the presentation of their assigned paper(s), their participation in discussions, and their course project. Tentative weights for the grading are as follows:
Deliverable | Grade |
Presentations | 25% |
Project | 60% |
Class participation | 15% |
Date |
Topic | Presenter (Tuesday) |
Moderator  (Thursday) |
Week 1 |
Course Introduction, selection of presenters, project discussion
See How To Get Your Systems Paper Accepted?, P. Pietzuch, 2011) related readings:
|
Fabian
|
No Class
|
Week 2 |
![]()
M. Backes, T. Holz, B. Kollenda, P. Koppe, S. Nurnberger, J. Pewny related readings:
|
Kevin Snow
|
Fabian
|
Week 3 |
![]()
S. Chen, J. Xu, E. Sezer, P. Guariar, R. Iyer related readings:
|
Roman Rogowski
|
Fabian
|
Week 4 |
![]()
B.Eshete and V.N. Venkatakrishnan related readings:
|
Teryl Taylor |
Nathan Otterness |
Week 5 |
![]()
P. Gupta, B. Srinivasan, V. Balasubramaniyan, M. Ahamad. related readings:
|
Micah Morton
|
Fabian
|
Week 6 |
![]()
B. Saltaformaggio, Z. Gu, X. Zhang, D. Xu related readings:
|
Nathan |
Jan |
Week 7 Sept 30, Oct. 2 |
Guest Lecturer: Michalis Polychronakis, Code Randomization for Fun and Profit. Project Updates (Friday) |
||
Week 8 |
Direct Memory Access (DMA) Attacks meets memory encryption
E. Blass and W. Robertson. TRESOR-Hunt: Attacking CPU-Bound Encryption, ACSAC, 2012. related readings:
|
Jan |
Roman
|
Week 9 |
![]()
N. Sovarel, D. Evans, and N. Paul related readings:
|
Vance |
Kevin
|
October 14 |
Literature Review due
|
||
Week 10 |
Michael |
Micah
|
|
Oct 28 - Nov. 6 |
Away for RAID Conference
|
||
Week 11 |
![]()
Yoongu Kim et al. related readings:
|
TBA |
TBA
|
Week 12 |
![]()
Y.Wang et al. related readings:
|
TBA |
TBA
|
Remaining weeks | Remaining papers to be decided based on class makeup; finalized during the first 3 weeks of class. | ||
XXX | Final presentations and submission of course project |