Fairness Testing: Testing Software for Discrimination

This paper defines software fairness and discrimination and develops a testing-based method for measuring if and how much software discriminates, focusing on causality in discriminatory behavior. Evidence of software discrimination has been found in modern software systems that recommend criminal sentences, grant access to financial products, and determine who is allowed to participate in promotions. Our approach, Themis, generates efficient test suites to measure discrimination. Given a schema describing valid system inputs, Themis generates discrimination tests automatically and does not require an oracle. We evaluate Themis on 20 software systems, 12 of which come from prior work with explicit focus on avoiding discrimination. We find that (1) Themis is effective at discovering software discrimination, (2) state-of-the-art techniques for removing discrimination from algorithms fail in many situations, at times discriminating against as much as 98% of an input subdomain, (3) Themis optimizations are effective at producing efficient test suites for measuring discrimination, and (4) Themis is more efficient on systems that exhibit more discrimination. We thus demonstrate that fairness testing is a critical aspect of the software development cycle in domains with possible discrimination and provide initial tools for measuring software discrimination.Comment: Sainyam Galhotra, Yuriy Brun, and Alexandra Meliou. 2017. Fairness Testing: Testing Software for Discrimination. In Proceedings of 2017 11th Joint Meeting of the European Software Engineering Conference and the ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering (ESEC/FSE), Paderborn, Germany, September 4-8, 2017 (ESEC/FSE'17). https://doi.org/10.1145/3106237.3106277, ESEC/FSE, 201

Easy over Hard: A Case Study on Deep Learning

While deep learning is an exciting new technique, the benefits of this method need to be assessed with respect to its computational cost. This is particularly important for deep learning since these learners need hours (to weeks) to train the model. Such long training time limits the ability of (a)~a researcher to test the stability of their conclusion via repeated runs with different random seeds; and (b)~other researchers to repeat, improve, or even refute that original work. For example, recently, deep learning was used to find which questions in the Stack Overflow programmer discussion forum can be linked together. That deep learning system took 14 hours to execute. We show here that applying a very simple optimizer called DE to fine tune SVM, it can achieve similar (and sometimes better) results. The DE approach terminated in 10 minutes; i.e. 84 times faster hours than deep learning method. We offer these results as a cautionary tale to the software analytics community and suggest that not every new innovation should be applied without critical analysis. If researchers deploy some new and expensive process, that work should be baselined against some simpler and faster alternatives.Comment: 12 pages, 6 figures, accepted at FSE201

JoanAudit: A tool for auditing common injection vulnerabilities

JoanAudit is a static analysis tool to assist security auditors in auditing Web applications and Web services for common injection vulnerabilities during software development. It automatically identifies parts of the program code that are relevant for security and generates an HTML report to guide security auditors audit the source code in a scalable way. JoanAudit is configured with various security-sensitive input sources and sinks relevant to injection vulnerabilities and standard sanitization procedures that prevent these vulnerabilities. It can also automatically fix some cases of vulnerabilities in source code — cases where inputs are directly used in sinks without any form of sanitization — by using standard sanitization procedures. Our evaluation shows that by using JoanAudit, security auditors are required to inspect only 1% of the total code for auditing common injection vulnerabilities. The screen-cast demo is available at https://github.com/julianthome/joanaudit

Why Modern Open Source Projects Fail

Open source is experiencing a renaissance period, due to the appearance of modern platforms and workflows for developing and maintaining public code. As a result, developers are creating open source software at speeds never seen before. Consequently, these projects are also facing unprecedented mortality rates. To better understand the reasons for the failure of modern open source projects, this paper describes the results of a survey with the maintainers of 104 popular GitHub systems that have been deprecated. We provide a set of nine reasons for the failure of these open source projects. We also show that some maintenance practices -- specifically the adoption of contributing guidelines and continuous integration -- have an important association with a project failure or success. Finally, we discuss and reveal the principal strategies developers have tried to overcome the failure of the studied projects.Comment: Paper accepted at 25th International Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering (FSE), pages 1-11, 201