22 research outputs found

    Who you gonna call? Analyzing Web Requests in Android Applications

    Full text link
    Relying on ubiquitous Internet connectivity, applications on mobile devices frequently perform web requests during their execution. They fetch data for users to interact with, invoke remote functionalities, or send user-generated content or meta-data. These requests collectively reveal common practices of mobile application development, like what external services are used and how, and they point to possible negative effects like security and privacy violations, or impacts on battery life. In this paper, we assess different ways to analyze what web requests Android applications make. We start by presenting dynamic data collected from running 20 randomly selected Android applications and observing their network activity. Next, we present a static analysis tool, Stringoid, that analyzes string concatenations in Android applications to estimate constructed URL strings. Using Stringoid, we extract URLs from 30, 000 Android applications, and compare the performance with a simpler constant extraction analysis. Finally, we present a discussion of the advantages and limitations of dynamic and static analyses when extracting URLs, as we compare the data extracted by Stringoid from the same 20 applications with the dynamically collected data

    Automatically Discovering, Reporting and Reproducing Android Application Crashes

    Full text link
    Mobile developers face unique challenges when detecting and reporting crashes in apps due to their prevailing GUI event-driven nature and additional sources of inputs (e.g., sensor readings). To support developers in these tasks, we introduce a novel, automated approach called CRASHSCOPE. This tool explores a given Android app using systematic input generation, according to several strategies informed by static and dynamic analyses, with the intrinsic goal of triggering crashes. When a crash is detected, CRASHSCOPE generates an augmented crash report containing screenshots, detailed crash reproduction steps, the captured exception stack trace, and a fully replayable script that automatically reproduces the crash on a target device(s). We evaluated CRASHSCOPE's effectiveness in discovering crashes as compared to five state-of-the-art Android input generation tools on 61 applications. The results demonstrate that CRASHSCOPE performs about as well as current tools for detecting crashes and provides more detailed fault information. Additionally, in a study analyzing eight real-world Android app crashes, we found that CRASHSCOPE's reports are easily readable and allow for reliable reproduction of crashes by presenting more explicit information than human written reports.Comment: 12 pages, in Proceedings of 9th IEEE International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation (ICST'16), Chicago, IL, April 10-15, 2016, pp. 33-4

    How do Developers Test Android Applications?

    Full text link
    Enabling fully automated testing of mobile applications has recently become an important topic of study for both researchers and practitioners. A plethora of tools and approaches have been proposed to aid mobile developers both by augmenting manual testing practices and by automating various parts of the testing process. However, current approaches for automated testing fall short in convincing developers about their benefits, leading to a majority of mobile testing being performed manually. With the goal of helping researchers and practitioners - who design approaches supporting mobile testing - to understand developer's needs, we analyzed survey responses from 102 open source contributors to Android projects about their practices when performing testing. The survey focused on questions regarding practices and preferences of developers/testers in-the-wild for (i) designing and generating test cases, (ii) automated testing practices, and (iii) perceptions of quality metrics such as code coverage for determining test quality. Analyzing the information gleaned from this survey, we compile a body of knowledge to help guide researchers and professionals toward tailoring new automated testing approaches to the need of a diverse set of open source developers.Comment: 11 pages, accepted to the Proceedings of the 33rd IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME'17

    Translating Video Recordings of Mobile App Usages into Replayable Scenarios

    Full text link
    Screen recordings of mobile applications are easy to obtain and capture a wealth of information pertinent to software developers (e.g., bugs or feature requests), making them a popular mechanism for crowdsourced app feedback. Thus, these videos are becoming a common artifact that developers must manage. In light of unique mobile development constraints, including swift release cycles and rapidly evolving platforms, automated techniques for analyzing all types of rich software artifacts provide benefit to mobile developers. Unfortunately, automatically analyzing screen recordings presents serious challenges, due to their graphical nature, compared to other types of (textual) artifacts. To address these challenges, this paper introduces V2S, a lightweight, automated approach for translating video recordings of Android app usages into replayable scenarios. V2S is based primarily on computer vision techniques and adapts recent solutions for object detection and image classification to detect and classify user actions captured in a video, and convert these into a replayable test scenario. We performed an extensive evaluation of V2S involving 175 videos depicting 3,534 GUI-based actions collected from users exercising features and reproducing bugs from over 80 popular Android apps. Our results illustrate that V2S can accurately replay scenarios from screen recordings, and is capable of reproducing ≈\approx 89% of our collected videos with minimal overhead. A case study with three industrial partners illustrates the potential usefulness of V2S from the viewpoint of developers.Comment: In proceedings of the 42nd International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE'20), 13 page
    corecore