
Numerous static analysis techniques have recently been proposed for identifying information flows in mobile applications. These techniques are compared to each other, usually on a set of syntactic benchmarks. Yet, configurations used for such comparisons are rarely described. Our experience shows that tools are often compared under different setup, rendering the comparisons irreproducible and largely inaccurate. In this paper, we provide a large, controlled, and independent comparison of the three most prominent static analysis tools: FlowDroid combined with IccTA, Amandroid, and DroidSafe. We evaluate all tools using common configuration setup and the same set of benchmark applications. We compare the results of our analysis to the results reported in previous studies, identify main reasons for inaccuracy in existing tools, and provide suggestions for future research.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 66 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% |
