40th IEEE Symposium on
Security and Privacy

Call For Papers

Since 1980 in Oakland, the IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy has been the premier forum for computer security research, presenting the latest developments and bringing together researchers and practitioners. We solicit previously unpublished papers offering novel research contributions in any aspect of security or privacy. Papers may present advances in the theory, design, implementation, analysis, verification, or empirical evaluation and measurement of secure systems.

Topics of interest include:

This topic list is not meant to be exhaustive; S&P is interested in all aspects of computer security and privacy. Papers without a clear application to security or privacy, however, will be considered out of scope and may be rejected without full review.

Systematization of Knowledge Papers

As in past years, we solicit systematization of knowledge (SoK) papers that evaluate, systematize, and contextualize existing knowledge, as such papers can provide a high value to our community. Suitable papers are those that provide an important new viewpoint on an established, major research area, support or challenge long-held beliefs in such an area with compelling evidence, or present a convincing, comprehensive new taxonomy of such an area. Survey papers without such insights are not appropriate. Submissions will be distinguished by the prefix “SoK:” in the title and a checkbox on the submission form. They will be reviewed by the full PC and held to the same standards as traditional research papers, but they will be accepted based on their treatment of existing work and value to the community, and not based on any new research results they may contain. Accepted papers will be presented at the symposium and included in the proceedings.

Ongoing Submissions

To enhance the quality and timeliness of the scientific results presented as part of the Symposium, and to improve the quality of our reviewing process, IEEE S&P now accepts paper submissions 12 times a year, on the first of each month. The detailed process is as follows.

Revised Submissions

As described above, some number of papers will receive a Revise decision, rather than Accept or Reject. This decision will be accompanied by a detailed summary of the expectations for the revision, in addition to the standard reviewer comments. Authors may take up to three months to prepare a revision, which may include running additional experiments, improving the paper’s presentation, or other such improvements. Papers meeting the expectations will typically be accepted. Those that do not will be rejected. Only in exceptional circumstances will additional revisions be requested.

Upon receiving a Revise decision, authors can choose to withdraw their paper or not submit a revision within three months, but they will be asked to not submit the same or similar work again (following the same rules as for Rejected papers) for 1 year from the date of the original submission.

Revised submissions should be submitted on the first of the month, just as with new submissions. Revisions must be accompanied by a summary of the changes that were made.

Submission Statistics

Statistics on the submissions and decisions made thus far are available here.

Student Program Committee

Following a successful model used at last year’s conference, as well as other premier technical conferences, some paper submissions will be reviewed by a “shadow PC” of students and junior researchers. For more information see

Instructions for Paper Submission

These instructions apply to both the research papers and systematization of knowledge papers.

All submissions must be original work; the submitter must clearly document any overlap with previously published or simultaneously submitted papers from any of the authors. Failure to point out and explain overlap will be grounds for rejection. Simultaneous submission of the same paper to another venue with proceedings or a journal is not allowed and will be grounds for automatic rejection. Contact the program committee chairs if there are questions about this policy.

Anonymous Submission

Papers must be submitted in a form suitable for anonymous review: no author names or affiliations may appear on the title page, and papers should avoid revealing their identity in the text. When referring to your previous work, do so in the third person, as though it were written by someone else. Only blind the reference itself in the (unusual) case that a third-person reference is infeasible. Publication as a technical report or in an online repository does not constitute a violation of this policy. Contact the program chairs if you have any questions. Papers that are not properly anonymized may be rejected without review.

Conflicts of Interest

Drawn from the ACM SIGMOD 2015 CFP

During submission of a research paper, the submission site will request information about conflicts of interest of the paper's authors with program committee (PC) members. It is the full responsibility of all authors of a paper to identify all and only their potential conflict-of-interest PC members, according to the following definition. A paper author has a conflict of interest with a PC member when and only when one or more of the following conditions holds:

  1. The PC member is a co-author of the paper.
  2. The PC member has been a co-worker in the same company or university within the past two years.
    • For student interns, the student is conflicted with their supervisors and with members of the same research group. If the student no longer works for the organization, then they are not conflicted with a PC member from the larger organization.
  3. The PC member has been a collaborator within the past two years.
  4. The PC member is or was the author's primary thesis advisor, no matter how long ago.
  5. The author is or was the PC member's primary thesis advisor, no matter how long ago.
  6. The PC member is a relative or close personal friend of the author.

For any other situation where the authors feel they have a conflict with a PC member, they must explain the nature of the conflict to the PC chairs, who will mark the conflict if appropriate. Papers with incorrect or incomplete conflict of interest information as of the submission closing time are subject to immediate rejection.

Human Subjects and Ethical Considerations

Drawn from the USENIX Security 2016 CFP

Submissions that describe experiments on human subjects, that analyze data derived from human subjects (even anonymized data), or that otherwise may put humans at risk should:

  1. Disclose whether the research received an approval or waiver from each of the authors' institutional ethics review boards (IRB) if applicable.
  2. Discuss steps taken to ensure that participants and others who might have been affected by an experiment were treated ethically and with respect.

If the submission deals with vulnerabilities (e.g., software vulnerabilities in a given program or design weaknesses in a hardware system), the authors need to discuss in detail the steps they have taken or plan to take to address these vulnerabilities (e.g., by disclosing vulnerabilities to the vendors). The same applies if the submission deals with personal identifiable information (PII) or other kinds of sensitive data. If a paper raises significant ethical and legal concerns, it might be rejected based on these concerns.

Contact the program co-chairs if you have any questions.

Page Limit and Formatting

Submitted papers may include up to 13 pages of text and up to 5 pages for references and appendices, totalling no more than 18 pages. The same applies to camera-ready papers, although, at the PC chairs’ discretion, additional pages may be allowed for references and appendices. Reviewers are not required to read appendices.

Papers must be formatted for US letter (not A4) size paper. The text must be formatted in a two-column layout, with columns no more than 9.5 in. tall and 3.5 in. wide. The text must be in Times font, 10-point or larger, with 11-point or larger line spacing. Authors are encouraged to use the IEEE conference proceedings templates. LaTeX submissions should use IEEEtran.cls version 1.8. All submissions will be automatically checked for conformance to these requirements. Failure to adhere to the page limit and formatting requirements are grounds for rejection without review.

Reviews from Prior Submissions

Authors may optionally submit a document (PDF or text) containing:

  1. the complete reviews they received from prior submission(s) and
  2. a page of up to 500 words documenting the improvements made since the prior submission(s).

Also starting this year, if a submission is derived in any way from a submission submitted to another venue (conference, journal, etc.) in the past twelve months, we require that the authors provide the name of the most recent venue to which it was submitted. This information will not be shared with reviewers. It will only be used (1) for aggregate statistics to understand the percent of resubmissions among the set of submitted (and accepted) papers; (2) at the Chairs’ discretion, to identify dual submissions and verify the accuracy of prior reviews provided by authors regarding previously rejected papers.


Submissions must be in Portable Document Format (.pdf). Authors should pay special attention to unusual fonts, images, and figures that might create problems for reviewers. Your document should render correctly in Adobe Reader 9 and when printed in black and white.

Conference Submission Server

Papers must be submitted at

Publication and Presentation

Authors are responsible for obtaining appropriate publication clearances. One of the authors of the accepted paper is expected to present the paper at the conference.

Program Committee


Christopher Kruegel UC Santa Barbara
Hovav Shacham University of California, San Diego


Abhi Shelat Northeastern University
Adam Bates University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Adam Doupé Arizona State University
Adrian Perrig ETH Zurich
Adrienne Porter Felt Google
Aggelos Kiayias University of Edinburgh & IOHK
Alessandro Chiesa UC Berkeley
Alexandros Kapravelos North Carolina State University
Alina Oprea Northeastern University
Ananth Raghunathan Google
Anders Fogh Intel Corporation
Andrei Sabelfeld Chalmers University of Technology
Andrew Miller University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Aniket Kate Purdue University
Anja Lehmann IBM Research - Zurich
Ari Juels Cornell Tech
Asia Slowinska IBM Security
Aurelien Francillon EURECOM
Aylin Caliskan George Washington University
Bo Li UC Berkeley
Brendan Dolan-Gavitt NYU
Cas Cremers University of Oxford
Chris Kanich University of Illinois at Chicago
Claudia Diaz KU Leuven
Cristiano Giuffrida Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
Daniel Genkin University of Pennsylvania and University of Maryland
Daniela Oliveira University of Florida
Daphne Yao Virginia Tech
Dave Levin University of Maryland
David Evans University of Virginia
David Kotz Dartmouth College
Deian Stefan UC San Diego
Engin Kirda Northeastern University
Fabian Monrose University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Farinaz Koushanfar University of California San Diego
Foteini Baldimtsi George Mason University
Frank Piessens KU Leuven
Franziska Roesner University of Washington
Gianluca Stringhini University College London
Guofei Gu Texas A&M University
Herbert Bos Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
Joseph Bonneau New York University
Juan Caballero IMDEA Software Institute
Kasper Rasmussen University of Oxford
Kenny Paterson Royal Holloway University of London
Konrad Rieck TU Braunschweig
Konstantin (Kosta) Beznosov University of British Columbia
Kurt Thomas Google
Leyla Bilge Symantec Research Labs
Long Lu Northeastern University
Lorrie Cranor Carnegie Mellon University
Lujo Bauer Carnegie Mellon University
Manos Antonakakis Georgia Institute of Technology
Manuel Egele Boston University
Mariana Raykova Yale University
Marina Blanton University at Buffalo
Mathias Payer EPFL and Purdue University
Matt Fredrikson Carnegie Mellon University
Matthew Hicks Virginia Tech
Michael Bailey University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Michael Franz University of California at Irvine
Michalis Polychronakis Stony Brook University
Michelle Mazurek University of Maryland
Mihai Christodorescu Visa Research
Mike Reiter University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Mike Rosulek Oregon State University
Nick Feamster Princeton University
Nick Nikiforakis Stony Brook University
Nickolai Zeldovich MIT CSAIL
Nicolas Christin Carnegie Mellon University
Niels Provos Google Inc
Nikhil Swamy Microsoft Research
Nitesh Saxena University of Alabama at Birmingham
Omar Chowdhury University of Iowa
Payman Mohassel Visa Research
Piotr Mardziel Carnegie Mellon University
Prateek Mittal Princeton University
Ralf Kuesters University of Stuttgart
Reza Shokri National University of Singapore (NUS)
Rob Reeder Google
Robert Watson University of Cambridge
Roberto Perdisci University of Georgia and Georgia Institute of Technology
Rosario Gennaro The City College of New York
Roya Ensafi University of Michigan
Ruby Lee Princeton University
Sarah Meiklejohn University College London
Sascha Fahl Leibniz University Hannover
Sergio Maffeis Imperial College London
Somesh Jha University of Wisconsin at Madison
Srdjan Capkun ETH Zurich
Stefan Katzenbeisser TU Darmstadt
Taesoo Kim Georgia Tech
Thorsten Holz Ruhr-Universität Bochum
Tom Ristenpart Cornell Tech
Tom Shrimpton University of Florida
Trent Jaeger Penn State University
Tudor Dumitras University of Maryland at College Park
Veronique Cortier CNRS and Loria
Virgil Gligor Carnegie Mellon University
Vladimir Kolesnikov Georgia Tech
Vyas Sekar Carnegie Mellon University
Wenke Lee Georgia Institute of Technology
Wenyuan Xu Zhejiang University
William Robertson Northeastern University
XiaoFeng Wang Indiana University
Zhiyun Qian University of California at Riverside