一句话:通过人类专家实验揭示 Android 应用 GUI 探索覆盖率约 30% 的根因,并提出超越 GUI 的可行绕过方向。
动态质量保障(如测试和安全分析)依赖调用机制实现高代码覆盖率,但 Android 应用的 GUI 驱动探索即使最先进也仅能覆盖真实应用约 30%。本文研究剩余 70% 为何难以覆盖。作者开展大规模实验,由两位人类专家彻底探索 61 个基准应用和 42 个 Google Play 热门应用,并排除语义输入、事件顺序等已知 GUI 探索问题。结果表明,即使人类分析师也无法覆盖整个应用,主要障碍包括远程服务器与外部资源依赖、难达入口、禁用或错误功能、设备软硬件属性。进一步分析这些阻塞的代码级属性发现,很大一部分可通过相对简单的 beyond-GUI 探索技术绕过。该工作为未来研究提供方向与现实基准。
Testing, security analysis, and other dynamic quality assurance approaches rely on mechanisms that invoke the software under test, aiming to achieve high code coverage. A large number of invocation mechanisms proposed in the literature, in particular for Android mobile applications, employ GUI-driven application exploration. However, studies show that even the most advanced GUI exploration techniques can cover only around 30% of a real-world application. This paper aims to investigate “the remaining 70%”. By conducting a large-scale experiment involving two human experts, who thoroughly explored 61 benchmark and 42 popular apps from Google Play, we show that achieving a substantially larger coverage for real-world applications is impractical even if we factor out known GUI-based exploration issues, such as the inability to provide semantic inputs and the right order of events. The main reasons preventing even human analysts from covering the entire application include application dependencies on remote servers and external resources, hard-to-reach app entry points, disabled and erroneous features, and software/hardware properties of the underlying device. Thus, future investment in GUI-based exploration strategies is unlikely to lead to substantial improvements in coverage. To chart possible ways forward and explore approaches to satisfy/bypass these “blockers”, we thoroughly analyze code-level properties guarding them. Our analysis shows that a large fraction of the blockers could actually be successfully bypassed with relatively simple beyond-GUI exploration techniques. We hope our study can inspire future work in this area; it also provides a realistic benchmark for evaluating such work.