World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
44
Citations
10031
World Ranking
7474
National Ranking
370

Felix C. Freiling publication distribution in Computer Science in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Computer Science in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Felix C. Freiling sits on this spectrum.

32–41 publications: 7 scientists 42–51 publications: 22 scientists 52–61 publications: 82 scientists 62–71 publications: 134 scientists 72–81 publications: 249 scientists 82–91 publications: 324 scientists 92–101 publications: 421 scientists 102–111 publications: 420 scientists 112–121 publications: 497 scientists 122–131 publications: 544 scientists 132–141 publications: 555 scientists 142–151 publications: 609 scientists 152–161 publications: 559 scientists 162–171 publications: 534 scientists 172–181 publications: 556 scientists 182–191 publications: 583 scientists 192–201 publications: 519 scientists 202–211 publications: 508 scientists 212–221 publications: 490 scientists 222–231 publications: 437 scientists 232–241 publications: 423 scientists 242–251 publications: 408 scientists 252–261 publications: 377 scientists 262–271 publications: 301 scientists 272–281 publications: 335 scientists 282–291 publications: 320 scientists 292–301 publications: 293 scientists 302–311 publications: 250 scientists 312–321 publications: 238 scientists 322–331 publications: 206 scientists 332–341 publications: 209 scientists 342–351 publications: 208 scientists 352–361 publications: 162 scientists 362–371 publications: 176 scientists 372–381 publications: 127 scientists 382–391 publications: 158 scientists 392–401 publications: 128 scientists 402–411 publications: 104 scientists 412–421 publications: 94 scientists 422–431 publications: 99 scientists 432–441 publications: 83 scientists 442–451 publications: 108 scientists 452–461 publications: 73 scientists 462–471 publications: 77 scientists 472–481 publications: 69 scientists 482–491 publications: 84 scientists 492–501 publications: 62 scientists 502–511 publications: 54 scientists 512–521 publications: 57 scientists 522–531 publications: 51 scientists 532–541 publications: 51 scientists 542–551 publications: 32 scientists 552–561 publications: 38 scientists 562–571 publications: 28 scientists 572–581 publications: 43 scientists 582–591 publications: 33 scientists 592–601 publications: 41 scientists 602–611 publications: 32 scientists 612–621 publications: 28 scientists 622–631 publications: 25 scientists 632–641 publications: 27 scientists 642–651 publications: 17 scientists 652–661 publications: 20 scientists 662–671 publications: 17 scientists 672–681 publications: 15 scientists 682–691 publications: 14 scientists 692–701 publications: 21 scientists 702–711 publications: 13 scientists 712–721 publications: 12 scientists 722–731 publications: 19 scientists 732–741 publications: 14 scientists 742–751 publications: 12 scientists 752–761 publications: 10 scientists 762–771 publications: 10 scientists 772–781 publications: 11 scientists 782–791 publications: 10 scientists 792–801 publications: 11 scientists 802–811 publications: 8 scientists 812–821 publications: 8 scientists 822–831 publications: 7 scientists 832–841 publications: 11 scientists 842–851 publications: 10 scientists 852–861 publications: 5 scientists 862–871 publications: 9 scientists 872–881 publications: 4 scientists 882–891 publications: 6 scientists 892–901 publications: 3 scientists 902–911 publications: 6 scientists 912–921 publications: 3 scientists 922–931 publications: 2 scientists 932–941 publications: 2 scientists 942–951 publications: 2 scientists 952–961 publications: 3 scientists 962–971 publications: 3 scientists 972–981 publications: 3 scientists 982–990 publications: 5 scientists 991+ publications: 100 scientists
32 publications 991+

This scientist: 262 publications — 65th percentile

65% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 991 publications or more.

Felix C. Freiling D-index placement in Computer Science in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Computer Science scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Felix C. Freiling sits on this spectrum.

30–31 D-Index: 879 scientists 32–33 D-Index: 983 scientists 34–35 D-Index: 918 scientists 36–37 D-Index: 990 scientists 38–39 D-Index: 968 scientists 40–41 D-Index: 907 scientists 42–43 D-Index: 821 scientists 44–45 D-Index: 763 scientists 46–47 D-Index: 689 scientists 48–49 D-Index: 543 scientists 50–51 D-Index: 543 scientists 52–53 D-Index: 518 scientists 54–55 D-Index: 500 scientists 56–57 D-Index: 458 scientists 58–59 D-Index: 400 scientists 60–61 D-Index: 337 scientists 62–63 D-Index: 308 scientists 64–65 D-Index: 292 scientists 66–67 D-Index: 249 scientists 68–69 D-Index: 213 scientists 70–71 D-Index: 192 scientists 72–73 D-Index: 189 scientists 74–75 D-Index: 165 scientists 76–77 D-Index: 139 scientists 78–79 D-Index: 119 scientists 80–81 D-Index: 121 scientists 82–83 D-Index: 113 scientists 84–85 D-Index: 88 scientists 86–87 D-Index: 87 scientists 88–89 D-Index: 75 scientists 90–91 D-Index: 69 scientists 92–93 D-Index: 57 scientists 94–95 D-Index: 46 scientists 96–97 D-Index: 38 scientists 98–99 D-Index: 34 scientists 100–101 D-Index: 36 scientists 102–103 D-Index: 27 scientists 104–105 D-Index: 37 scientists 106–107 D-Index: 18 scientists 108–109 D-Index: 31 scientists 110–111 D-Index: 19 scientists 112–113 D-Index: 16 scientists 114–115 D-Index: 12 scientists 116–117 D-Index: 20 scientists 118–119 D-Index: 15 scientists 120–121 D-Index: 5 scientists 122–123 D-Index: 20 scientists 124–125 D-Index: 8 scientists 126–127 D-Index: 5 scientists 128–129 D-Index: 7 scientists 130 D-Index: 3 scientists 131+ D-Index: 98 scientists
30 D-Index 131+

This scientist: 44 D-Index — 48th percentile

48% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 131 D-Index or more.

Overview

Felix C. Freiling is affiliated with the University of Erlangen-Nuremberg in Germany. Their research primarily spans the field of computer science, with a notable focus on information systems and signal processing within this domain. Other subfields of study include artificial intelligence, computer vision and pattern recognition, and computer networks and communications.

The main research topics covered by Felix C. Freiling include digital and cyber forensics, advanced malware detection techniques, and digital media forensic detection. Additional areas of interest involve advanced data storage technologies, security and verification in computing, user authentication and security systems, and cloud data security solutions.

Freiling has contributed to multiple recent scholarly papers, some of which are:

  • Towards GDPR-compliant data processing in modern SIEM systems (2020, Computers & Security)
  • Tampering with Digital Evidence is Hard: The Case of Main Memory Images (2020, Forensic Science International Digital Investigation)
  • An Experimental Assessment of Inconsistencies in Memory Forensics (2023, ACM Transactions on Privacy and Security)
  • Advanced System Resiliency Based on Virtualization Techniques for IoT Devices (2021, Annual Computer Security Applications Conference)
  • Contamination of digital evidence: Understanding an underexposed risk (2023, Forensic Science International Digital Investigation)

Freiling frequently collaborates with several co-authors, including Jenny Ottmann, Janine Schneider, Jan Gruber, Christopher Hargreaves, and Frank Breitinger. These partnerships have been reflected in multiple joint publications.

Their work has been published in various venues, with repeated contributions to Forensic Science International Digital Investigation being the most frequent. Other notable venues include Digital Threats Research and Practice, arXiv (Cornell University), Datenschutz und Datensicherheit - DuD, and IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing.

Best Publications

  • Toward Automated Dynamic Malware Analysis Using CWSandbox

    C. Willems;T. Holz;F. Freiling

  • Measurements and mitigation of peer-to-peer-based botnets: a case study on storm worm

    Thorsten Holz;Moritz Steiner;Frederic Dahl;Ernst Biersack

  • Measuring and Detecting Fast-Flux Service Networks

    Thorsten Holz;Christian Gorecki;Konrad Rieck;Felix C. Freiling

  • The nepenthes platform : An efficient approach to collect malware

    Paul Baecher;Markus Koetter;Thorsten Holz;Maximillian Dornseif

  • Botnet tracking: exploring a root-cause methodology to prevent distributed denial-of-service attacks

    Felix C. Freiling;Thorsten Holz;Georg Wicherski

  • Mobile-sandbox: having a deeper look into android applications

    Michael Spreitzenbarth;Felix Freiling;Florian Echtler;Thomas Schreck

  • Return-oriented rootkits: bypassing kernel code integrity protection mechanisms

    Ralf Hund;Thorsten Holz;Felix C. Freiling

  • Learning more about the underground economy: a case-study of keyloggers and dropzones

    Thorsten Holz;Markus Engelberth;Felix Freiling

  • Mobile Security Catching Up? Revealing the Nuts and Bolts of the Security of Mobile Devices

    Michael Becher;Felix C. Freiling;Johannes Hoffmann;Thorsten Holz

  • On Botnets That Use DNS for Command and Control.

    Christian J. Dietrich;Christian Rossow;Felix C. Freiling;Herbert Bos

  • A structured approach to anomaly detection for in-vehicle networks

    Michael Muter;Andre Groll;Felix C. Freiling

  • TRESOR runs encryption securely outside RAM

    Tilo Müller;Felix C. Freiling;Andreas Dewald

  • Hardware-Based Trusted Computing Architectures for Isolation and Attestation

    Pieter Maene;Johannes Gotzfried;Ruan de Clercq;Tilo Muller

  • A Common Process Model for Incident Response and Computer Forensics.

    Felix C. Freiling;Bastian Schwittay

  • Cooperative Intrusion Detection in Wireless Sensor Networks

    Ioannis Krontiris;Zinaida Benenson;Thanassis Giannetsos;Felix C. Freiling

  • Sancus 2.0: A Low-Cost Security Architecture for IoT Devices

    Job Noorman;Jo Van Bulck;Jan Tobias Mühlberg;Frank Piessens

  • Sandnet: network traffic analysis of malicious software

    Christian Rossow;Christian J. Dietrich;Herbert Bos;Lorenzo Cavallaro

  • Towards an Intrusion Detection System in Wireless Sensor Networks

    Ioannis Krontiris;Tassos Dimitriou;Felix Freiling

  • Visual analysis of malware behavior using treemaps and thread graphs

    Philipp Trinius;Thorsten Holz;Jan Gobel;Felix C. Freiling

  • Walowdac - Analysis of a Peer-to-Peer Botnet

    Ben Stock;Jan Göbel;Markus Engelberth;Felix C. Freiling

  • Intelligent data analysis: keeping pace with technological advances

    Xiaohui Liu

  • Fundamentals of fault-tolerant distributed computing in asynchronous environments

    Felix Freiling

Frequent Co-Authors

Thorsten Holz
Thorsten Holz Max Planck Institute for Security and Privacy
Christian Rossow
Christian Rossow Saarland University
Herbert Bos
Herbert Bos Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
Rainer Böhme
Rainer Böhme University of Innsbruck
Maarten van Steen
Maarten van Steen University of Twente
Alexander Maedche
Alexander Maedche Karlsruhe Institute of Technology
Konrad Rieck
Konrad Rieck Technische Universität Braunschweig
Rachid Guerraoui
Rachid Guerraoui École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne

If you think any of the details on this page are incorrect, let us know.

Report an issue

We appreciate your kind effort to assist us to improve this page, it would be helpful providing us with as much detail as possible in the text box below:

Related Online Degrees & Career Pathways

The field of Computer Science offers a wealth of academic and career opportunities for students in the USA. Choosing your degree pathway is crucial, as it can influence not only your future job prospects but also the time and financial investment required.

Many students look for programs that are considered top degrees for the future, such as data science, cybersecurity, or software engineering, to align their education with in-demand careers. For those seeking flexibility, earning an advanced degree online can be an attractive option. Some learners prioritize quick completion and lower stress, so they may explore the easiest masters degree to get online.

Affordability is another important factor. Prospective doctoral students often search for the cheapest online doctoral programs to further their expertise without incurring massive debt. Those interested in educational leadership might compare options for the cheapest edd to fast-track their careers in academia or administration.

Exploring these related degrees and pathways can help you create a customized academic plan that supports your career ambitions and financial goals.

Best Scientists Citing Felix C. Freiling

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles