Conference Guidelines#

Overview#

This section documents the ethics guidelines and practices described by major security and privacy conferences in their Call for Papers (CfPs). It is intended only as a reference and does not guarantee correctness. Authors should always consult the official conference website and the most current policies.

USENIX Security (2026)#

USENIX Security requires submissions to include a dedicated section titled Ethical Considerations, which must be placed after the main body of the paper and before the references. This section does not count toward the page limit.

A central expectation is that authors conduct and document a stakeholder-based ethics analysis, explicitly considering who may be affected by the research and how harms were mitigated.

To support ethical evaluation, USENIX has a REC.

USENIX Security (2027)#

USENIX Security strongly encourages submissions to include a dedicated section on ethics in the appendix of the work.

Authors should consult the USENIX 2026 ethics guidelines (including a stakeholder-based ethics analysis) when considering ethical implications.

To support ethical evaluation, USENIX has a REC.

IEEE S&P (2026)#

IEEE Security & Privacy requires a separate and clearly marked section titled Ethics considerations at the end of every paper. If no ethical considerations apply, authors must explicitly state None in that section. This ethics section does not count toward the page limit.

To support ethical evaluation, S&P has a REC.

IEEE S&P (2027)#

IEEE S&P 2027 continues the requirement that authors complete an “Ethics Considerations” field on HotCRP and include an Ethics considerations section in the manuscript at camera-ready (this section does not count toward page limits). If no ethical considerations apply, authors should state None and are encouraged to explain how they reached that conclusion.

To support ethical evaluation, S&P 2027 maintains a REC.

ACM CCS (2026)#

ACM CCS requires authors to include an Ethics considerations section for papers that raise ethical concerns that is excluded from the page limit and placed after the primary technical content.

CCS explicitly notes that institutional approval (e.g., IRB/ERB review) is neither strictly necessary nor always sufficient to demonstrate ethical conduct, and that authors are expected to reason about ethical implications beyond formal compliance.

For detailed guidance on community standards, CCS points authors to follow the USENIX Security ’26 ethics policy as a reference baseline.

Instead of a dedicated REC, CCS consults its board of track chairs when ethical concerns arise.

NDSS (2026)#

NDSS invites authors to include an optional Ethics Considerations section placed immediately before the references.

Authors should disclose whether IRB (or an equivalent ethics review) was conducted and briefly justify their approach to managing potential risks.

Similar to other major venues, NDSS may escalate submissions with ethics-related concerns to an internal Ethics Review Board (ERB) composed of TPC members.

NDSS (2027)#

NDSS invites authors to include an optional Ethics Considerations section placed immediately before the references.

Authors should disclose whether IRB (or an equivalent ethics review) was conducted and briefly justify their approach to managing potential risks.

Similar to other major venues, NDSS may escalate submissions with ethics-related concerns to an internal Ethics Review Board (ERB) composed of TPC members.

Summary Table#