IEEE S&P Camera-Ready
Use this after an Accept decision. S&P's camera-ready is not a formatting
pass: acceptance arrives with a draft meta-review listing remaining
concerns and a shepherd who strikes each concern only when the revision
resolves it (2027 CFP, checked 2026-07-08). The camera-ready is the last
reviewed artifact of the cycle.
Working the shepherding loop
- Convert the draft meta-review into a numbered concern ledger on day one.
- For each concern, agree internally on: the change, its location, and the
one-line evidence the shepherd can check.
- Ask the shepherd early about any concern you believe is out of scope or
wrong — negotiation happens at the start, not at the deadline.
- Submit the revision with a concern → change → location map; make the
strike-through decision mechanical for the shepherd.
- Nothing in the shepherding loop authorizes new claims: the accepted
contribution is the contribution.
| Shepherd asks for |
Right-sized response |
| Tone down claim X |
Rewrite the claim to the evaluated boundary; show old/new text |
| Add limitation discussion |
A titled paragraph, referenced from the intro |
| Clarify threat model edge |
Amend §2 with the explicit assumption |
| Missing related system |
Cite + one-line technical delta, not a new section |
| Ethics wording |
Coordinate with the ethics section below |
The ethics section is added now — and does not count
Accepted papers add a dedicated, well-marked ethics section without it
counting against page limits (2026 CFP wording, checked 2026-07-08). Write
it as a record, not a disclaimer:
- What could cause harm, to whom, and what you did about it.
- Responsible disclosure: who was notified, when, what they responded,
current fix status — with the real names and dates now that anonymity has
lifted.
- IRB approval or waiver, by institution and protocol ID, where applicable.
- Data handling: what PII existed, minimization, retention, who had access.
De-anonymization with security-specific restorations
Beyond names, affiliations, acknowledgments, and first-person citations,
restore what anonymity forced you to blur:
- Vendor names and CVE identifiers in the disclosure narrative.
- Artifact URLs (repository, DOI deposit) replacing anonymized placeholders.
- Funding and infrastructure acknowledgments (measurement platforms often
contractually require attribution).
# Residue sweep after de-anonymization
pdftotext final.pdf - | grep -inE 'anonym|redacted|omitted for (review|anonymity)|Vendor [A-Z]\b'
pdfinfo final.pdf | grep -iE 'title|author' # metadata now correct, not blank
grep -rn 'REPLACE-AFTER-ACCEPT' . || true
IEEE mechanics
The proceedings are published by IEEE (Xplore); the compsoc template remains
mandatory. Verify on the current year's author page — all 待核实 at this
pack's check date for 2027: the exact camera-ready deadline, the final page
allowance and any purchasable extra pages, the IEEE copyright/eCF step,
PDF-compliance checking, and whether registration or in-person presentation
by an author is required for publication. Reported by aggregators (unverified
officially): recent S&P papers appear open access in the Computer Society
Digital Library — do not promise open access until confirmed.
Sequence to the deadline
- Concern ledger agreed with shepherd (week 1).
- Content revisions + ethics section drafted (weeks 1–2).
- De-anonymization and restoration sweep.
- Artifact evaluation submission if opting in — its schedule runs off the
acceptance date, in parallel (
ieeesp-artifact-evaluation).
- Final compsoc compile, IEEE PDF check, copyright form, upload.
- Re-download and verify the archived PDF; Xplore keeps what you upload.
Common failures at this stage
- Treating the meta-review as advisory — an unresolved concern is a
shepherd-level blocker, not a style note.
- An ethics section written as legal boilerplate; reviewers approved a
specific record and expect it stated.
- Disclosure narrative updated in the ethics section but not in the
introduction, leaving contradictory timelines.
- Missing the artifact-evaluation registration window while polishing prose.
Output format
[Concern ledger] <n> total: resolved <n> · negotiating <n> · open <n>
[Ethics section] disclosure record ✓/✗ · IRB/waiver ✓/✗ · data handling ✓/✗
[De-anon sweep] names/CVEs/URLs restored ✓/✗ · residue found: <items>
[IEEE mechanics 待核实] deadline / page allowance / copyright / attendance
[Artifact track] opted in? deadline <date>; badge targets <list>
1---2name: ieeesp-camera-ready3description: Use when converting an IEEE S&P (Oakland) acceptance into a final paper, including working the shepherd against the draft meta-review's concern list, adding the ethics section, de-anonymizing and restoring disclosure specifics, IEEE compsoc and Xplore requirements, and coordinating artifact submission.4---56# IEEE S&P Camera-Ready78Use this after an Accept decision. S&P's camera-ready is not a formatting9pass: acceptance arrives with a **draft meta-review listing remaining10concerns and a shepherd who strikes each concern only when the revision11resolves it** (2027 CFP, checked 2026-07-08). The camera-ready is the last12reviewed artifact of the cycle.1314## Working the shepherding loop15161. Convert the draft meta-review into a numbered concern ledger on day one.172. For each concern, agree internally on: the change, its location, and the18 one-line evidence the shepherd can check.193. Ask the shepherd early about any concern you believe is out of scope or20 wrong — negotiation happens at the start, not at the deadline.214. Submit the revision with a concern → change → location map; make the22 strike-through decision mechanical for the shepherd.235. Nothing in the shepherding loop authorizes *new* claims: the accepted24 contribution is the contribution.2526| Shepherd asks for | Right-sized response |27|---|---|28| Tone down claim X | Rewrite the claim to the evaluated boundary; show old/new text |29| Add limitation discussion | A titled paragraph, referenced from the intro |30| Clarify threat model edge | Amend §2 with the explicit assumption |31| Missing related system | Cite + one-line technical delta, not a new section |32| Ethics wording | Coordinate with the ethics section below |3334## The ethics section is added now — and does not count3536Accepted papers add a dedicated, well-marked ethics section **without it37counting against page limits** (2026 CFP wording, checked 2026-07-08). Write38it as a record, not a disclaimer:3940- What could cause harm, to whom, and what you did about it.41- Responsible disclosure: who was notified, when, what they responded,42 current fix status — with the real names and dates now that anonymity has43 lifted.44- IRB approval or waiver, by institution and protocol ID, where applicable.45- Data handling: what PII existed, minimization, retention, who had access.4647## De-anonymization with security-specific restorations4849Beyond names, affiliations, acknowledgments, and first-person citations,50restore what anonymity forced you to blur:5152- Vendor names and CVE identifiers in the disclosure narrative.53- Artifact URLs (repository, DOI deposit) replacing anonymized placeholders.54- Funding and infrastructure acknowledgments (measurement platforms often55 contractually require attribution).5657```bash58# Residue sweep after de-anonymization59pdftotext final.pdf - | grep -inE 'anonym|redacted|omitted for (review|anonymity)|Vendor [A-Z]\b'60pdfinfo final.pdf | grep -iE 'title|author' # metadata now correct, not blank61grep -rn 'REPLACE-AFTER-ACCEPT' . || true62```6364## IEEE mechanics6566The proceedings are published by IEEE (Xplore); the compsoc template remains67mandatory. Verify on the current year's author page — all 待核实 at this68pack's check date for 2027: the exact camera-ready deadline, the final page69allowance and any purchasable extra pages, the IEEE copyright/eCF step,70PDF-compliance checking, and whether registration or in-person presentation71by an author is required for publication. Reported by aggregators (unverified72officially): recent S&P papers appear open access in the Computer Society73Digital Library — do not promise open access until confirmed.7475## Sequence to the deadline76771. Concern ledger agreed with shepherd (week 1).782. Content revisions + ethics section drafted (weeks 1–2).793. De-anonymization and restoration sweep.804. Artifact evaluation submission if opting in — its schedule runs off the81 acceptance date, in parallel (`ieeesp-artifact-evaluation`).825. Final compsoc compile, IEEE PDF check, copyright form, upload.836. Re-download and verify the archived PDF; Xplore keeps what you upload.8485## Common failures at this stage8687- Treating the meta-review as advisory — an unresolved concern is a88 shepherd-level blocker, not a style note.89- An ethics section written as legal boilerplate; reviewers approved a90 specific record and expect it stated.91- Disclosure narrative updated in the ethics section but not in the92 introduction, leaving contradictory timelines.93- Missing the artifact-evaluation registration window while polishing prose.9495## Output format9697```text98[Concern ledger] <n> total: resolved <n> · negotiating <n> · open <n>99[Ethics section] disclosure record ✓/✗ · IRB/waiver ✓/✗ · data handling ✓/✗100[De-anon sweep] names/CVEs/URLs restored ✓/✗ · residue found: <items>101[IEEE mechanics 待核实] deadline / page allowance / copyright / attendance102[Artifact track] opted in? deadline <date>; badge targets <list>103```
brycewang-stanford