Building multiple-viewpoint assurance cases using assumption/guarantee contracts

Security assurance cases—state of the art of an emerging approach

“…This approach combines safety and security principles to create assurance cases with the main goal of achieving acceptable safety. The resulting cases have separate top claims for safety and security followed by separate argumentation; (iv) dynamic assurance cases (Calinescu et al 2017), an approach for generating arguments and evidence based on run-time patterns for the assurance cases of self-adaptive systems; (v) multiple viewpoint assurance cases where security is treated as an assurance viewpoint (Sljivo and Gallina 2016). The approach suggests to reuse AC artefacts by building multipleviewpoint AC using contracts, and introduces an algorithm for a model transformation from a contract meta model into an argumentation meta model; and (vi) dependability cases with focus on security (Patu and Yamamoto 2013a).…”

“…The most common types of evidence reported in literature are test results (TR) (12 papers) (Ben Othmane and Ali 2016; Calinescu et al 2017;Cheah et al 2018;Chindamaikul et al 2014;Lipson and Weinstock 2008;Poreddy and Corns 2011;Shortt and Weber 2015;Sklyar and Kharchenko 2016, 2017a, b, 2019Sljivo and Gallina 2016) and different types of analysis. These analysis include threat and vulnerability (TVA) (Cockram and Lautieri 2007;McCaffery 2014a, b, Patu andYamamoto 2013a), code (CA) and bug (BA) (Chindamaikul et al 2014;Ben Othmane and Ali 2016;Sklyar and Kharchenko 2016, 2017a, b, 2019, security standards and policies (PA) (Agudo et al 2009;Netkachova et al 2015), risk (RA) (Mohammadi et al 2018), and log analysis (LA) (Mohammadi et al 2018;Patu and Yamamoto 2013a).…”

“…There are 17 reported prerequisites. The majority belong to approaches (11) (Chindamaikul et al 2014;Cockram and Lautieri 2007;Cyra and Gorski 2007;Hawkins et al 2015;Patu and Yamamoto 2013a;Ankrum and Kromholz 2005;Cheah et al 2018;Sljivo and Gallina 2016;Tippenhauer et al 2014;Vivas et al 2011;Xu et al 2017) while the remaining ones belong to usage scenarios (2) (Bloomfield et al 2017;Goodger et al 2012), patterns (2) (Patu and Yamamoto 2013b;He and Johnson 2012), and tools (1) (Gacek et al 2014). We categorize prerequisites as follows: The studies in this category require the existence or performing certain analysis and models to achieve their purpose.…”

“…The data sources vary among the validations, as can be seen in Table 14. We categorize these sources into three main categories: -Research, open source, and in-house projects (20) (Ankrum and Kromholz 2005;Chindamaikul et al 2014;Cockram and Lautieri 2007;Coffey et al 2014;Gacek et al 2014;Haley et al 2005;Hawkins et al 2015;Mohammadi et al 2018;Netkachova et al 2015;Patu and Yamamoto 2013a;Poreddy and Corns 2011;Ray and Cleaveland 2015;Rodes et al 2014;Shortt and Weber 2015;Sklyar and Kharchenko 2019;Sljivo and Gallina 2016;Strielkina et al 2018;Tippenhauer et al 2014;Vivas et al 2011;Gallo and Dahab 2015) -Commercial products / systems (9) (Ben Othmane and Ali 2016;Ben Othmane et al 2014;Calinescu et al 2017;Cheah et al 2018;Goodger et al 2012;Górski et al 2012;Masumoto et al 2013;Xu et al 2017;Netkachova et al 2014) -Standards, regulation, and technical reports (7) (Bloomfield et al 2017;Cyra and Gorski 2007;Finnegan and McCaffery 2014b;Fung et al 2018;Graydon and Kelly 2013;He and Johnson 2012;Sklyar and Kharchenko 2017b) SACs were presented in 31 out of the 36 validations. Representing a complete SAC is mostly not possible even in small illustrative cases due to the amount of information required ...…”

“…We have seen in many cases that the approaches presented in literature treat security and safety cases as the same, e.g., Chindamaikul et al (2014), Graydon and Kelly (2013), Hawkins et al (2015), Sljivo and Gallina (2016), Goodger et al (2012, Ankrum and Kromholz (2005), Gacek et al (2014) and Kharchenko (2017b, 2019). We believe that since assurance cases in general are mature in the safety domain and have been used for a long time, it is natural to consider the gained knowledge and transfer it into other domains, such as security.…”