Partitioning Interpolant-Based Verification for Effective Unbounded Model Checking

2016 International Conference on Development and Application Systems (DAS)

Camurati

Finocchiaro

et al. 2016

Nowadays embedded devices collect various kinds of information and provide it to communication networks for further processing. These devices often provide critical functionalities that could be exploited by malicious parties. Using formal techniques is a natural way to increase the confidence in the overall embedded system security. However, the major research focus is on verifying only the correctness of encryption algorithms and their implementation in software and hardware and not the whole security process. Following novel research studies, many security requirements of an embedded architecture can be specified as Taint Properties, expressing properties related to information flow and access control. In this paper we define Taint Properties as a way to find out whether there is a path from src to dest, where src is an RTL signal seeded with the Taint and dest is a signal not to be reached by the Taint in order to satisfy the security requirements. In our scenario a Taint is an untrusted code following an illegal path from src to dest. We present a systematic approach to formalize generic security requirements, referring to a model abstraction, and their related Taint Properties of an embedded architecture. First, we present our model abstraction of two selected embedded secure architectures, then we define a portfolio of Taint Properties to verify key secrecy, isolation, attestation, confidentiality and availability features. We finally perform verification of previously defined formal security properties, hence presenting results on two selected embedded architectures proving the effectiveness of our approach.

Section: B Verification Strategiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Secure embedded architectures: Taint properties verification

2016 International Conference on Development and Application Systems (DAS)

Camurati

Finocchiaro

et al. 2016

“…This work led us to consider 11 new engines, and enrich our portfolio, to finally include the following 36 methodologies: -9 BDD-based methods [12], i.e., forward, backward and forward/backward, with 3 MC schemes available for each method, based on different clustering and early quantification, insertion of cut-point, etc. -24 ITP-based [16] techniques, with different partitioning and quantification schemes [17][18][19][20][21] (6 base engines multiplied by 4 different running configurations). -2 SAT-based strategies (simple induction [14] and inductive invariants [15,22]).…”

Section: Portfolio Strategiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It includes falsification features, even if it is mainly oriented to the proof of (true) properties. No expert system (or portfolio manager) was present before this work, except an interpolant-based approach integrating a few other SAT-and BDD-based techniques [20,21].…”

Section: The Pdtrav Packagementioning

confidence: 99%

“…-Interpolant-based verification, with ad-hoc abstraction and tightening techniques [18,19], integrated SAT-based approaches [20,21]. -Inductive reasoning (inductive invariants [22,30]) and symbolic manipulation of AndInvert Graphs (AIGs [31]), with circuit-based quantification [32].…”

Section: The Pdtrav Packagementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The overlap among classes was also relevant, as just 25 problems were solved in one class only, respectively (9,7,1,8). This value increased by filtering-out results of combined techniques, such as [20,21], originally classified as ITP. In that case, the overall number of unsolved circuits was 42, distributed as (28,4,2,8).…”

Section: Affinity Measures: "A Posteriori" Static Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Benchmarking a model checker for algorithmic improvements and tuning for performance

Nocco

Quer

2011

Form Methods Syst Des

Self Cite

This paper describes a portfolio-based approach for model checking, i.e., an approach in which several model checking engines are orchestrated to reach the best possible performance on a broad and real set of designs. Model checking algorithms are evaluated through experiments, and experimental data inspire package tuning, as well as new algorithmic features and methodologies. This approach, albeit similar to several industrial and academic experiences, and already applied in other domains, is somehow new to the model checking field. Its contributions lie in the description of how we: (1) characterize and classify benchmarks in a dynamic way, throughout experimental runs, (2) relate model checking problems to algorithms and engines, (3) introduce a dynamic tuning of sub-engines, exploiting an on-the-fly performance analysis, (4) record results of different approaches, and sort out heuristics to target different classes of problems. We provide a detailed description of the experiments performed in preparation of the Model Checking Competition 2010, where PdTRAV, our academic verification tool, won the UNSAT division, while ranking second in the OVERALL category.

Optimized model checking of multiple properties

2011 Design, Automation &Amp; Test in Europe

Nocco

2011

This paper addresses the problem of model checking multiple properties on the same circuit/system. Although this is a typical scenario in several industrial verification frameworks, most model checkers currently handle single properties, verifying multiple properties one at a time. Possible correlations and shared sub-problems, that could be considered while checking different properties, are typically ignored, either for the sake of simplicity or for Cone-Of-Influence minimization. In this paper we describe a preliminary effort oriented to exploit possible synergies among distinct verification tasks of several properties on the same circuit. Besides considering given sets of properties, we also show that multiple properties can be automatically extracted from individual properties, thus simplifying difficult model checking tasks. Preliminary experimental results indicate that our approach can lead to significant performance improvements.