Synthesizing Certified Code

Code certification is a lightweight approach for formally demonstrating software quality. Its basic idea is to require code producers to provide formal proofs that their code satisfies certain quality properties. These proofs serve as certificates that can be checked independently. Since code certification uses the same underlying technology as program verification, it requires detailed annotations (e.g., loop invariants) to make the proofs possible. However, manually adding annotations to the code is time-consuming and error-prone. We address this problem by combining code certification with automatic program synthesis. Given a high-level specification, our approach simultaneously generates code and all annotations required to certify the generated code. We describe a certification extension of AutoBayes, a synthesis tool for automatically generating data analysis programs. Based on built-in domain knowledge, proof annotations are added and used to generate proof obligations that are discharged by the automated theorem prover E-SETHEO. We demonstrate our approach by certifying operator- and memory-safety on a data-classification program. For this program, our approach was faster and more precise than PolySpace, a commercial static analysis tool

Symbolic and analytic techniques for resource analysis of Java bytecode

Recent work in resource analysis has translated the idea of amortised resource analysis to imperative languages using a program logic that allows mixing of assertions about heap shapes, in the tradition of separation logic, and assertions about consumable resources. Separately, polyhedral methods have been used to calculate bounds on numbers of iterations in loop-based programs. We are attempting to combine these ideas to deal with Java programs involving both data structures and loops, focusing on the bytecode level rather than on source code

Certifying and reasoning about cost annotations of functional programs

We present a so-called labelling method to insert cost annotations in a higher-order functional program, to certify their correctness with respect to a standard compilation chain to assembly code including safe memory management, and to reason on them in a higher-order Hoare logic.Comment: Higher-Order and Symbolic Computation (2013

TWAM: A Certifying Abstract Machine for Logic Programs

Type-preserving (or typed) compilation uses typing derivations to certify correctness properties of compilation. We have designed and implemented a type-preserving compiler for a simply-typed dialect of Prolog we call T-Prolog. The crux of our approach is a new certifying abstract machine which we call the Typed Warren Abstract Machine (TWAM). The TWAM has a dependent type system strong enough to specify the semantics of a logic program in the logical framework LF. We present a soundness metatheorem which constitutes a partial correctness guarantee: well-typed programs implement the logic program specified by their type. This metatheorem justifies our design and implementation of a certifying compiler from T-Prolog to TWAM.Comment: 41 pages, under submission to ACM Transactions on Computational Logi

Trusting Computations: a Mechanized Proof from Partial Differential Equations to Actual Program

Computer programs may go wrong due to exceptional behaviors, out-of-bound array accesses, or simply coding errors. Thus, they cannot be blindly trusted. Scientific computing programs make no exception in that respect, and even bring specific accuracy issues due to their massive use of floating-point computations. Yet, it is uncommon to guarantee their correctness. Indeed, we had to extend existing methods and tools for proving the correct behavior of programs to verify an existing numerical analysis program. This C program implements the second-order centered finite difference explicit scheme for solving the 1D wave equation. In fact, we have gone much further as we have mechanically verified the convergence of the numerical scheme in order to get a complete formal proof covering all aspects from partial differential equations to actual numerical results. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first time such a comprehensive proof is achieved.Comment: N° RR-8197 (2012). arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:1112.179

Assumptions and guarantees for compositional noninterference

The idea of building secure systems by plugging together "secure" components is appealing, but this requires a definition of security which, in addition to taking care of top-level security goals, is strengthened appropriately in order to be compositional. This approach has been previously studied for information-flow security of shared-variable concurrent programs, but the price for compositionality is very high: a thread must be extremely pessimistic about what an environment might do with shared resources. This pessimism leads to many intuitively secure threads being labelled as insecure. Since in practice it is only meaningful to compose threads which follow an agreed protocol for data access, we take advantage of this to develop a more liberal compositional security condition. The idea is to give the security definition access to the intended pattern of data usage, as expressed by assumption-guarantee style conditions associated with each thread. We illustrate the improved precision by developing the first flow-sensitive security type system that provably enforces a noninterference-like property for concurrent programs. \ua9 2011 IEEE

Formal Verification of Security Protocol Implementations: A Survey

Automated formal verification of security protocols has been mostly focused on analyzing high-level abstract models which, however, are significantly different from real protocol implementations written in programming languages. Recently, some researchers have started investigating techniques that bring automated formal proofs closer to real implementations. This paper surveys these attempts, focusing on approaches that target the application code that implements protocol logic, rather than the libraries that implement cryptography. According to these approaches, libraries are assumed to correctly implement some models. The aim is to derive formal proofs that, under this assumption, give assurance about the application code that implements the protocol logic. The two main approaches of model extraction and code generation are presented, along with the main techniques adopted for each approac

Do you have space for dessert? a verified space cost semantics for CakeML programs

Garbage collectors relieve the programmer from manual memory management, but lead to compiler-generated machine code that can behave differently (e.g. out-of-memory errors) from the source code. To ensure that the generated code behaves exactly like the source code, programmers need a way to answer questions of the form: what is a sufficient amount of memory for my program to never reach an out-of-memory error? This paper develops a cost semantics that can answer such questions for CakeML programs. The work described in this paper is the first to be able to answer such questions with proofs in the context of a language that depends on garbage collection. We demonstrate that positive answers can be used to transfer liveness results proved for the source code to liveness guarantees about the generated machine code. Without guarantees about space usage, only safety results can be transferred from source to machine code. Our cost semantics is phrased in terms of an abstract intermediate language of the CakeML compiler, but results proved at that level map directly to the space cost of the compiler-generated machine code. All of the work described in this paper has been developed in the HOL4 theorem prover

Challenges in verification and validation of autonomous systems for space exploration

Space exploration applications offer a unique opportunity for the development and deployment of autonomous systems, due to limited communications, large distances, and great expense of direct operation. At the same time, the risk and cost of space missions leads to reluctance to taking on new, complex and difficult-to-understand technology. A key issue in addressing these concerns is the validation of autonomous systems. In recent years, higher-level autonomous systems have been applied in space applications. In this presentation, we will highlight those autonomous systems, and discuss issues in validating these systems. We will then look to future demands on validating autonomous systems for space, identify promising technologies and open issues