Automated incremental software verification

Software continuously evolves to meet rapidly changing human needs. Each evolved transformation of a program is expected to preserve important correctness and security properties. Aiming to assure program correctness after a change, formal verification techniques, such as Software Model Checking, have recently benefited from fully automated solutions based on symbolic reasoning and abstraction. However, the majority of the state-of-the-art model checkers are designed that each new software version has to be verified from scratch. In this dissertation, we investigate the new Formal Incremental Verification (FIV) techniques that aim at making software analysis more efficient by reusing invested efforts between verification runs. In order to show that FIV can be built on the top of different verification techniques, we focus on three complementary approaches to automated formal verification. First, we contribute the FIV technique for SAT-based Bounded Model Checking developed to verify programs with (possibly recursive) functions with respect to the set of pre-defined assertions. We present the function-summarization framework based on Craig interpolation that allows extracting and reusing over- approximations of the function behaviors. We introduce the algorithm to revalidate the summaries of one program locally in order to prevent re-verification of another program from scratch. Second, we contribute the technique for simulation relation synthesis for loop-free programs that do not necessarily contain assertions. We introduce an SMT-based abstraction- refinement algorithm that proceeds by guessing a relation and checking whether it is a simulation relation. We present a novel algorithm for discovering simulations symbolically, by means of solving ∀∃-formulas and extracting witnessing Skolem relations. Third, we contribute the FIV technique for SMT-based Unbounded Model Checking developed to verify programs with (possibly nested) loops. We present an algorithm that automatically derives simulations between programs with different loop structures. The automatically synthesized simulation relation is then used to migrate the safe inductive invariants across the evolution boundaries. Finally, we contribute the implementation and evaluation of all our algorithmic contributions, and confirm that the state-of-the-art model checking tools can successfully be extended by the FIV capabilities

Software Model Checking with Explicit Scheduler and Symbolic Threads

In many practical application domains, the software is organized into a set of threads, whose activation is exclusive and controlled by a cooperative scheduling policy: threads execute, without any interruption, until they either terminate or yield the control explicitly to the scheduler. The formal verification of such software poses significant challenges. On the one side, each thread may have infinite state space, and might call for abstraction. On the other side, the scheduling policy is often important for correctness, and an approach based on abstracting the scheduler may result in loss of precision and false positives. Unfortunately, the translation of the problem into a purely sequential software model checking problem turns out to be highly inefficient for the available technologies. We propose a software model checking technique that exploits the intrinsic structure of these programs. Each thread is translated into a separate sequential program and explored symbolically with lazy abstraction, while the overall verification is orchestrated by the direct execution of the scheduler. The approach is optimized by filtering the exploration of the scheduler with the integration of partial-order reduction. The technique, called ESST (Explicit Scheduler, Symbolic Threads) has been implemented and experimentally evaluated on a significant set of benchmarks. The results demonstrate that ESST technique is way more effective than software model checking applied to the sequentialized programs, and that partial-order reduction can lead to further performance improvements.Comment: 40 pages, 10 figures, accepted for publication in journal of logical methods in computer scienc

Quality and Quantity in Robustness-Checking Using Formal Techniques

Fault tolerance is one of the main challenges for future technology scaling to tolerate transient faults. Various techniques at design level are available to catch and handle transient faults, e.g., Triple Modular Redundancy. An important but missing step is to verify the implementation of those techniques since the implementation might be buggy itself. The thesis is focusing on formally verifying digital circuits with respect to fault-tolerant aspects. It considers transient faults and basically checks whether these faults can influence the output behavior of sequential circuits for any kind of scenarios. As a result the designer is pin-pointed directly to critical parts of the design and gets a prove about the absence of faulty behavior for non-critical parts. The focus of the verification is completeness with respect to the analysis. Three issues need to be adequately addressed: 1) cover all input stimuli, 2) all possible transient faults, and, 3) all possibly exponential long (wrt. to number of state bits) propagation paths. All three issues are addressed in different engines. A tool called RobuCheck has been implemented and evaluated on different academic benchmarks from ITC'99 and industrial benchmarks from IBM

A Survey of Symbolic Execution Techniques

Many security and software testing applications require checking whether certain properties of a program hold for any possible usage scenario. For instance, a tool for identifying software vulnerabilities may need to rule out the existence of any backdoor to bypass a program's authentication. One approach would be to test the program using different, possibly random inputs. As the backdoor may only be hit for very specific program workloads, automated exploration of the space of possible inputs is of the essence. Symbolic execution provides an elegant solution to the problem, by systematically exploring many possible execution paths at the same time without necessarily requiring concrete inputs. Rather than taking on fully specified input values, the technique abstractly represents them as symbols, resorting to constraint solvers to construct actual instances that would cause property violations. Symbolic execution has been incubated in dozens of tools developed over the last four decades, leading to major practical breakthroughs in a number of prominent software reliability applications. The goal of this survey is to provide an overview of the main ideas, challenges, and solutions developed in the area, distilling them for a broad audience. The present survey has been accepted for publication at ACM Computing Surveys. If you are considering citing this survey, we would appreciate if you could use the following BibTeX entry: http://goo.gl/Hf5FvcComment: This is the authors pre-print copy. If you are considering citing this survey, we would appreciate if you could use the following BibTeX entry: http://goo.gl/Hf5Fv

Witness-based validation of verification results with applications to software-model checking

In the scientific world, formal verification is an established engineering technique to ensure the correctness of hardware and software systems. Because formal verification is an arduous and error-prone endeavor, automated solutions are desirable, and researchers continue to develop new algorithms and optimize existing ones to push the boundaries of what can be verified automatically. These efforts do not go unnoticed by the industry. Hardware-circuit designs, flight-control systems, and operating-system drivers are just a few examples of systems where formal verification is already part of the quality-assurance repertoire. Nevertheless, the primary fields of application for formal verification are mainly those where errors carry a high risk of significant damage, either financial or physical, because the costs of formal verification are considered to be too high for most other projects, despite the fact that the research community has made vast advancements regarding the effectiveness and efficiency of formal verification techniques in the last decades. We present and address two potential reasons for this discrepancy that we identified in the field of automated formal software verification. (1) Even for experts in the field, it is often difficult to decide which of the multitude of available techniques is the most suitable solution they should recommend to solve a given verification problem. Moreover, even if a suitable solution is found for a given system, there is no guarantee that the solution is sustainable as the system evolves. Consequently, the cost of finding and maintaining a suitable approach for applying formal software verification to real-world systems is high. (2) Even assuming that a suitable and maintainable solution for applying formal software verification to a given system is found and verification results could be obtained, developers of the system still require further guidance towards making practical use of these results, which often differ significantly from the results they obtain from classical quality-assurance techniques they are familiar with, such as testing. To mitigate the first issue, using the open-source software-verification framework CPAchecker, we investigate several popular formal software-verification techniques such as predicate abstraction, Impact, bounded model checking, k -induction, and PDR, and perform an extensive and rigorous experimental study to identify their strengths and weaknesses regarding their comparative effectiveness and efficiency when applied to a large and established benchmark set, to provide a basis for choosing the best technique for a given problem. To mitigate the second issue, we propose a concrete standard format for the representation and communication of verification results that raises the bar from plain "yes" or "no" answers to verification witnesses, which are valuable artifacts of the verification process that contain detailed information discovered during the analysis. We then use these verification witnesses for several applications: To increase the trust in verification results, we irst develop several independent validators based on violation witnesses, i.e. verification witnesses that represent bugs detected by a verifier. We then extend our validators to also erify the verification results obtained from a successful verification, which are represented y correctness witnesses. Lastly, we also develop an interactive web service to store and retrieve these verification witnesses, to provide online validation to quickly de-prioritize likely wrong results, and to graphically visualize the witnesses, as an example of how verification can be integrated into a development process. Since the introduction of our proposed standard format for verification witnesses, it has been adopted by over thirty different software verifiers, and our witness-based result-validation tools have become a core component in the scoring process of the International Competition on Software Verification.In der Welt der Wissenschaft gilt die Formale Verifikation als etablierte Methode, die Korrektheit von Hard- und Software zu gewährleisten. Da die Anwendung formaler Verifikation jedoch selbst ein beschwerliches und fehlerträchtiges Unterfangen darstellt, ist es erstrebenswert, automatisierte Lösungen dafür zu finden. Forscher entwickeln daher immer wieder neue Algorithmen Formaler Verifikation oder verbessern bereits existierende Algorithmen, um die Grenzen der Automatisierbarkeit Formaler Verifikation weiter und weiter zu dehnen. Auch die Industrie ist bereits auf diese Anstrengungen aufmerksam geworden. Flugsteuerungssysteme, Betriebssystemtreiber und Entwürfe von Hardware-Schaltungen sind nur einzelne Beispiele von Systemen, bei denen Formale Verifikation bereits heute einen festen Stammplatz im Arsenal der Qualitätssicherungsmaßnahmen eingenommen hat. Trotz alledem bleiben die primären Einsatzgebiete Formaler Verifikation jene, in denen Fehler ein hohes Risiko finanzieller oder physischer Schäden bergen, da in anderen Projekten die Kosten des Einsatzes Formaler Verifikation in der Regel als zu hoch empfunden werden, unbeachtet der Tatsache, dass es der Forschungsgemeinschaft in den letzten Jahrzehnten gelungen ist, enorme Fortschritte bei der Verbesserung der Effektivität und Effizienz Formaler Verifikationstechniken zu machen. Wir präsentieren und diskutieren zwei potenzielle Ursachen für diese Diskrepanz zwischen Forschung und Industrie, die wir auf dem Gebiet der Automatisierten Formalen Softwareverifikation identifiziert haben. (1) Sogar Fachleuten fällt es oft schwer, zu entscheiden, welche der zahlreichen verfügbaren Methoden sie als vielversprechendste Lösung eines gegebenen Verifikationsproblems empfehlen sollten. Darüber hinaus gibt es selbst dann, wenn eine passende Lösung für ein gegebenes System gefunden wird, keine Garantie, dass sich diese Lösung im Laufe der Evolution des Systems als Nachhaltig erweisen wird. Daher sind sowohl die Wahl als auch der Unterhalt eines passenden Ansatzes zur Anwendung Formaler Softwareverifikation auf reale Systeme kostspielige Unterfangen. (2) Selbst unter der Annahme, dass eine passende und wartbare Lösung zur Anwendung Formaler Softwareverifikation auf ein gegebenes System gefunden und Verifikationsergebnisse erzielt werden, benötigen die Entwickler des Systems immer noch weitere Unterstützung, um einen praktischen Nutzen aus den Ergebnissen ziehen zu können, die sich oft maßgeblich unterscheiden von den Ergebnissen jener klassischen Qualitätssicherungssysteme, mit denen sie vertraut sind, wie beispielsweise dem Testen. Um das erste Problem zu entschärfen, untersuchen wir unter Verwendung des Open-Source-Softwareverifikationsystems CPAchecker mehrere beliebte Formale Softwareverifikationsmethoden, wie beispielsweise Prädikatenabstraktion, Impact, Bounded-Model-Checking, k-Induktion und PDR, und führen umfangreiche und gründliche experimentelle Studien auf einem großen und etablierten Konvolut an Beispielprogrammen durch, um die Stärken und Schwächen dieser Methoden hinsichtlich ihrer relativen Effektivität und Effizienz zu ermitteln und daraus eine Entscheidungsgrundlage für die Wahl der besten Lösung für ein gegebenes Problem abzuleiten. Um das zweite Problem zu entschärfen, schlagen wir ein konkretes Standardformat zur Modellierung und zum Austausch von Verifikationsergebnissen vor, welches die Ansprüche an Verifikationsergebnisse anhebt, weg von einfachen "ja/nein"-Antworten und hin zu Verifikationszeugen (Verification Witnesses), bei denen es sich um wertvolle Produkte des Verifikationsprozesses handelt und die detaillierte, während der Analyse entdeckte Informationen enthalten. Wir stellen mehrere Anwendungsbeispiele für diese Verifikationszeugen vor: Um das Vertrauen in Verifikationsergebnisse zu erhöhen, entwickeln wir zunächst mehrere, voneinander unabhängige Validatoren, die Verletzungszeugen (Violation Witnesses) verwenden, also Verifikationszeugen, welche von einem Verifikationswerkzeug gefundene Spezifikationsverletzungen darstellen, Diese Validatoren erweitern wir anschließend so, dass sie auch in der Lage sind, die Verifikationsergebnisse erfolgreicher Verifikationen, also Korrektheitsbehauptungen, die durch Korrektheitszeugen (Correctness Witnesses) dokumentiert werden, nachzuvollziehen. Schlussendlich entwickeln wir als Beispiel für die Integrierbarkeit Formaler Verifikation in den Entwicklungsprozess einen interaktiven Webservice für die Speicherung und den Abruf von Verifikationzeugen, um einen Online-Validierungsdienst zur schnellen Depriorisierung mutmaßlich falscher Verifikationsergebnisse anzubieten und Verifikationszeugen graphisch darzustellen. Unser Vorschlag für ein Standardformat für Verifikationszeugen wurde inzwischen von mehr als dreißig verschiedenen Softwareverifikationswerkzeugen übernommen und unsere zeugen-basierten Validierungswerkzeuge sind zu einer Kernkomponente des Bewertungsschemas des Internationalen Softwareverifikationswettbewerbs geworden

Scalable algorithms for software based self test using formal methods

textTransistor scaling has kept up with Moore's law with a doubling of the number of transistors on a chip. More logic on a chip means more opportunities for manufacturing defects to slip in. This, in turn, has made processor testing after manufacturing a significant challenge. At-speed functional testing, being completely non-intrusive, has been seen as the ideal way of testing chips. However for processor testing, generating instruction level tests for covering all faults is a challenge given the issue of scalability. Data-path faults are relatively easier to control and observe compared to control-path faults. In this research we present a novel method to generate instruction level tests for hard to detect control-path faults in a processor. We initially map the gate level stuck-at fault to the Register Transfer Level (RTL) and build an equivalent faulty RTL model. The fault activation and propagation constraints are captured using Control and Data Flow Graphs of the RTL as a Liner Temporal Logic (LTL) property. This LTL property is then negated and given to a Bounded Model Checker based on a Bit-Vector Satisfiability Module Theories (SMT) solver. From the counter-example to the property we can extract a sequence of instructions that activates the gate level fault and propagates the fault effect to one of the observable points in the design. Other than the user supplying instruction constraints, this approach is completely automatic and does not require any manual intervention. Not all the design behaviors are required to generate a test for a fault. We use this insight to scale our previous methodology further. Underapproximations are design abstractions that only capture a subset of the original design behaviors. The use of RTL for test generation affords us two types of under-approximations: bit-width reduction and operator approximation. These are abstractions that perform reductions based on semantics of the RTL design. We also explore structural reductions of the RTL, called path based search, where we search through error propagation paths incrementally. This approach increases the size of the test generation problem step by step. In this way the SMT solver searches through the state space piecewise rather than doing the entire search at once. Experimental results show that our methods are robust and scalable for generating functional tests for hard to detect faults.Electrical and Computer Engineerin

An extension of lazy abstraction with interpolation for programs with arrays

Lazy abstraction with interpolation-based refinement has been shown to be a powerful technique for verifying imperative programs. In presence of arrays, however, the method suffers from an intrinsic limitation, due to the fact that invariants needed for verification usually contain universally quantified variables, which are not present in program specifications. In this work we present an extension of the interpolation-based lazy abstraction framework in which arrays of unknown length can be handled in a natural manner. In particular, we exploit the Model Checking Modulo Theories framework to derive a backward reachability version of lazy abstraction that supports reasoning about arrays. The new approach has been implemented in a tool, called safari, which has been validated on a wide range of benchmarks. We show by means of experiments that our approach can synthesize and prove universally quantified properties over arrays in a completely automatic fashion