Sciduction: Combining Induction, Deduction, and Structure for Verification and Synthesis

Even with impressive advances in automated formal methods, certain problems in system verification and synthesis remain challenging. Examples include the verification of quantitative properties of software involving constraints on timing and energy consumption, and the automatic synthesis of systems from specifications. The major challenges include environment modeling, incompleteness in specifications, and the complexity of underlying decision problems. This position paper proposes sciduction, an approach to tackle these challenges by integrating inductive inference, deductive reasoning, and structure hypotheses. Deductive reasoning, which leads from general rules or concepts to conclusions about specific problem instances, includes techniques such as logical inference and constraint solving. Inductive inference, which generalizes from specific instances to yield a concept, includes algorithmic learning from examples. Structure hypotheses are used to define the class of artifacts, such as invariants or program fragments, generated during verification or synthesis. Sciduction constrains inductive and deductive reasoning using structure hypotheses, and actively combines inductive and deductive reasoning: for instance, deductive techniques generate examples for learning, and inductive reasoning is used to guide the deductive engines. We illustrate this approach with three applications: (i) timing analysis of software; (ii) synthesis of loop-free programs, and (iii) controller synthesis for hybrid systems. Some future applications are also discussed

Hardware Design and Implementation of Role-Based Cryptography

Traditional public key cryptographic methods provide access control to sensitive data by allowing the message sender to grant a single recipient permission to read the encrypted message. The Need2Know® system (N2K) improves upon these methods by providing role-based access control. N2K defines data access permissions similar to those of a multi-user file system, but N2K strictly enforces access through cryptographic standards. Since custom hardware can efficiently implement many cryptographic algorithms and can provide additional security, N2K stands to benefit greatly from a hardware implementation. To this end, the main N2K algorithm, the Key Protection Module (KPM), is being specified in VHDL. The design is being built and tested incrementally: this first phase implements the core control logic of the KPM without integrating its cryptographic sub-modules. Both RTL simulation and formal verification are used to test the design. This is the first N2K implementation in hardware, and it promises to provide an accelerated and secured alternative to the software-based system. A hardware implementation is a necessary step toward highly secure and flexible deployments of the N2K system

MAGICCARPET: Verified Detection and Recovery for Hardware-based Exploits

Abstract—MAGICCARPET is a new approach to defending systems against exploitable processor bugs. MAGICCARPET uses hardware to detect violations of invariants involving security-critical processor state and uses firmware to correctly push software’s state past the violations. The invariants are specified at run time. MAGICCARPET focuses on dynamically validating updates to security-critical processor state. In this work, (1) we generate correctness proofs for both MAGICCARPET hardware and firmware; (2) we prove that processor state and events never violate our security invariants at runtime; and (3) we show that MAGICCARPET copes with hardware-based exploits discovered post-fabrication using a combination of verified reconfigurations of invariants in the fabric and verified recoveries via reprogrammable software. We implement MAGICCARPET inside a popular open source processor on an FPGA platform. We evaluate MAGICCARPET using a diverse set of hardware-based attacks based on escaped and exploitable commercial processor bugs. MAGICCARPET is able to detect and recover from all tested attacks with no software run-time overhead in the attack-free case