Computing homomorphic program invariants

Program invariants are properties that are true at a particular program point or points. Program invariants are often undocumented assertions made by a programmer that hold the key to reasoning correctly about a software verification task. Unlike the contemporary research in which program invariants are defined to hold for all control flow paths, we propose \textit{homomorphic program invariants}, which hold with respect to a relevant equivalence class of control flow paths. For a problem-specific task, homomorphic program invariants can form stricter assertions. This work demonstrates that the novelty of computing homomorphic program invariants is both useful and practical. Towards our goal of computing homomorphic program invariants, we deal with the challenge of the astronomical number of paths in programs. Since reasoning about a class of program paths must be efficient in order to scale to real-world programs, we extend prior work to efficiently divide program paths into equivalence classes with respect to control flow events of interest. Our technique reasons about inter-procedural paths, which we then use to determine how to modify a program binary to abort execution at the start of an irrelevant program path. With off-the-shelf components, we employ the state-of-the-art in fuzzing and dynamic invariant detection tools to mine homomorphic program invariants. To aid in the task of identifying likely software anomalies, we develop human-in-the-loop analysis methodologies and a toolbox of human-centric static analysis tools. We present work to perform a statically-informed dynamic analysis to efficiently transition from static analysis to dynamic analysis and leverage the strengths of each approach. To evaluate our approach, we apply our techniques to three case study audits of challenge applications from DARPA\u27s Space/Time Analysis for Cybersecurity (STAC) program. In the final case study, we discover an unintentional vulnerability that causes a denial of service (DoS) in space and time, despite the challenge application having been hardened against static and dynamic analysis techniques

Human-centric verification for software safety and security

Software forms a critical part of our lives today. Verifying software to avoid violations of safety and security properties is a necessary task. It is also imperative to have an assurance that the verification process was correct. We propose a human-centric approach to software verification. This involves enabling human-machine collaboration to detect vulnerabilities and to prove the correctness of the verification. We discuss two classes of vulnerabilities. The first class is Algorithmic Complexity Vulnerabilities (ACV). ACVs are a class of software security vulnerabilities that cause denial-of-service attacks. The description of an ACV is not known a priori. The problem is equivalent to searching for a needle in the haystack when we don\u27t know what the needle looks like. We present a novel approach to detect ACVs in web applications. We present a case study audit from DARPA\u27s Space/Time Analysis for Cybersecurity (STAC) program to illustrate our approach. The second class of vulnerabilities is Memory Leaks. Although the description of the Memory Leak (ML) problem is known, a proof of the correctness of the verification is needed to establish trust in the results. We present an approach inspired by the works of Alan Perlis to compute evidence of the verification which can be scrutinized by a human to prove the correctness of the verification. We present a novel abstraction, the Evidence Graph, that succinctly captures the verification evidence and show how to compute the evidence. We evaluate our approach against ML instances in the Linux kernel and report improvement over the state-of-the-art results. We also present two case studies to illustrate how the Evidence Graph can be used to prove the correctness of the verification