Verifiably-safe software-defined networks for CPS

Next generation cyber-physical systems (CPS) are expected to be deployed in domains which require scalability as well as performance under dynamic conditions. This scale and dynamicity will require that CPS communication networks be programmatic (i.e., not requiring manual intervention at any stage), but still maintain iron-clad safety guarantees. Software-defined networking standards like OpenFlow provide a means for scalably building tailor-made network architectures, but there is no guarantee that these systems are safe, correct, or secure. In this work we propose a methodology and accompanying tools for specifying and modeling distributed systems such that existing formal verification techniques can be transparently used to analyze critical requirements and properties prior to system implementation. We demonstrate this methodology by iteratively modeling and verifying an OpenFlow learning switch network with respect to network correctness, network convergence, and mobility-related properties. We posit that a design strategy based on the complementary pairing of software-defined networking and formal verification would enable the CPS community to build next-generation systems without sacrificing the safety and reliability that these systems must deliver

Applying Formal Methods to Networking: Theory, Techniques and Applications

Despite its great importance, modern network infrastructure is remarkable for the lack of rigor in its engineering. The Internet which began as a research experiment was never designed to handle the users and applications it hosts today. The lack of formalization of the Internet architecture meant limited abstractions and modularity, especially for the control and management planes, thus requiring for every new need a new protocol built from scratch. This led to an unwieldy ossified Internet architecture resistant to any attempts at formal verification, and an Internet culture where expediency and pragmatism are favored over formal correctness. Fortunately, recent work in the space of clean slate Internet design---especially, the software defined networking (SDN) paradigm---offers the Internet community another chance to develop the right kind of architecture and abstractions. This has also led to a great resurgence in interest of applying formal methods to specification, verification, and synthesis of networking protocols and applications. In this paper, we present a self-contained tutorial of the formidable amount of work that has been done in formal methods, and present a survey of its applications to networking.Comment: 30 pages, submitted to IEEE Communications Surveys and Tutorial

Verifying the Safety of a Flight-Critical System

This paper describes our work on demonstrating verification technologies on a flight-critical system of realistic functionality, size, and complexity. Our work targeted a commercial aircraft control system named Transport Class Model (TCM), and involved several stages: formalizing and disambiguating requirements in collaboration with do- main experts; processing models for their use by formal verification tools; applying compositional techniques at the architectural and component level to scale verification. Performed in the context of a major NASA milestone, this study of formal verification in practice is one of the most challenging that our group has performed, and it took several person months to complete it. This paper describes the methodology that we followed and the lessons that we learned.Comment: 17 pages, 5 figure

Model checking learning agent systems using Promela with embedded C code and abstraction

As autonomous systems become more prevalent, methods for their verification will become more widely used. Model checking is a formal verification technique that can help ensure the safety of autonomous systems, but in most cases it cannot be applied by novices, or in its straight \off-the-shelf" form. In order to be more widely applicable it is crucial that more sophisticated techniques are used, and are presented in a way that is reproducible by engineers and verifiers alike. In this paper we demonstrate in detail two techniques that are used to increase the power of model checking using the model checker SPIN. The first of these is the use of embedded C code within Promela specifications, in order to accurately re ect robot movement. The second is to use abstraction together with a simulation relation to allow us to verify multiple environments simultaneously. We apply these techniques to a fairly simple system in which a robot moves about a fixed circular environment and learns to avoid obstacles. The learning algorithm is inspired by the way that insects learn to avoid obstacles in response to pain signals received from their antennae. Crucially, we prove that our abstraction is sound for our example system { a step that is often omitted but is vital if formal verification is to be widely accepted as a useful and meaningful approach

Using ACL2 to Verify Loop Pipelining in Behavioral Synthesis

Behavioral synthesis involves compiling an Electronic System-Level (ESL) design into its Register-Transfer Level (RTL) implementation. Loop pipelining is one of the most critical and complex transformations employed in behavioral synthesis. Certifying the loop pipelining algorithm is challenging because there is a huge semantic gap between the input sequential design and the output pipelined implementation making it infeasible to verify their equivalence with automated sequential equivalence checking techniques. We discuss our ongoing effort using ACL2 to certify loop pipelining transformation. The completion of the proof is work in progress. However, some of the insights developed so far may already be of value to the ACL2 community. In particular, we discuss the key invariant we formalized, which is very different from that used in most pipeline proofs. We discuss the needs for this invariant, its formalization in ACL2, and our envisioned proof using the invariant. We also discuss some trade-offs, challenges, and insights developed in course of the project.Comment: In Proceedings ACL2 2014, arXiv:1406.123