No abstract

This paper presents an automated tool called M orphy for datamorphic testing. It classifies software test artefacts into test entities and test morphisms, which are mappings on testing entities. In addition to datamorphisms, metamorphisms and seed test case makers, Morphy also employs a set of other test morphisms including test case metrics and filters, test set metrics and filters, test result analysers and test executers to realise test automation. In particular, basic testing activities can be automated by invoking test morphisms. Test strategies can be realised as complex combinations of test morphisms. Test processes can be automated by recording, editing and playing test scripts that invoke test morphisms and strategies. Three types of test strategies have been implemented in Morphy: datamorphism combination strategies, cluster border exploration strategies and strategies for test set optimisation via genetic algorithms. This paper focuses on the datamorphism combination strategies by giving their definitions and implementation algorithms. The paper also illustrates their uses for testing both traditional software and AI applications with three case studies.

Security is one of the most important problems in the engineering of online service-oriented systems. The current best practice in security design is a pattern-oriented approach. A large number of security design patterns have been identified, categorised and documented in the literature. The design of a security solution for a system starts with identification of security requirements and selection of appropriate security design patterns; these are then composed together. It is crucial to verify that the composition of security design patterns is valid in the sense that it preserves the features, semantics and soundness of the patterns and correct in the sense that the security requirements are met by the design. This paper proposes a methodology that employs the algebraic specification language SOFIA to specify security design patterns and their compositions. The specifications are then translated into the Alloy formalism and their validity and correctness are verified using the Alloy model checker. A tool that translates SOFIA into Alloy is presented. A case study with the method and the tool is also reported.

No abstract