Towards Automated Static Verification of GNU C Programs

Novikov, Evgeny; Zakharov, Ilja

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-74313-4_30

Cited by 9 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The existence and availability of exchangeable objects with information about the verification process makes it possible to develop approaches for explaining what the verification process did and why the user should be more confident about the verification result. There are preliminary results on explaining and visualizing counterexamples, e.g., for SPIN models [73] and for C programs [11,81], but due to the exchangeable witness format, many more approaches are possible.…”

Section: Improvement Of Precision and Confidence Witness-based Results Validationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Verification Artifacts in Cooperative Verification: Survey and Unifying Component Framework

Beyer

Wehrheim

2020

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The goal of cooperative verification is to combine verification approaches in such a way that they work together to verify a system model. In particular, cooperative verifiers provide exchangeable information (verification artifacts) to other verifiers or consume such information from other verifiers with the goal of increasing the overall effectiveness and efficiency of the verification process. This paper first gives an overview over approaches for leveraging strengths of different techniques, algorithms, and tools in order to increase the power and abilities of the state of the art in software verification. To limit the scope, we restrict our overview to tools and approaches for automatic program analysis. Second, we specifically outline cooperative verification approaches and discuss their employed verification artifacts. Third, we formalize all artifacts in a uniform way, thereby fixing their semantics and providing verifiers with a precise meaning of the exchanged information.

show abstract

Section: Improvement Of Precision and Confidence Witness-based Results Validationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Execution reports [34] present an underapproximation of the successfully verified state space to the user. There are also approaches to support interactive inspection of verification results, e.g., by visualization of error paths [81] and verification-aided debugging [11].…”

Section: Fig 2 Output Interfacesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Verification Artifacts in Cooperative Verification: Survey and Unifying Component Framework

Beyer

Wehrheim

2020

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the second experiment, 284 modules of Linux operating system kernel USB device drivers, version 5.10.27, were verified against memory leaks, incorrect dereferences and use after free. It was carried out using Klever system [31] on an 8-core Intel Xeon E3-12xx v2 (Ivy Bridge, IBRS) machine with 32 GB of RAM, and a 64-bit Debian 4.9.246-2 OS. Baseline analysis configuration (-smg-ldv) uses symbolic memory graphs [32].…”

Section: Linux Usb Driversmentioning

confidence: 99%

Finding More Bugs with Software Model Checking using Delta Debugging

Petrov

2023

Proceedings of ISP RAS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many verification tasks in model checking (one of the formal software verification approaches) can’t be solved within bounded time requirements due to combinatorial state space explosion. In order to find a bug in the verified program in a given time, a simplified version of it can be analyzed. This paper presents DD** algorithms (based on the Delta Debugging approach) to iterate over simplified versions of the given program. These algorithms were implemented in software-verification tool CPAchecker. Our experiments showed that this technique might be used to find new bugs in real software.

show abstract

“…the successfully verified state space to the user. There are also approaches to support interactive inspection of verification results, e.g., by visualization of error paths [65] and verification-aided debugging [9]. Machine.…”

Section: Classification Of Verification Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Verification Artifacts in Cooperative Verification: Survey and Unifying Component Framework

Beyer¹,

Wehrheim²

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The goal of cooperative verification is to combine verification approaches in such a way that they work together to verify a system model. In particular, cooperative verifiers provide exchangeable information (verification artifacts) to other verifiers or consume such information from other verifiers with the goal of increasing the overall effectiveness and efficiency of the verification process. This paper first gives an overview over approaches for leveraging strengths of different techniques, algorithms, and tools in order to increase the power and abilities of the state of the art in software verification. Second, we specifically outline cooperative verification approaches and discuss their employed verification artifacts. We formalize all artifacts in a uniform way, thereby fixing their semantics and providing verifiers with a precise meaning of the exchanged information.

show abstract

Towards Automated Static Verification of GNU C Programs

Cited by 9 publications

References 27 publications

Verification Artifacts in Cooperative Verification: Survey and Unifying Component Framework

Verification Artifacts in Cooperative Verification: Survey and Unifying Component Framework

Finding More Bugs with Software Model Checking using Delta Debugging

Verification Artifacts in Cooperative Verification: Survey and Unifying Component Framework

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About