Verification of Temporal Properties of Concurrent Systems

Andersen, Henrik Reif

doi:10.7146/dpb.v22i445.6762

Cited by 23 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 70 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In [CS91,And93] it was shown how one can construct characteristic formulae for a number of equivalences and preorders within the nu-calculus. As the model checking problem for the nu-calculus is decidable in time O(n · m), where m is the size of the declaration and n is the size of the transition system, and as the declaration constructed essentially describes the transitions of the transition system and therefore is of size O(n), this shows that the simulation-like equivalences considered in [CS91,And93] are polynomialtime decidable.…”

Section: Characteristic Formulaementioning

confidence: 99%

On the Complexity of Deciding Behavioural Equivalences and Preorders. A Survey

Hüttel¹,

Shukla²

1996

BRICS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper gives an overview of the computational complexity of all the equivalences in the linear/branching time hierarchy [vG90a] and the preorders in the corresponding hierarchy of preorders. We consider finite state or regular processes as well as infinite-state BPA [BK84b] processes.A distinction, which turns out to be important in the finite-state processes, is that of simulation-like equivalences/preorders vs. trace-like equivalences and preorders. Here we survey various known complexity results for these relations. For regular processes, all simulation-like equivalences and preorders are decidable in polynomial time whereas all trace-like equivalences and preorders are PSPACE-Complete. We also consider interesting special classes of regular processes such as deterministic, determinate, unary, locally unary, and tree-like processes and survey the known complexity results in these special cases.For infinite-state processes the results are quite different. For the class of context-free processes or BPA processes any preorder or equivalence beyond bisimulation is undecidable but bisimulation equivalence is polynomial time decidable for normed BPA processes and is known to be elementarily decidable in the general case. For the class of BPP processes, all preorders and equivalences apart from bisimilarity are undecidable. However, bisimilarity is decidable in this case and is known to be decidable in polynomial time for normed BPP processes.

show abstract

Section: Characteristic Formulaementioning

confidence: 99%

On the Complexity of Deciding Behavioural Equivalences and Preorders. A Survey

Hüttel¹,

Shukla²

1996

BRICS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, since the branching-time modal mu-calculus can state bisimilarity through a simple (modal depth 2) formula [And93], EXPTIMEhardness of bisimilarity entails EXPTIME-hardness of model-checking mucalculus formula over non-flat systems (a result already known from [KVW98,Rab97b]). …”

Section: Classical Verification Problemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Foundations of Software Science and Computation Structures

Tiuryn¹

2000

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Given a security property ϕ, expressed through a logical formula (e.g. 8, 9), the main verification problem corresponds to check that S ‖ X satisfies the formula ϕ, ( S ∥ X ⊧ϕ) regardless of the behaviour of any possible malicious user X that may interact with S . Formally, the verification problem for an open system is: …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A framework for automatic generation of security controller

Martinelli

Matteucci

2010

Software Testing Verif & Rel

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYThis paper concerns the study, the development and the synthesis of mechanisms for guaranteeing the security of complex systems, i.e., systems composed by several interacting components.A complex system under analysis is described as an open system, i.e., a system in which an unspecified component (a component whose behaviour is not fixed in advance) interacts with the known part of the system. Within this formal approach, we propose techniques that aim to synthesize controller programs able to guarantee that, for all possible behaviours of the unspecified component, the system should work properly, e.g., it should be able to satisfy a certain property.For performing this task, we first need to identify the set of necessary and sufficient conditions that the unspecified component has to satisfy in order to ensure that the whole system is secure. Hence, by exploiting satisfiability procedures for temporal logic, we automatically synthesize an appropriate controller program that forces the unspecified component to meet these conditions. This will ensure the security of the whole system.In particular, we contribute within the area of the enforcement of security properties by proposing a flexible and automated framework that goes beyond the definition of how a system should behave to work properly. Indeed, while the majority of related work focuses on the definition of monitoring mechanisms, we also address the synthesis problem.Moreover, we describe a tool for the synthesis of secure systems which is able to generate appropriate controller programs. This tool is also able to translate the synthesized controller programs into the ConSpec language. ConSpec programs can be actually deployed for enforcing security policies on mobile Java applications by using the run-time framework developed in the ambit of the European Project S3MS.

show abstract

Verification of Temporal Properties of Concurrent Systems

Cited by 23 publications

References 70 publications

On the Complexity of Deciding Behavioural Equivalences and Preorders. A Survey

On the Complexity of Deciding Behavioural Equivalences and Preorders. A Survey

Foundations of Software Science and Computation Structures

A framework for automatic generation of security controller

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About