Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

An Introduction to Software Verification with Whiley

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Engineering Trustworthy Software Systems (SETSS 2018)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 11430))

Abstract

This tutorial introduces the basic ideas of software specification and verification, which are important techniques for assuring the quality of software and eliminating common kinds of errors such as buffer overflow. The tutorial takes a practical hands-on approach using the Whiley language and its verifying compiler. This verifying compiler uses an automated proof engine to try to prove that the code will execute without errors and will satisfy its specifications. Each section of the tutorial includes exercises that can be checked using the online Whiley Labs website.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

eBook
USD 12.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    This holds because integers are unbounded in Whiley.

References

  1. European Space Agency: Ariane 5: Flight 501 failure. Report by the Enquiry Board (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Babić, D., Hu, A.J.: Exploiting shared structure in software verification conditions. In: Yorav, K. (ed.) HVC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4899, pp. 169–184. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-77966-7_15

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Babić, D., Hu, A.J.: Structural abstraction of software verification conditions. In: Damm, W., Hermanns, H. (eds.) CAV 2007. LNCS, vol. 4590, pp. 366–378. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-73368-3_41

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Back, R.J.R., von Wright, J.: Refinement Calculus: A Systematic Approach. Graduate Texts in Computer Science. Springer, New York (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-1674-2

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Barnett, M., Chang, B.-Y.E., DeLine, R., Jacobs, B., Leino, K.R.M.: Boogie: a modular reusable verifier for object-oriented programs. In: de Boer, F.S., Bonsangue, M.M., Graf, S., de Roever, W.-P. (eds.) FMCO 2005. LNCS, vol. 4111, pp. 364–387. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/11804192_17

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Barnett, M., Fähndrich, M., Leino, K.R.M., Müller, P., Schulte, W., Venter, H.: Specification and verification: the Spec# experience. Commun. ACM 54(6), 81–91 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Barnett, M., DeLine, R., Fähndrich, M., Leino, K.R.M., Schulte, W.: Verification of object-oriented programs with invariants. J. Object Technol. 3(6), 27–56 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Barnett, M., Leino, K.R.M.: Weakest-precondition of unstructured programs. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Program Analysis for Software Tools and Engineering (PASTE), pp. 82–87. ACM Press (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Burdy, L., Requet, A., Lanet, J.-L.: Java applet correctness: a developer-oriented approach. In: Araki, K., Gnesi, S., Mandrioli, D. (eds.) FME 2003. LNCS, vol. 2805, pp. 422–439. Springer, Heidelberg (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-45236-2_24

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Carvalho, M., DeMott, J., Ford, R., Wheeler, D.: Heartbleed 101. IEEE Secur. Priv. 12(4), 63–67 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Cataño, N., Huisman, M.: Formal specification and static checking of gemplus’ electronic purse using ESC/Java. In: Eriksson, L.-H., Lindsay, P.A. (eds.) FME 2002. LNCS, vol. 2391, pp. 272–289. Springer, Heidelberg (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45614-7_16

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Chalin, P., Rioux, F.: JML runtime assertion checking: improved error reporting and efficiency using strong validity. In: Cuellar, J., Maibaum, T., Sere, K. (eds.) FM 2008. LNCS, vol. 5014, pp. 246–261. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-68237-0_18

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Chandra, S., Fink, S.J., Sridharan, M.: Snugglebug: a powerful approach to weakest preconditions. In: Proceedings of the ACM conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation (PLDI), pp. 363–374. ACM Press (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Charette, R.: This car runs on code. IEEE Spectr. 46, 3 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Charette, R.N.: Why software fails. IEEE Spect. 42(9), 42–49 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Cohen, E., et al.: VCC: a practical system for verifying concurrent C. In: Berghofer, S., Nipkow, T., Urban, C., Wenzel, M. (eds.) TPHOLs 2009. LNCS, vol. 5674, pp. 23–42. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03359-9_2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  17. Cok, D.R.: OpenJML: JML for Java 7 by extending OpenJDK. In: Bobaru, M., Havelund, K., Holzmann, G.J., Joshi, R. (eds.) NFM 2011. LNCS, vol. 6617, pp. 472–479. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-20398-5_35

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  18. Cok, D.R.: OpenJML: Software verification for Java 7 using JML, OpenJDK, and eclipse. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Formal Integrated Development Environment (F-IDE), vol. 149, pp. 79–92 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Cytron, R., Ferrante, J., Rosen, B., Wegman, M., Zadeck, F.K.: An efficient method of computing static single assignment form. In: Proceedings of the ACM symposium on the Principles Of Programming Languages (POPL), pp. 25–35 (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Cytron, R., Ferrante, J., Rosen, B.K., Wegman, M.N., Zadeck, F.K.: Efficiently computing static single assignment form and the control dependence graph. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 13(4), 451–490 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Denney, E., Fischer, B.: Explaining verification conditions. In: Meseguer, J., Roşu, G. (eds.) AMAST 2008. LNCS, vol. 5140, pp. 145–159. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-79980-1_12

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  22. Detlefs, D., Nelson, G., Saxe, J.B.: Simplify: a theorem prover for program checking. J. ACM 52(3), 365–473 (2005)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  23. Detlefs, D.L., Leino, K.R.M., Nelson, G., Saxe, J.B.: Extended static checking. SRC Research Report 159, Compaq Systems Research Center (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Dijkstra, E.W.: Guarded commands, nondeterminancy and formal derivation of programs. Commun. ACM 18, 453–457 (1975)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Durumeric, Z., et al.: The matter of heartbleed. In: Proceedings of Internet Measurement Conference (IMC), pp. 475–488. ACM Press (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Fähndrich, M., Leino, K.R.M.: Declaring and checking non-null types in an object-oriented language. In: Proceedings of the ACM conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages and Applications (OOPSLA), pp. 302–312. ACM Press (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Filliâtre, J.-C., Marché, C.: The Why/Krakatoa/Caduceus platform for deductive program verification. In: Damm, W., Hermanns, H. (eds.) CAV 2007. LNCS, vol. 4590, pp. 173–177. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-73368-3_21

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  28. Flanagan, C., Leino, K., Lillibridge, M., Nelson, G., Saxe, J.B., Stata, R.: Extended static checking for Java. In: Proceedings of the ACM conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation (PLDI), pp. 234–245 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Flanagan, C., Saxe, J.B.: Avoiding exponential explosion: generating compact verification conditions. In: Proceedings of the ACM symposium on the Principles Of Programming Languages (POPL), pp. 193–205. ACM Press (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Floyd, R.W.: Assigning meaning to programs. In: Proceedings of Symposia in Applied Mathematics, vol. 19, pp. 19–31. American Mathematical Society (1967)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Frade, M.J., Pinto, J.S.: Verification conditions for source-level imperative programs. Comput. Sci. Rev. 5(3), 252–277 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Software problem led to system failure at dhahran, saudi arabia, gao report #b-247094 (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Grigore, R., Charles, J., Fairmichael, F., Kiniry, J.: Strongest postcondition of unstructured programs. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Formal Techniques for Java-like Programs (FTFJP), pp. 6:1–6:7. ACM Press (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Hoare, C.A.R.: An axiomatic basis for computer programming. CACM 12, 576–580 (1969)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Holzmann, G.J.: Out of bounds. IEEE Softw. 32(6), 24–26 (2015)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  36. Huisman, M., Klebanov, V., Monahan, R.: Verifythis verification competition 2012 - organizer’s report (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Jacobs, B.: Weakest pre-condition reasoning for Java programs with JML annotations. J. Log. Algebr. Program. 58(1–2), 61–88 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Kassios, I.T.: Dynamic frames: support for framing, dependencies and sharing without restrictions. In: Misra, J., Nipkow, T., Sekerinski, E. (eds.) FM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4085, pp. 268–283. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/11813040_19

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  39. Klebanov, V., et al.: The 1st verified software competition: experience report. In: Butler, M., Schulte, W. (eds.) FM 2011. LNCS, vol. 6664, pp. 154–168. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-21437-0_14

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  40. Ko, A.J., Dosono, B., Duriseti, N.: Thirty years of software problems in the news. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Cooperative and Human Aspects of Software Engineering, CHASE 2014, Hyderabad, India, 2–3 June 2014. ACM Press (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  41. Leavens, G.T., Cheon, Y., Clifton, C., Ruby, C., Cok, D.R.: How the design of JML accommodates both runtime assertion checking and formal verification. Sci. Comput. Program. 55(1–3), 185–208 (2005)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  42. Leino, K.R.M.: Efficient weakest preconditions. Inf. Process. Lett. 93(6), 281–288 (2005)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  43. Rustan, K., Leino, M.: Developing verified programs with Dafny. In: Joshi, R., Müller, P., Podelski, A. (eds.) VSTTE 2012. LNCS, vol. 7152, p. 82. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-27705-4_7

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  44. Leino, K.R.M.: Dafny: an automatic program verifier for functional correctness. In: Clarke, E.M., Voronkov, A. (eds.) LPAR 2010. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 6355, pp. 348–370. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-17511-4_20

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  45. Leino, K.R.M., Müller, P.: Using the Spec# language, methodology, and tools to write bug-free programs. In: Müller, P. (ed.) LASER 2007–2008. LNCS, vol. 6029, pp. 91–139. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-13010-6_4

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  46. Leino, K.R.M., Monahan, R.: Dafny meets the verification benchmarks challenge. In: Leavens, G.T., O’Hearn, P., Rajamani, S.K. (eds.) VSTTE 2010. LNCS, vol. 6217, pp. 112–126. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15057-9_8

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  47. Leveson, N., Turner, C.: An investigation of the Therac-25 accidents. IEEE Comput. 26(7), 18–41 (1993)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Morgan, C.: Programming from Specifications, 2nd edn. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (1994)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  49. de Moura, L., Bjørner, N.: Z3: an efficient SMT solver. In: Ramakrishnan, C.R., Rehof, J. (eds.) TACAS 2008. LNCS, vol. 4963, pp. 337–340. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-78800-3_24

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  50. Pearce, D.J.: Integer range analysis for Whiley on embedded systems. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/IFIP Workshop on Software Technologies for Future Embedded and Ubiquitous Systems, pp. 26–33 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  51. Pearce, D.J.: The Whiley Language Specification (Updated, 2016)

    Google Scholar 

  52. Pearce, D.J., Groves, L.: Whiley: a platform for research in software verification. In: Erwig, M., Paige, R.F., Van Wyk, E. (eds.) SLE 2013. LNCS, vol. 8225, pp. 238–248. Springer, Cham (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02654-1_13

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  53. Rahman, H.A., Beznosov, K., Martí, J.R.: Identification of sources of failures and their propagation in critical infrastructures from 12 years of public failure reports. Int. J. Crit. Infrastruct. 5(3), 220–244 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Sánchez, J., Leavens, G.T.: Static verification of PtolemyRely programs using OpenJML. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Foundations of Aspect-Oriented Languages (FOAL), pp. 13–18. ACM Press (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  55. Steinberg, J.: Massive internet security vulnerability - here’s what you need to do (2014). https://www.forbes.com/sites/josephsteinberg/2014/04/10/massive-internet-security-vulnerability-you-are-at-risk-what-you-need-to-do. Accessed 12 Jan 2019

  56. Stevens, M.: Demonstrating Whiley on an embedded system. Technical report, School of Engineering and Computer Science, Victoria University of Wellington (2014). http://www.ecs.vuw.ac.nz/~djp/files/MattStevensENGR489.pdf

  57. Weng, M.H., Pfahringer, B., Utting, M.: Static techniques for reducing memory usage in the C implementation of Whiley programs. In: Proceedings of the Australasian Computer Science Week Multiconference, ACSW 2017, pp. 15:1–15:8. ACM, New York (2017). https://doi.org/10.1145/3014812.3014827

  58. White, D., Roschelle, A., Peterson, P., Schlissel, D., Biewald, B., Steinhurst, W.: The 2003 blackout: solutions that won’t cost a fortune. Electr. J. 16(9), 43–53 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Thanks to all the students and researchers who have contributed to the development of Whiley. The slides used to present this tutorial at SETSS were based on David Pearce’s slides for the SWEN224 (Software Correctness) course at Victoria University of Wellington, 2015-2016. Thanks to the students of those classes for their feedback and comments. Thanks to Professor Zhiming LIU for organising SETSS 2018.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand

    David J. Pearce & Lindsay Groves

  2. University of the Sunshine Coast, Sunshine Coast, QLD, Australia

    Mark Utting

Authors
  1. David J. Pearce
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mark Utting
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Lindsay Groves
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mark Utting .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. London South Bank University, London, UK

    Jonathan P. Bowen

  2. Southwest University, Chongqing, China

    Zhiming Liu

  3. Southwest University, Chongqing, China

    Zili Zhang

Appendix A: Sample Answers to Selected Exercises

Appendix A: Sample Answers to Selected Exercises

This appendix gives sample solutions to the exercises that cannot be checked using the online Whiley Labs website.

figure fi
figure fj

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Pearce, D.J., Utting, M., Groves, L. (2019). An Introduction to Software Verification with Whiley. In: Bowen, J., Liu, Z., Zhang, Z. (eds) Engineering Trustworthy Software Systems. SETSS 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11430. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-17601-3_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-17601-3_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-17600-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-17601-3

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics