Gaining and maintaining confidence in operating systems security
Pages 201 - 204
Abstract
Recently, there has been a lot of work in the verification of security properties in programs. Engler et al. use static analysis to find flaws in the implementation of Linux device drivers, such as the failure to release locks [4]. Edwards et al. use static and dynamic analysis to verify that the authorization hooks of the Linux Security Modules (LSM) framework are placed such that all the necessary authorizations are performed [2, 12]. In addition, Shankar et al. and Larochelle et al. show how to use static analysis tools to find program vulnerabilities, such as buffer overflows and printf vulnerabilities [7, 10, 11]. Lastly, Necula et al. show that we use detect and leverage the cases in which C is used in a type-safe manner in order to detect memory errors [9]. Runtime verification can be used to detect errors in other cases.
References
[1]
M. Bishop and M. Dilger. Checking for race conditions in file accesses. Technical Report CSE-95-10, University of California at Davis, September 1995.]]
[2]
A. Edwards, T. Jaeger, and X. Zhang. Verifying authorization hook placement for the Linux Security Modules framework. TR 22254, IBM, December 2001.]]
[3]
M. Elsman, J. S. Foster, and A. Aiken. Carillon -- a system to find Y2K problems in C programs, user manual. www.cs.berkeley.edu/carillon, 1999.]]
[4]
D. Engler, B. Chelf, A. Chou, and S. Hallem. Checking system rules using system-specific, programmer-written compiler extensions. In Proceedings of the 4th Symposium on Operation System Design and Implementation (OSDI), October 2000.]]
[5]
D. Evans. Static detection of dynamic memory errors. In SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, 1996.]]
[6]
ITSEC. Common Criteria for Information Security Technology Evaluation. ITSEC, 1998. Available at www.commoncriteria.org.]]
[7]
D. Larochelle and D. Evans. Statically detecting likely buffer overflow vulnerabilities. In Proceedings of the Tenth USENIX Security Symposium, 2001.]]
[8]
NCSC. Trusted Computer Security Evaluation Criteria. National Computer Security Center, 1985. DoD 5200.28-STD, also known as the Orange Book.]]
[9]
G. Necula, S. McPeak, and W. Weimer. CCured: Type-safe retrofitting of legacy code. In Proceedings of the Principles of Programming Languages, 2002.]]
[10]
U. Shankar, K. Talwar, J. S. Foster, and D. Wagner. Detecting format string vulnerabilities with type qualifiers. In Proceedings of the Tenth USENIX Security Symposium, 2001.]]
[11]
D. Wagner, J. Foster, E. Brewer, and A. Aiken. A first step towards automated detection of buffer overrun vulnerabilities. In NDSS Network and Distributed System Security Symposium, 2000.]]
[12]
X. Zhang, A. Edwards, and T. Jaeger. Using CQual for static analysis of authorization hook placement, February 2002. Submitted for conference publication.]]
- Gaining and maintaining confidence in operating systems security
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
July 2002
258 pages
Copyright © 2002 ACM.
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 01 July 2002
Check for updates
Qualifiers
- Article
Acceptance Rates
Overall Acceptance Rate 37 of 37 submissions, 100%
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 369Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)9
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 20 Feb 2025
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in