research-article

Efficient runtime invariant checking: a framework and case study

Authors:

Michael Gorbovitski,

Yanhong A. Liu,

Scott D. StollerAuthors Info & Claims

WODA '08: Proceedings of the 2008 international workshop on dynamic analysis: held in conjunction with the ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis (ISSTA 2008)

Pages 43 - 49

https://doi.org/10.1145/1401827.1401837

Published: 21 July 2008 Publication History

Abstract

This paper describes a general and powerful framework for efficient runtime invariant checking. The framework supports (1) declarative specification of arbitrary invariants using high-level queries, with easy use of information from any data in the execution, (2) powerful analysis and transformations for automatic generation of instrumentation for efficient incremental checking of invariants, and (3) convenient mechanisms for reporting errors, debugging, and taking preventive or remedial actions, as well as recording history data for use in queries. We demonstrate the advantages and effectiveness of the framework through implementations and case studies with abstract syntax tree transformations, authentication in a SMB client, and the BitTorrent peer-to-peer file distribution protocol.

References

[1]

C. Artho, V. Schuppan, A. Biere, P. Eugster, M. Baur, and B. Zweimüller. JNuke: Efficient dynamic analysis for Java. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 3114: 462--465, 2004.

[2]

M. Barnett, B. Chang, R. DeLine, B. Jacobs, and K. Leino. Boogie: A modular reusable verifier for object-oriented programs. Proc. of the 4th Intl. Symp. on Formal Methods for Components and Objects, pages 364--387, 2006.

Digital Library

[3]

M. Barnett, R. DeLine, M. Fahndrich, K. Leino, and W. Schulte. Verification of object-oriented programs with invariants. Journal of Object Technology, 3(6): 27--56, 2004.

[4]

H. Barringer, A. Goldberg, K. Havelund, and K. Sen. Rule-based runtime verification. Proc. of the 5th Intl. Conf. on Verification, Model Checking and Abstract Interpretation, pages 44--57, 2004.

[5]

D. Bartetzko, C. Fischer, M. Möller, and H. Wehrheim. Jass Java with assertions. Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science, 55(2): 103--117, 2001.

[6]

F. Chen and G. Roşu. Mop: an efficient and generic runtime verification framework. Proc. of the 22nd annual ACM SIGPLAN Conf. on Object Oriented Programming Systems and Applications, pages 569--588, 2007.

Digital Library

[7]

Y. Cheon. A Runtime Assertion Checker for the Java Modeling Language. PhD thesis, Iowa State University, 2003.

[8]

L. Clarke and D. Rosenblum. A historical perspective on runtime assertion checking in software development. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, 31(3): 25--37, 2006.

Digital Library

[9]

T. Gibbs and B. Malloy. Weaving aspects into C++ applications for validation of temporal invariants. Proc. of the 7th European Conf. on Software Maintenance and Reengineering, pages 249--258, 2003.

Digital Library

[10]

D. Goyal. Transformational derivation of an improved alias analysis algorithm. Higher-Order and Symbolic Computation, 18(1/2), Feb. 2005.

Digital Library

[11]

D. Gries. The Science of Programming. Springer, 1981.

Digital Library

[12]

A. Gupta, I. Mumick, and V. Subrahmanian. Maintaining views incrementally. Proc. of the 1993 ACM SIGMOD Intl. Conf. on Management of Data, pages 157--166, 1993.

Digital Library

[13]

K. Havelund and G. Roşu. An Overview of the runtime verification tool Java PathExplorer. Formal Methods in System Design, 24(2): 189--215, 2004.

Digital Library

[14]

G. Kiczales, E. Hilsdale, J. Hugunin, M. Kersten, J. Palm, and W. Griswold. An overview of AspectJ. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2072: 327--355, 2001.

Digital Library

[15]

M. Kim, M. Viswanathan, S. Kannan, I. Lee, and O. Sokolsky. Java-MaC: a run-time assurance approach for Java programs. Formal Methods in System Design, 24(2): 129--155, 2004.

Digital Library

[16]

B. Krause and T. Wahls. jmle: a tool for executing JML specifications via constraint programming. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 4346: 293--296, 2007.

Digital Library

[17]

V. Kuncak and M. Rinard. An overview of the Jahob analysis system: project goals and current status. 20th Intl. Parallel and Distributed Processing Symp., pages 8--16, 2006.

Digital Library

[18]

G. Leavens, A. Baker, and C. Ruby. Preliminary design of JML: a behavioral interface specification language for Java. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, 31(3): 1--38, 2006.

Digital Library

[19]

G. T. Leavens, Y. Cheon, C. Clifton, C. Ruby, and D. R. Cok. How the design of jml accommodates both runtime assertion checking and formal verification. Science of Computer Programming, 55(1-3): 185--208, 2005.

Digital Library

[20]

Y. Liu, S. Stoller, M. Gorbovitski, T. Rothamel, and Y. Liu. Incrementalization across object abstraction. Proc. of the 20th Annual ACM SIGPLAN Conf. on Object Oriented Programming Systems Languages and Applications, pages 473--486, 2005.

Digital Library

[21]

M. Martin, B. Livshits, and M. Lam. Finding application errors and security flaws using PQL: a program query language. ACM SIGPLAN Notices, 40(10): 365--383, 2005.

Digital Library

[22]

R. Paige and S. Koenig. Finite differencing of computable expressions. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, 4(3): 402--454, 1982.

Digital Library

[23]

A. Potanin, J. Noble, and R. Biddle. Snapshot query-based debugging. Proc. of Australian Software Engineering Conf, pages 251--259, 2004.

Digital Library

[24]

A. Shankar and R. Bodík. DITTO: automatic incrementalization of data structure invariant checks (in Java). Proc. of the 2007 ACM SIGPLAN Conf. on Programming Language Design and Implementation, pages 310--319, 2007.

Digital Library

[25]

F Steimann. The paradoxical success of aspect-oriented programming. Proc. of the 21st Annual ACM SIGPLAN Conf. on Object-oriented Programming Languages, Systems, and Applications, pages 481--497, 2006.

Digital Library

[26]

V. Stolz and E. Bodden. Temporal assertions using AspectJ. Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science, 144(4): 109--124, 2006.

Digital Library

[27]

D. Willis, D. Pearce, and J. Noble. Efficient object querying for Java. Proc. of the European Conf. on Object-Oriented Programming, pages 28--49, 2006.

Digital Library

[28]

K. Zee, V. Kuncak, M. Taylor, and M. Rinard. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 4839: 202--213, 2007.

Digital Library

Cited By

Riley IJahan SMarshall AWalter CGamble R(2021)Evaluating verification awareness as a method for assessing adaptation riskFuture Generation Computer Systems10.1016/j.future.2021.01.034Online publication date: Feb-2021
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2021.01.034
Liu YStoller S(2020)Assurance of Distributed Algorithms and Systems: Runtime Checking of Safety and LivenessRuntime Verification10.1007/978-3-030-60508-7_3(47-66)Online publication date: 6-Oct-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-030-60508-7_3
Jahan SMarshall AGamble R(2017)Embedding Verification Concerns in Self-Adaptive System Code2017 IEEE 11th International Conference on Self-Adaptive and Self-Organizing Systems (SASO)10.1109/SASO.2017.21(121-130)Online publication date: Sep-2017
https://doi.org/10.1109/SASO.2017.21
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Efficient runtime invariant checking: a framework and case study

Recommendations

Model-based Runtime Verification Framework

Model-based runtime verification is an extension to the state-of-the-art runtime verification, aimed at checking at runtime the system implementation against the system model (consistency checking) and the system model against the system specification (...
Using capabilities for strict runtime invariant checking
Abstract
In this paper we use pre-existing language support for both reference and object capabilities to enable sound runtime verification of representation invariants. Our invariant protocol is stricter than the other protocols, since it ...
Lazy Runtime Verification for Constraints on Interacting Objects
APSEC '10: Proceedings of the 2010 Asia Pacific Software Engineering Conference

Application Programming Interface (API) constraints on objects are rules that API client code must follow in order to get expected results from these objects. Runtime verification, an important approach for detecting API constraint violations, usually ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

WODA '08: Proceedings of the 2008 international workshop on dynamic analysis: held in conjunction with the ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis (ISSTA 2008)

July 2008

81 pages

ISBN:9781605580548

DOI:10.1145/1401827

Conference Chairs:
Ben Liblit
University of Wisconsin---Madison
,
Atanas Rountev
Ohio State University

Copyright © 2008 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]

Sponsors

SIGSOFT: ACM Special Interest Group on Software Engineering

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 21 July 2008

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Funding Sources

Conference

ISSTA '08

Sponsor:

SIGSOFT

ISSTA '08: International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis

July 21, 2008

Washington, Seattle

Upcoming Conference

ICSE 2025

2025 IEEE/ACM 46th International Conference on Software Engineering

April 26 - May 3, 2025

Ottawa , ON , Canada

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

11
Total Citations
View Citations
264
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)7
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1

Reflects downloads up to 03 Mar 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Riley IJahan SMarshall AWalter CGamble R(2021)Evaluating verification awareness as a method for assessing adaptation riskFuture Generation Computer Systems10.1016/j.future.2021.01.034Online publication date: Feb-2021
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2021.01.034
Liu YStoller S(2020)Assurance of Distributed Algorithms and Systems: Runtime Checking of Safety and LivenessRuntime Verification10.1007/978-3-030-60508-7_3(47-66)Online publication date: 6-Oct-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-030-60508-7_3
Jahan SMarshall AGamble R(2017)Embedding Verification Concerns in Self-Adaptive System Code2017 IEEE 11th International Conference on Self-Adaptive and Self-Organizing Systems (SASO)10.1109/SASO.2017.21(121-130)Online publication date: Sep-2017
https://doi.org/10.1109/SASO.2017.21
Taha SJulliand JDadeau FCastillos KKanso B(2015)A compositional automata-based semantics and preserving transformation rules for testing property patternsFormal Aspects of Computing10.1007/s00165-014-0328-527:4(641-664)Online publication date: 1-Jul-2015
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s00165-014-0328-5
Thober MPendergrass JJurik AXu SYu TZhang XDing X(2012)JMFProceedings of the seventh ACM workshop on Scalable trusted computing10.1145/2382536.2382542(21-32)Online publication date: 15-Oct-2012
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2382536.2382542
Gorbovitski MLiu YStoller SRothamel TKiselyov OThompson S(2012)Composing transformations for instrumentation and optimizationProceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN 2012 workshop on Partial evaluation and program manipulation10.1145/2103746.2103759(53-62)Online publication date: 23-Jan-2012
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2103746.2103759
Liu YGorbovitski MStoller S(2009)A language and framework for invariant-driven transformationsACM SIGPLAN Notices10.1145/1837852.162161745:2(55-64)Online publication date: 4-Oct-2009
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/1837852.1621617
Liu YGorbovitski MStoller SSiek JFischer B(2009)A language and framework for invariant-driven transformationsProceedings of the eighth international conference on Generative programming and component engineering10.1145/1621607.1621617(55-64)Online publication date: 4-Oct-2009
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/1621607.1621617
Aftandilian EGuyer S(2009)GC assertionsACM SIGPLAN Notices10.1145/1543135.154250344:6(235-244)Online publication date: 15-Jun-2009
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/1543135.1542503
Aftandilian EGuyer SHind MDiwan A(2009)GC assertionsProceedings of the 30th ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation10.1145/1542476.1542503(235-244)Online publication date: 15-Jun-2009
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/1542476.1542503
Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Figures

Tables

Media

View Table of Conten