Abstract not found

A major obstacle to finding program errors in a real system is knowing what correctness rules the system must obey. These rules are often undocumented or specified in an ad hoc manner. This paper demonstrates tech-niques that automatically extract such checking information from the source code itself, rather than the programmer, thereby avoiding the need for a priori knowledge of system rules. The cornerstone of our approach is inferring programmer "beliefs" that we then cross-check for contradictions. Beliefs are facts implied by code: a dereference of a pointer, p, implies a belief that p is non-null, a call to "unlock(1)" implies that 1 was locked, etc. For beliefs we know the programmer must hold, such as the pointer dereference above, we immediately flag contra-

We describe a formal approach for finding bugs in security-relevant software and verifying their absence. The idea is as follows: we identify rules of safe programming practice, encode them as safety properties, and verify whether these properties are obeyed. Because manual verification is too expensive, we have built a program analysis tool to automate this process. Our program analysis models the program to be verified as a pushdown automaton, represents the security property as a finite state automaton, and uses model checking techniques to identify whether any state violating the desired security goal is reachable in the program. The major advantages of this approach are that it is sound in verifying the absence of certain classes of vulnerabilities, that it is fully interprocedural, and that it is efficient and scalable. Experience suggests that this approach will be useful in finding a wide range of security vulnerabilities in large programs efficiently.