David Evans evans@cs.virginia.edu http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~evans - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

slide1 n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
David Evans evans@cs.virginia.edu http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~evans PowerPoint Presentation
David Evans evans@cs.virginia.edu http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~evans

share
play prev play next
play fullscreen
1 / 32
Download
Download Presentation

David Evans evans@cs.virginia.edu http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~evans

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Bugs and the Bees Research in Programming Languages and Security David Evans evans@cs.virginia.edu http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~evans University of Virginia Department of Computer Science

  2. What is Computer Science? David Evans - CS696

  3. Let AB and CD be the two given numbers not relatively prime. It is required to find the greatest common measure of AB and CD. If now CD measures AB, since it also measures itself, then CD is a common measure of CD and AB. And it is manifest that it is also the greatest, for no greater number than CD measures CD. But, if CD does not measure AB, then, when the less of the numbers AB and CD being continually subtracted from the greater, some number is left which measures the one before it. David Evans - CS696

  4. For a unit is not left, otherwise AB and CD would be relatively prime, which is contrary to the hypothesis. Therefore some number is left which measures the one before it. Now let CD, measuring BE, leave EA less than itself, let EA, measuring DF, leave FC less than itself, and let CF measure AE. Since then, CF measures AE, and AE measures DF, therefore CF also measures DF. But it measures itself, therefore it also measures the whole CD. But CD measures BE, therefore CF also measures BE. And it also measures EA, therefore it measures the whole BA. But it also measures CD, therefore CF measures AB and CD. Therefore CF is a common measure of AB and CD. I say next that it is also the greatest. If CF is not the greatest common measure of AB and CD, then some number G, which is greater than CF, measures the numbers AB and CD. Now, since G measures CD, and CD measures BE, therefore G also measures BE. But it also measures the whole BA, therefore it measures the remainder AE. But AE measures DF, therefore G also measures DF. And it measures the whole DC, therefore it also measures the remainder CF, that is, the greater measures the less, which is impossible. Therefore no number which is greater than CF measures the numbers AB and CD. Therefore CF is the greatest common measure of AB and CD. Euclid’s Elements, Book VII, Proposition 2 (300BC) David Evans - CS696

  5. By the word operation, we mean any process which alters the mutual relation of two or more things, be this relation of what kind it may. This is the most general definition, and would include all subjects in the universe. Again, it might act upon other things besides number, were objects found whose mutual fundamental relations could be expressed by those of the abstract science of operations, and which should be also susceptible of adaptations to the action of the operating notation and mechanism of the engine... Supposing, for instance, that the fundamental relations of pitched sounds in the science of harmony and of musical composition were susceptible of such expression and adaptations, the engine might compose elaborate and scientific pieces of music of any degree of complexity or extent. • Ada, Countess of Lovelace, around 1830 David Evans - CS696

  6. What is the difference between Euclid and Ada? “It depends on what your definition of ‘is’ is.” Bill Gates (speaking at Microsoft’s anti-trust trial) David Evans - CS696

  7. Geometry vs. Computer Science • Geometry (mathematics) is about declarative knowledge: “what is” If now CD measures AB, since it also measures itself, then CDis a common measure of CD and AB • Computer Science is about imperative knowledge: “how to” Computer Science has nothing to do with beige (or translucent blue) boxes called “computers” and is not a science. David Evans - CS696

  8. Computer Science • “How to” knowledge: • Ways of describing imperative processes (computations) • Ways of reasoning about (predicting) what imperative processes will do • Most interesting CS problems concern: • Better ways of describing computations • Ways of reasoning about what they do (and don’t do) David Evans - CS696

  9. LCLint My Research Projects • The Bugs • The Bees - “Programming the Swarm” How can we detect code that describes unintended computations? How can we program large collections of devices and reason about their behavior? David Evans - CS696

  10. A Gross Oversimplification all Formal Verifiers Bugs Detected LCLint Compilers none Low Unfathomable Effort Required David Evans - CS696

  11. Everyone Likes Types • Easy to Understand • Easy to Use • Quickly Detect Many Programming Errors • Useful Documentation • …even though they are lots of work! • 1/4 of text of typical C program is for types David Evans - CS696

  12. Limitations of Standard Types David Evans - CS696

  13. Attributes Limitations of Standard Types David Evans - CS696

  14. Approach • Programmers add annotations (formal specifications) • Simple and precise • Describe programmers intent: • Types, memory management, data hiding, aliasing, modification, null-ity, buffer sizes, security, etc. • LCLint detects inconsistencies between annotations and code • Simple (fast!) dataflow analyses David Evans - CS696

  15. Example: Buffer Overflows • [David Larochelle’s MCS] • Most commonly exploited security vulnerability • 1988 Internet Worm • Still the most common attack • Code Red exploited buffer overflow in IIS • >50% of CERT advisories, 23% of CVE entries in 2001 • Attributes describe sizes of allocated buffers David Evans - CS696

  16. uninitialized array Buffer Overflow Example Source: Secure Programming, SecurityFocus.com char *strncat (char *s1, char *s2, size_t n) /*@requires maxSet(s1) >=maxRead(s1) + n@*/ void func(char *str) { char buffer[256]; strncat(buffer, str, sizeof(buffer) - 1); } strncat.c:4:21: Possible out-of-bounds store: strncat(buffer, str, sizeof((buffer)) - 1); Unable to resolve constraint: requires maxRead (buffer @ strncat.c:4:29) <= 0 needed to satisfy precondition: requires maxSet (buffer @ strncat.c:4:29) >= maxRead (buffer @ strncat.c:4:29) + 255 … David Evans - CS696

  17. Detecting Buffer Overflows • Annotations express constraints on buffer sizes • e.g., maxSet is the highest index that can safely be written to • Checking uses axiomatic semantics with simplification rules • Heuristics for analyzing common loop idioms • Detected known and unknown vulnerabilities in wu-ftpd and BIND David Evans - CS696

  18. LCLint Status • Public distribution • Effective checking >100K line programs (checks about 1K lines per second) • Detects lots of real bugs in real programs (including itself, of course) • Real users, C Unleashed, Linux Journal, etc. • Checks include type abstractions, modifications, globals, memory leaks, dead storage, naming conventions, undefined behavior, incomplete definition... David Evans - CS696

  19. Some Open Issues • Integrate run-time checking • Combine static and run-time checking to enable additional checking and completeness guarantees • Generalize framework • Support static checking for multiple source languages in a principled way • Design-level Properties • Concurrent programs • Make it easier to annotate legacy programs David Evans - CS696

  20. LCLint • More information: lclint.cs.virginia.edu USENIX Security ’01, PATV ‘2000, PLDI ’96 • Public release – real users, mentioned in C FAQ, C Unleashed, Linux Journal, etc. • Students (includes other PL/SE/security related projects): • David Larochelle: buffer overflows, automatic annotations • Joel Winstead: parallel loop exception semantics • Greg Yukl: serialization • Undergraduates: David Friedman, Mike Lanouette, Lim Lam, Tran Nguyen, Hien Phan, Adam Sowers • Current Funding: NASA (joint with John Knight) David Evans - CS696

  21. Programming the Swarm David Evans - CS696

  22. Really Brief History of Computer Science 1950s: Programming in the small... Programmable computers Learned the programming is hard Birth of higher-order languages Tools for reasoning about trivial programs 1970s: Programming in the large... Abstraction, objects Methodologies for development Tools for reasoning about component-based systems 2000s: Programming the Swarm! David Evans - CS696

  23. What’s Changing • Execution Platforms • Not computers (98% of microprocessors sold this year) • Small and cheap • Execution environment • Interact with physical world • Unpredictable, dynamic • Programs • Old style of programming won’t work • Is there a new paradigm? David Evans - CS696

  24. Programming the Swarm: Long-Range Goal Cement 10 GFlop David Evans - CS696

  25. Why this Might be Possible? • Biology Does It • Ant routing • Find best route to food source using pheromone trails • Bee house-hunting • Reach consensus by dancing and split to new hive • Complex creatures self-organize from short DNA program and dumb chemicals • Genetic code for 2 humans differs in only 2M base pairs (.5 MB < 1% of Win2000) David Evans - CS696

  26. Swarm Programming Model Behavioral Description Device Units Swarm Program Generator Device Programs Environment Model Programmed Device Units Device Model Primitives Library David Evans - CS696

  27. Swarm Programming • Primitives describe group behaviors • What are the primitives? • How are they specified? • Important to understand both functional (how the state changes) and non-functional (power use, robustness, efficiency, etc.) properties • Construct complex behaviors by composing primitives • What are the right combination mechanisms? • Pick the right combination of primitive implementations based on description of desired non-functional properties David Evans - CS696

  28. Open Issues • How can we predict the functional and non-functional properties of combinations of primitives? • How can we synthesize efficient swarm programs from a library of primitive implementations? • Security • Can we use swarm programming to build systems that are resilient to classes of attack? • Can we produce swarm programs with known behavioral constraints? David Evans - CS696

  29. Programming the Swarm swarm.cs.virginia.edu • Students: • Gilbert Backers: Adaptive Hierarchal Communication • Weilin Zhong: Security of Ant Routing • Undergraduates: Keen Browne, Mike Cuvelier, John Calandrino, Bill Oliver, Mike Hoyge, Jon McCune, Errol McEachron • Funding: NSF Career Award David Evans - CS696

  30. Choosing an Advisor • Most important decision you will make in graduate school! • Don’t rely on the matching process • This is a LAST RESORT • If you don’t know who your advisor is before the matching process, something is wrong David Evans - CS696

  31. Things you should do: • Talk to faculty – don’t wait until the week before matching forms are due! • Talk to students about their advisors • Think of your own project ideas • Prove your value as a student to a potential advisor • But also – expect potential advisor to demonstrate their value as an advisor David Evans - CS696

  32. Summary • Computer Science is about “how to” knowledge • Interesting problems: • Describing and reasoning about behavior of large ad hoc collections (Programming the Swarm) • Detecting differences between what programs express and what programmers intend (LCLint) • Be proactive about finding an advisor • [Swarm Demo] • evans@cs.virginia.edu David Evans - CS696