Automated techniques for provably safe mobile code

Theoretical Computer Science

Volumn 290, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 1175-1199

  Colby, Christopher ^a   Crary, Karl ^b   Harper, Robert ^b   Lee, Peter ^b   Pfenning, Frank ^b  

^a Inksomi Corporation   (United States)

^b Carnegie Mellon University   (United States)

Author keywords

Certifying compilers; Proof carrying code; Type safety; Type systems; Typed assembly language

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER OPERATING SYSTEMS; COMPUTER SOFTWARE; MACHINE ORIENTED LANGUAGES; MOBILE TELECOMMUNICATION SYSTEMS; PROGRAM ASSEMBLERS; PROGRAM COMPILERS;

CERTIFYING COMPILERS; PROOF-CARRYING CODES;

BINARY CODES;

EID: 0037413289     PISSN: 03043975     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0304-3975(01)00201-8     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Appel A.W., Felten E.W. Proof-carrying authentication. Tsudik G. Proc. 6th Conf. on Computer and Communications Security. 1999;52-62 ACM Press, Singapore.
2. Appel A.W., Felty A.P. A semantic model of types and machine instructions for proof-carrying code. Reps T. Conf. Rec. 27th Ann. Symp. on Principles of Programming Languages (POPL'00). 2000;243-253 ACM Press, Boston, MA.
3. B. Bershad, S. Savage, P. Pardyak, E. Sirer, M. Fiuczynski, D. Becker, C. Chambers, S. Eggers, Extensibility, safety and performance in the SPIN operating system, Proc. 15th ACM Symp. on Operating Systems Principles, Copper Mountain, 1995, pp. 267-284.
4. C. Colby, P. Lee, G.C. Necula, F. Blau, M. Plesko, K. Cline, A certifying compiler for Java, Proc. Conf. on Programming Language Design and Implementation (PLDI'00), ACM Press, Vancouver, Canada, 2000, pp. 95-107.
5. K. Crary, S. Weirich, Resource bound certification, Proc. 27th ACM Symp. on Principles of Programming Languages, Boston, MA, 2000, pp. 184-198.
6. Harper R., Honsell F., Plotkin G. A framework for defining logics. J. Assoc. Comput. Mach. 40(1):1993;143-184.
7. R. Harper, F. Pfenning, On equivalence and canonical forms in the LF type theory, Technical Report CMU-CS-00-148, Department of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, July 2000.
8. S. Michaylov, F. Pfenning, An empirical study of the runtime behavior of higher-order logic programs, in: D. Miller (Ed.), Proc. Workshop on the λProlog Programming Language, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, 1992, pp. 257-271, available as Technical Report MS-CIS-92-86.
9. J.G. Morrisett, Compiling with types, Ph.D. Thesis, School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, Available as Carnegie Mellon University School of Computer Science Technical Report CMU-CS-95-226, December 1995.
10. G. Morrisett, K. Crary, N. Glew, D. Grossman, R. Samuels, F. Smith, D. Walker, S. Weirich, S. Zdancewic, TALx86: a realistic typed assembly language, Proc. 2nd Workshop on Compiler Support for System Software, Atlanta, Georgia, 1999, pp. 25-35.
11. G. Morrisett, K. Crary, N. Glew, D. Walker, Stack-based typed assembly language, in: X. Leroy, A. Ohori (Eds.), Second Workshop on Types in Compilation, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 1473, Springer, Kyoto, Japan, 1998, pp. 28-52, extended version published as CMU Technical Report CMU-CS-98-178.
12. G. Morrisett, D. Walker, K. Crary, N. Glew, From System F to typed assembly language, ACM Trans. Programming Language Systems 21 (3) (1999) 528-569, an earlier version appeared in Proc. 25th Symp. on Principles of Programming Languages (POPL'98), San Diego, CA, 1998, pp. 85-97.
13. Necula G.C. Proof-carrying code. Jones N.D. Conf. Record of the 24th Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages (POPL'97). 1997;106-119 ACM Press, Paris, France.
14. G.C. Necula, Compiling with proofs, Ph.D. Thesis, Carnegie Mellon University, available as Technical Report CMU-CS-98-154, October 1998.
15. G. Necula, P. Lee, Safe kernel extensions without run-time checking, Proc. Second Symp. on Operating Systems Design and Implementation, Seattle, Washington, 1996, pp. 229-243.
16. Necula G., Lee P. Safe, untrusted agents using proof-carrying code, Special Issue on Mobile Agent Security, Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Vol. 1419:1997;Springer, New York.
17. G.C. Necula, P. Lee, Efficient representation and validation of logical proofs, Proc. 13th Annual Symp. on Logic in Computer Science (LICS'98), IEEE Computer Society Press, Indianapolis, Indiana, 1998, pp. 93-104.
18. Necula G.C., Lee P. The design and implementation of a certifying compiler. Cooper K.D. Proc. Conf. on Programming Language Design and Implementation (PLDI'98). 1998;333-344 ACM Press, Montreal, Canada.
19. Pfenning F. Logic programming in the LF logical framework. Huet G., Plotkin G. Logical Frameworks. 1991;149-181 Cambridge University Press.
20. F. Pfenning, Elf: A meta-language for deductive systems, in: A. Bundy (Ed.), Proc. 12th International Conf. on Automated Deduction, Springer, LNAI 814, Nancy, France, 1994, pp. 811-815, system abstract.
21. F. Pfenning, Logical frameworks, in: A. Robinson, A. Voronkov (Eds.), Handbook of Automated Reasoning, Chap. XXI, Elsevier Science and MIT Press, 2001, pp. 977-1061.
22. Pfenning F., Schürmann C. Algorithms for equality and unification in the presence of notational definitions. Altenkirch T., Naraschewski W., Reus B. Types for Proofs and Programs, Springer, Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Vol. 1657:1998;179-193 Kloster Irsee, Germany.
23. F. Pfenning, C. Schürmann, System description: Twelf -- a meta-logical framework for deductive systems, in: H. Ganzinger (Ed.), Proc. 16th Internat. Conf. on Automated Deduction (CADE-16), Springer, LNAI 1632, Trento, Italy, 1999, pp. 202-206.
24. Reynolds J.C., Definitional interpreters for higher-order programming languages. Proc. Conf. Record of the 25th National ACM Conference. Boston. 1972, pp. 717-740.
25. A. Stump, D.L. Dill, Generating proofs from a decision procedure, in: A. Pnueli, P. Traverso (Eds.), Proc. FLoC Workshop on Run-Time Result Verification, Trento, Italy, 1999.
26. D. Tarditi, G. Morrisett, P. Cheng, C. Stone, R. Harper, P. Lee, TIL: a type-directed optimizing compiler for ML, ACM SIGPLAN Conf. on Programming Language Design and Implementation, Philadelphia, PA, 1996, pp. 181-192.
27. R. Virga, Higher-order rewriting with dependent types, Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Mathematical Sciences, Carnegie Mellon University, available as Technical Report CMU-CS-99-167, September 1999.
28. R. Wahbe, S. Lucco, T. Anderson, S. Graham, Efficient software-based fault isolation, Proc. 14th ACM Symp. on Operating System Principles, 1993, pp. 203-216.
29. D. Walker, A type system for expressive security policies, Proc. 27th ACM Symp. on Principles of Programming Languages, Boston, MA, 2000, pp. 254-267.
30. H. Xi, R. Harper, A dependently typed assembly language, Technical Report OGI-CSE-99-008, Computer Science Department, Oregon Graduate Institute, July 1999.
31. Xi H., Pfenning F. Eliminating array bound checking through dependent types. Cooper K.D. Proc. Conf. on Programming Language Design and Implementation (PLDI'98). 1998;249-257 ACM Press, Montreal, Canada.
32. Xi H., Pfenning F. Dependent types in practical programming. Aiken A. Conf. Record of the 26th Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages (POPL'99). 1999;214-227 ACM Press.