On the selection of error model(s) for OS robustness evaluation

Proceedings of the International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks

Volumn , Issue , 2007, Pages 502-511

  Johansson, Andréas ^a   Suri, Neeraj ^a   Murphy, Brendan ^b  

^a DARMSTADT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Germany)

^b MICROSOFT RESEARCH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ERROR ANALYSIS; INTERFACES (COMPUTER); MATHEMATICAL MODELS; ROBUSTNESS (CONTROL SYSTEMS);

DEVICE DRIVERS; ERROR MODELS; EXECUTION COSTS; FUZZING ERRORS;

COMPUTER OPERATING SYSTEMS;

EID: 36048982540     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1109/DSN.2007.71     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (21)

1. A. Albinet, et. al. Characterization of the Impact of Faulty Drivers on the Robustness of the Linux Kernel. Proc. of DSN, pp. 807-816, 2004.
2. J. Durães and H. Madeira. Multidimensional Characterization of the Impact of Faulty Drivers on the Operating System Behavior. IEICE Trans., E86-D(12):2563-2570, Dec. 2003.
3. J. Arlat, et. al. Dependability of COTS Microkernel-Based Systems. IEEE TOC, 51(2):138-163, Feb. 2002.
4. T. Ball et. al. Thorough Static Analysis of Device Drivers. Proc. of EuroSys, pp. 73-85, 2006.
5. R. Chillarege, et. al. Orthogonal Defect classification-a Concept for In-Process Measurements. IEEE TSE,,18(11):943-956, 1992.
6. J. Christmansson and R. Chillarege. Generation of an Error set that Emulates Software Faults Based on Field Data. Proc. of FTCS, pp. 304-313, 1996.
7. C. Fetzer and Z. Xiao. An Automated Approach to Increasing the Robustness of C-Libraries. Proc. of DSN, pp. 155-164, 2002.
8. W. Gu, et. al. Error Sensitivity of the Linux Kernel Executing on PowerPC G4 and Pentium 4 Processors. Proc. of DSN, pp. 887-896, 2004.
9. W. Gu, et. al. Characterization of Linux Kernel Behavior Under Errors. Proc. of DSN, pp. 459-468, 2003.
10. M. Howard and S. Lipner. The Security Development Lifecycle. Microsoft Press, 2006.
11. T. Jarboui, et. al. Analysis of the Effects of Real and Injected Software Faults: Linux as a Case Study. Proc. of PRDC, pp. 51-58, 2002.
12. T. Jarboui, et. al. Experimental Analysis of the Errors Induced into Linux by Three Fault Injection Techniques. Proc. of DSN, pp. 331-336, 2002.
13. A. Johansson and N. Suri. Error Propagation in Operating Systems. Proc. of DSN, pp. 86-95, 2005.
14. K. Kanoun, et. al. Benchmarking the Dependability of Windows and Linux using PostMark Workloads. Proc. of ISSRE, pp. 11-20, 2005.
15. P Koopman and J. DeVale. Comparing the Robustness of POSIX Operating Systems. Proc. of FTCS, pp. 30-37, 1999.
16. E. Marsden and J.-C. Fabre. Failure Mode Analysis of CORBA Service Implementations. Proc. of Middleware, pp. 216-231, 2001
17. B. P. Miller, et. al. An Empirical Study of the Reliability of Unix Utilities. CACM, 33(12):32-44, Dec. 1990.
18. R. Moraes, et. al. Injection of Faults at component interfaces and inside the component code: are they equivalent? Proc. of EDCC, pp. 53-64, 2006.
19. P Oehlert. Violating Assumptions with Fuzzing. IEEE Security & Privacy Magazine, 3(2):58-62, 2005.
20. M. M. Swift, et. al. Improving the Reliability of Commodity Operating Systems. Proc. of SOSP, pp. 207-222, 2003.
21. T. Tsai and N. Singh. Reliability Testing of Applications on Windows NT. Proc. of DSN, pp. 427-436, 2000.