How do the authors model the final memory?

The authors model the final memory by a merging function ⊙Γ that combines high and low parts of two final memories from high and low executions.

What is the syntax of the language to demonstrate their technical results?

The syntax of the language to demonstrate their technical results is:(programs) P ::= skip | x:= e | P1; P2 | if x then P1 else P2 | while x do P (expressions) e ::= v | x |e1 ⊕ e2

What does Zanarini et al. propose to do in order to prove?

Zanarini et al. [27] propose a modification to SME in order to prove a version of TSNI transparency (In fact, they prove a property called CP precision in Theorem 23 of [27], which is a weaker notion that TSNI transparency because it recognizes as secure a program that silently diverges on one branch, and terminates without producing any outputs on the other branch).

What is the difference between MFd and SME?

the authors have found the second reason for their difference: while SME is using a default value for high variables in the low execution, MF uses special runtime values ⊥, allowing the execution of some branches to be skipped.

What is the difference between termination and noninterference?

time-sensitive noninterference is stronger than termination-sensitive noninterference because it requires that two executions starting in low-equal memories must terminate within the same number of program execution steps.

What is the default value used to create a faceted memory?

Consider Program 8 which is not TSNI and initial memory µ= [h=1, l=1], the default value used to create a faceted memory is defH=

Open AccessBook Chapter10.1007/978-3-319-45744-4_25

Spot the Difference: Secure Multi-execution and Multiple Facets

Nataliia Bielova, +1 more

- 26 Sep 2016

- pp 501-519

TL;DR: A rigorous comparison of two widely known dynamic information flow mechanisms: Secure Multi-Execution (SME) and Multiple Facets (MF) is proposed.

Abstract: We propose a rigorous comparison of two widely known dynamic information flow mechanisms: Secure Multi-Execution (SME) and Multiple Facets (MF). Informally, it is believed that MF simulates SME while providing better performance. Formally, it is well known that SME has stronger soundness guarantees than MF.

AI Agents for this Paper

Find similar papers on Google Scholar, PubMed and Arxiv
Write a critical review of this paper
Analyze citations of this paper to find unaddressed research gaps

Most frequently asked questions

1. What are the contributions mentioned in the paper "Spot the difference: secure multi-execution and multiple facets" ?

The authors propose a rigorous comparison of two widely known dynamic information flow mechanisms: Secure Multi-Execution ( SME ) and Multiple Facets ( MF ).. The authors prove that one of them simulates SME, which was falsely believed to be true for MF.

2. What have the authors stated for future works in "Spot the difference: secure multi-execution and multiple facets" ?

It is left as future work to understand if their results generalize to declassification properties in order to compare SME and MF.

3. What is the if-bot rule used to evaluate the conditional?

Since the test depends on a high variable h, the if-bot rule will be used to evaluate the conditional, and only the high facet of the value in l will be updated, getting the value 0, while the low facet will not be updated, hence the new faceted value of l is ⟨0 : 1⟩.

4. What is the reason for SME and MF to be incomparable?

The first reason for SME and MF to be incomparable is that SME enforces termination-sensitive noninterference (TSNI), whereas MF enforces a weaker version of noninterference called termination-insensitive noninterference (TINI).

Fig. 2: Secure Multi-Execution semantics (SME)

Fig. 4: SME semantics for TINI (SME-TINI)

Fig. 7: Additional rules for the Multiple Facet semantics for TSNI (MF-TSNI)

Fig. 6: Multiple Facets semantics with default for TSNI (MFd-TSNI)

Citations

•Journal Article•10.1145/3276488

Secure serverless computing using dynamic information flow control

Kalev Alpernas, +6 more

- 24 Oct 2018

TL;DR: In this article, the termination channel found in most existing IFC systems can be arbitrarily amplified via multiple concurrent requests, necessitating a stronger termination-sensitive noninterference guarantee, which is achieved using a combination of static labeling of serverless processes and dynamic faceted labeling of persistent data.

...read moreread less

•Posted Content

Secure Serverless Computing Using Dynamic Information Flow Control.

Kalev Alpernas, +6 more

- 25 Feb 2018

- arXiv: Programming Languages

TL;DR: In this paper, the termination channel found in most existing IFC systems can be arbitrarily amplified via multiple concurrent requests, necessitating a stronger termination-sensitive noninterference guarantee, which is achieved using a combination of static labeling of serverless processes and dynamic faceted labeling of persistent data.

...read moreread less

Proceedings Article•10.1145/3243734.3243806

Faceted Secure Multi Execution

Thomas Schmitz, +3 more

- 15 Oct 2018

TL;DR: Feted Secure Multi Execution (FSME) is presented, a novel synthesis of MF and SME that combines the stronger security guarantees of SME with the optimizations of MF, enabling an apples-to-apples comparison and benchmarking of all three approaches.

...read moreread less

Proceedings Article•10.1145/3139337.3139341

Using Precise Taint Tracking for Auto-sanitization

Tejas Saoji, +2 more

- 30 Oct 2017

TL;DR: This paper proposes that a library-writer defined sanitization function can instead be used on the tainted portions of a string, so that developer mistakes do not have to result in system crashes to guarantee security.

...read moreread less

•Proceedings Article•10.1109/CSF.2019.00008

Optimising Faceted Secure Multi-Execution

Maximilian Algehed, +2 more

- 25 Jun 2019

TL;DR: This work lays down the foundations for optimisation techniques aimed at reducing overheads to a managable level, thus helping to make multi-execution more practical and show the efficacy of these techniques to two case-studies.

...read moreread less

...

Expand

References

Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2382

Petrus Bollen

- 01 Jan 2002

36.7K

•Journal Article•10.1109/JSAC.2002.806121

Language-based information-flow security

Andrei Sabelfeld, +1 more

- 14 Jan 2003

- IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Commun...

TL;DR: A structured view of research on information-flow security is given, particularly focusing on work that uses static program analysis to enforce information- flow policies, and some important open challenges are identified.

...read moreread less

2.2K

Journal Article•10.3233/JCS-2009-0352

Declassification: Dimensions and principles

Andrei Sabelfeld, +1 more

- 01 Oct 2009

TL;DR: A road map of the main directions of current research in information release is provided, by classifying the basic goals according to what information is released, who releases information, where in the system information isreleased and when information can be released.

...read moreread less

299

•Journal Article•10.1145/2103621.2103677

Multiple facets for dynamic information flow

Thomas H. Austin, +1 more

- 25 Jan 2012

TL;DR: Faceted values is introduced, a new mechanism for providing information flow security in a dynamic manner that overcomes limitations of static type systems and dynamic analyses, taking inspiration from secure multi-execution.

...read moreread less

196

•Proceedings Article•10.1145/1814217.1814220

Permissive dynamic information flow analysis

Thomas H. Austin, +1 more

- 10 Jun 2010

TL;DR: A sound yet flexible permissive-upgrade strategy for inferring privatization operations and inserting them into the program source code is developed, which allows more programs to run to completion, while still guaranteeing termination-insensitive non-interference in a purely dynamic manner.

...read moreread less

166

...

Expand

Spot the Difference: Secure Multi-execution and Multiple Facets

Chat with Paper

AI Agents for this Paper

Most frequently asked questions

1. What are the contributions mentioned in the paper "Spot the difference: secure multi-execution and multiple facets" ?

2. What have the authors stated for future works in "Spot the difference: secure multi-execution and multiple facets" ?

3. What is the if-bot rule used to evaluate the conditional?

4. What is the reason for SME and MF to be incomparable?

5. How do the authors model the final memory?

6. What is the syntax of the language to demonstrate their technical results?

7. What does Zanarini et al. propose to do in order to prove?

8. What is the difference between MFd and SME?

9. What is the difference between termination and noninterference?

10. What is the default value used to create a faceted memory?

Figures

Citations

Secure serverless computing using dynamic information flow control

Secure Serverless Computing Using Dynamic Information Flow Control.

Faceted Secure Multi Execution

Using Precise Taint Tracking for Auto-sanitization

Optimising Faceted Secure Multi-Execution

References

Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2382

Language-based information-flow security

Declassification: Dimensions and principles

Multiple facets for dynamic information flow

Permissive dynamic information flow analysis

Related Papers (5)

FlowFox: a web browser with flexible and precise information flow control

Multiple facets for dynamic information flow

Permissive dynamic information flow analysis

A lattice model of secure information flow

Language-based information-flow security