Skip to main content

Formally Verifying Isolation and Availability in an Idealized Model of Virtualization

  • Conference paper
FM 2011: Formal Methods (FM 2011)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 6664))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Hypervisors allow multiple guest operating systems to run on shared hardware, and offer a compelling means of improving the security and the flexibility of software systems. We formalize in the Coq proof assistant an idealized model of a hypervisor, and formally establish that the hypervisor ensures strong isolation properties between the different operating systems, and guarantees that requests from guest operating systems are eventually attended.

Partially funded by European Project FP7 256980 NESSoS, Spanish project TIN2009-14599 DESAFIOS 10, Madrid Regional project S2009TIC-1465 PROMETIDOS and project ANII-Clemente Estable PR-FCE-2009-1-2568 VirtualCert.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alkassar, E., Cohen, E., Hillebrand, M., Kovalev, M., Paul, W.: Verifying shadow page table algorithms. In: Bloem, R., Sharygina, N. (eds.) 10th International Conference on Formal Methods in Computer-Aided Design, FMCAD 2010. IEEE CS, Switzerland (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Alkassar, E., Hillebrand, M., Paul, W., Petrova, E.: Automated Verification of a Small Hypervisor. In: Leavens, G.T., O’Hearn, P., Rajamani, S.K. (eds.) VSTTE 2010. LNCS, vol. 6217, pp. 40–54. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Alkassar, E., Paul, W., Starostin, A., Tsyban, A.: Pervasive verification of an os microkernel: Inline assembly, memory consumption, concurrent devices. In: Leavens, G.T., O’Hearn, P., Rajamani, S.K. (eds.) VSTTE 2010. LNCS, vol. 6217, pp. 71–85. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Andronick, J., Chetali, B., Ly, O.: Using Coq to Verify Java Card Applet Isolation Properties. In: Basin, D., Wolff, B. (eds.) TPHOLs 2003. LNCS, vol. 2758, pp. 335–351. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Banerjee, A., Naumann, D.: Stack-based access control for secure information flow. Journal of Functional Programming 15, 131–177 (2005); Special Issue on Language-Based Security

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Barham, P., Dragovic, B., Fraser, K., Hand, S., Harris, T., Ho, A., Neugebauer, R., Pratt, I., Warfield, A.: Xen and the art of virtualization. In: SOSP 2003: Proceedings of the Nineteenth ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, pp. 164–177. ACM Press, New York (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Clarkson, M.R., Schneider, F.B.: Hyperproperties. Journal of Computer Security 18(6), 1157–1210 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Cohen, E.: Validating the microsoft hypervisor. In: Misra, J., Nipkow, T., Sekerinski, E. (eds.) FM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4085, p. 81. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Elkaduwe, D., Klein, G., Elphinstone, K.: Verified protection model of the seL4 microkernel. In: Shankar, N., Woodcock, J. (eds.) VSTTE 2008. LNCS, vol. 5295, pp. 99–114. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Garfinkel, T., Warfield, A.: What virtualization can do for security. login: The USENIX Magazine 32 (December 2007)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Goldberg, R.P.: Survey of virtual machine research. IEEE Computer Magazine 7, 34–45 (1974)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Greve, D., Wilding, M., Mark Van Eet, W.: A separation kernel formal security policy. In: Proc. Fourth International Workshop on the ACL2 Theorem Prover and Its Applications (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Heitmeyer, C.L., Archer, M., Leonard, E.I., McLean, J.: Formal specification and verification of data separation in a separation kernel for an embedded system. In: Proceedings of the 13th ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, CCS 2006, pp. 346–355. ACM, New York (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Klein, G., Andronick, J., Elphinstone, K., Heiser, G., Cock, D., Derrin, P., Elkaduwe, D., Engelhardt, K., Kolanski, R., Norrish, M., Sewell, T., Tuch, H., Winwood, S.: seL4: Formal verification of an OS kernel. Communications of the ACM (CACM) 53(6), 107–115 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Klein, G.: Operating system verification – an overview. Sādhanā 34(1), 27–69 (2009)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Leinenbach, D., Santen, T.: Verifying the microsoft hyper-V hypervisor with VCC. In: Cavalcanti, A., Dams, D. (eds.) FM 2009. LNCS, vol. 5850, pp. 806–809. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  17. Martin, W., White, P., Taylor, F.S., Goldberg, A.: Formal construction of the mathematically analyzed separation kernel. In: The Fifteenth IEEE International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  18. von Oheimb, D.: Information Flow Control Revisited: Noninfluence = Noninterference + Nonleakage. In: Samarati, P., Ryan, P., Gollmann, D., Molva, R. (eds.) ESORICS 2004. LNCS, vol. 3193, pp. 225–243. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  19. von Oheimb, D., Lotz, V., Walter, G.: Analyzing SLE 88 memory management security using Interacting State Machines. International Journal of Information Security 4(3), 155–171 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Rushby, J.M.: Noninterference, Transitivity, and Channel-Control Security Policies. Technical Report CSL-92-02, SRI International (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  21. The Coq Development Team. The Coq Proof Assistant Reference Manual – Version V8.2 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Tews, H., Weber, T., Poll, E., van Eekelen, M.C.J.D.: Formal Nova interface specification. Technical Report ICIS–R08011, Radboud University Nijmegen, Robin deliverable D12 (May 2008)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Yang, J., Hawblitzel, C.: Safe to the last instruction: automated verification of a type-safe operating system. In: Proceedings of PLDI 2010, pp. 99–110. ACM, New York (2010)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Barthe, G., Betarte, G., Campo, J.D., Luna, C. (2011). Formally Verifying Isolation and Availability in an Idealized Model of Virtualization. In: Butler, M., Schulte, W. (eds) FM 2011: Formal Methods. FM 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6664. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-21437-0_19

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-21437-0_19

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-21436-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-21437-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics