Prem Devanbu and Stuart Stubblebine. Automated software veri cation with trusted hardware. In Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, 1997. 31 Home/Search Document Not in Database Summary Related Articles Check |
This paper is cited in the following contexts:
Proof Linking: Progress Report and Research Proposal - Fong (2002) (Correct)
....be no protection against the possibility that signing authorities miscertify. Moreover, celebrity is required in the certi cation of mobile programs, making it hard for nonestablished developers to inspire trust. These objections are nicely addressed by a protocol which I call proof delegation [19, 20]. The protocol proceeds as follow. i) The code consumers, or more likely an authority representing them, publish a safety policy in the form of a static program analyzer that checks if a given mobile program is safe. The analyzer is encapsulated in a trusted coprocessor, for example, having the ....
....home grown connection code is certi ed by CLDC style stack maps. When combined with a public key management infrastructure, signature based veri cation protocols also enable a very exible con guration management solution, in which software releases known to be awed can be disabled remotely [19, 20]. 7 A JVM hosting this program will not only need to be uent in both protocols, but also need to combine two di erent kinds of certi cate (signatures and stack maps) when assessing the safety of the whole program. What is needed, then, is a mechanism to hide the details of a code unit s certi ....
Prem Devanbu and Stuart Stubblebine. Automated software veri cation with trusted hardware. In Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, 1997. 31
Proof Linking: Distributed Verification of Java Classfiles in.. - Fong, Cameron (2001) (1 citation) (Correct)
....be no protection against the possibility that signing authorities miscertify. Moreover, celebrity is required in the certi cation of mobile programs, making it hard for non established developers to inspire trust. These objections are nicely addressed by a protocol which we call proof delegation [2, 3]. The protocol proceeds as follow. i) The code consumers, or more likely an authority representing them, publish a safety policy in the form of a static program analyzer that checks if a given mobile program is safe. The analyzer is encapsulated in a trusted coprocessor, for example, having the ....
Prem Devanbu and Stuart Stubblebine. Automated software verication with trusted hardware. In Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, 1997.
Online articles have much greater impact More about CiteSeer.IST Add search form to your site Submit documents Feedback
CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC