Abstract
Softgoals are goals that do not have a clear-cut criterion for their satisfaction (in contrast to so-called hardgoals). They are considered to be satisfied when there is sufficient positive and little negative evidence for this claim. Thus, they are expected to be satisfied within acceptable limits rather than absolutely. Examples of such softgoals are quality attributes such as safety, security, and trustworthiness. In a previous paper, we showed how the systematic refinement of goals can be supported by combining KAOS goal models and problem diagrams that are created based on the Six-Variable Model. Therein, we mainly focussed on hardgoals. In this paper, we show how the systematic refinement of softgoals can be supported. We mainly focus on security as a softgoal and show how it can be refined in a systematic way. However, our method can be used in the same way to systematically decompose other softgoals as well. The benefit of our method is that it results not only in detailed security requirements but helps also in making expectations to be satisfied e.g. by sensors, actuators, other systems, and users explicit.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
References
van Lamsweerde, A.: Goal-oriented requirements engineering: a guided tour. In: Proceedings of RE 2001, pp. 249–263. IEEE Computer Society (2001)
Mylopoulos, J., Chung, L., Yu, E.: From object-oriented to goal-oriented requirements analysis. Commun. ACM 42(1), 31–37 (1999)
Van Lamsweerde, A.: Requirements Engineering - From System Goals to UML Models to Software Specifications. Wiley, Hoboken (2009)
Ulfat-Bunyadi, N., Gol Mohammadi, N., Heisel, M.: Supporting the systematic goal refinement in KAOS using the Six-Variable Model. In: Proceedings of ICSOFT 2018, pp. 136–145 (2018)
Ulfat-Bunyadi, N., Meis, R., Heisel, M.: The six-variable model - context modelling enabling systematic reuse of control software. In: Proceedings of ICSOFT 2016, pp. 15–26 (2016)
Jackson, M.: Problem Frames - Analysing and Structuring Software Development Problems. Addison-Wesley, Boston (2001)
Zave, P., Jackson, M.: Four dark corners of requirements engineering. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 6(1), 1–30 (1997)
Parnas, D., Madey, J.: Functional documents for computer systems. Sci. Comput. Program. 25(1), 41–61 (1995)
Haley, C.B., Laney, R.C., Moffett, J.D., Nuseibeh, B.: The effect of trust assumptions on the elaboration of security requirements. In: Proceedings of RE 2004, pp. 102–111 (2004)
Wirtz, R., Heisel, M., Meis, R., Omerovic, A., Stølen, K.: Problem-based elicitation of security requirements - the ProCOR method. In: Proceedings of ENASE 2018, pp. 26–38. SciTePress (2018)
Lund, M., Solhaug, B., Stolen, K.: Model-Driven Risk Analysis – The CORAS Approach. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-12323-8
RestAssured Consortium: Deliverable D8.1: First Validation Plan (2017). https://restassuredh2020.eu/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/D8.1.pdf
Bleistein, S., Cox, K., Verner, J.: Requirements engineering for e-business systems: integrating Jackson problem diagrams with goal modelling and BPM. In: Proceedings of APSEC 2004, pp. 410–417. IEEE Computer Society (2004)
Mohammadi, N.G., Alebrahim, A., Weyer, T., Heisel, M., Pohl, K.: A framework for combining problem frames and goal models to support context analysis during requirements engineering. In: Cuzzocrea, A., Kittl, C., Simos, D.E., Weippl, E., Xu, L. (eds.) CD-ARES 2013. LNCS, vol. 8127, pp. 272–288. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40511-2_19
Dao, T., Lee, H., Kang, K.: Problem frames-based approach to achieving quality attributes in software product line engineering. In: Proceedings of SPLC 2011, pp. 175–180. IEEE Computer Society (2011)
Han, D., Xing, J., Yang, Q., Li, J., Zhang, X., Chen, Y.: Integrating goal models and problem frames for requirements analysis of self-adaptive CPS. In: Proceedings of COMPSAC 2017, pp. 529–535. IEEE Computer Society (2017)
Elahi, G., Yu, E.: Trust trade-off analysis for security requirements engineering. In: Proceedings of RE 2009, pp. 243–248 (2009)
Giorgini, P., Mouratidis, H.: Secure tropos: a security-oriented extension of the tropos methodology. Int. J. Softw. Eng. Knowl. Eng. 17(2), 285–309 (2007)
Meland, P., Paja, E., Gjære, E., Paul, S., Dalpiaz, F., Giorgini, P.: Threat analysis in goal-oriented security requirements modelling. Int. J. Secur. Softw. Eng. 5(2), 1–19 (2014)
Faßbender, S., Heisel, M., Meis, R.: Functional requirements under security PresSuRE. In: Proceedings of ICSOFT-PT 2014, pp. 5–16 (2014)
Lin, L., Nuseibeh, B., Ince, D.C., Jackson, M., Moffett, J.D.: Analysing security threats and vulnerabilities using abuse frames. Technical Report No. 2003/10, October 2003, The Open University, United Kingdom (2003)
Haley, C., Laney, R., Moffett, J., Nuseibeh, B.: Security requirements engineering: a framework for representation and analysis. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 34(1), 133–153 (2008)
Acknowledgment
Research leading to these results received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement number 731678 (RestAssured).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Ulfat-Bunyadi, N., Gol Mohammadi, N., Wirtz, R., Heisel, M. (2019). Systematic Refinement of Softgoals Using a Combination of KAOS Goal Models and Problem Diagrams. In: van Sinderen, M., Maciaszek, L. (eds) Software Technologies. ICSOFT 2018. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 1077. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29157-0_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29157-0_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-29156-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-29157-0
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)