Timed Multiset Rewriting and the Verification of Time-Sensitive Distributed Systems

  • Max Kanovich
  • Tajana Ban Kirigin
  • Vivek Nigam
  • Andre Scedrov
  • Carolyn Talcott
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9884)

Abstract

Time-Sensitive Distributed Systems (TSDS), such as applications using autonomous drones, achieve goals under possible environment interference (e.g., winds). Moreover, goals are often specified using explicit time constraints which must be satisfied by the system perpetually. For example, drones carrying out the surveillance of some area must always have recent pictures, i.e., at most M time units old, of some strategic locations. This paper proposes a Multiset Rewriting language with explicit time for specifying and analysing TSDSes. We introduce two properties, realizability (some trace is good) and survivability (where, in addition, all admissible traces are good). A good trace is an infinite trace in which goals are perpetually satisfied. We propose a class of systems called progressive timed systems (PTS), where intuitively only a finite number of actions can be carried out in a bounded time period. We prove that for this class of systems both the realizability and the survivability problems are PSPACE-complete. Furthermore, if we impose a bound on time (as in bounded model-checking), we show that for PTS, realizability becomes NP-complete, while survivability is in the \(\varDelta _2^p\) class of the polynomial hierarchy. Finally, we demonstrate that the rewriting logic system Maude can be used to automate time bounded verification of PTS.

References

  1. 1.
    Alpern, B., Schneider, F.B.: Recognizing safety and liveness. Distrib. Comput. 2(3), 117–126 (1987)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alur, R., Henzinger, T.A.: Logics and models of real time: a survey. In: de Bakker, J.W., Huizing, C., de Roever, W.P., Rozenberg, G. (eds.) REX Workshop. LNCS, vol. 600, pp. 74–106. Springer, Heidelberg (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Alur, R., Madhusudan, P.: Decision problems for timed automata: a survey. In: Bernardo, M., Corradini, F. (eds.) SFM-RT 2004. LNCS, vol. 3185, pp. 1–24. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cárdenas, A.A., Amin, S., Sastry, S.: Secure control: towards survivable cyber-physical systems. In: ICDCS, pp. 495–500 (2008)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Clarkson, M.R., Schneider, F.B.: Hyperproperties. J. Comput. Secur. 18(6), 1157–1210 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Clavel, M., Durán, F., Eker, S., Lincoln, P., Martí-Oliet, N., Meseguer, J., Talcott, C.: All About Maude: A High-Performance Logical Framework. LNCS. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)MATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dolev, D., Yao, A.: On the security of public key protocols. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 29(2), 198–208 (1983)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Durgin, N.A., Lincoln, P., Mitchell, J.C., Scedrov, A.: Multiset rewriting and the complexity of bounded security protocols. J. Comput. Secur. 12(2), 247–311 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Herbert, B., Enderton, H.B.: A Mathematical Introduction to Logic. Academic Press, Salt lake city (1972)MATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Faella, M., Legay, A., Stoelinga, M.: Model checking quantitative linear time logic. Electron. Notes Theoret. Comput. Sci. 220(3), 61–77 (2008)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kanovich, M., Kirigin, T.B., Nigam, V., Scedrov, A.: Bounded memory Dolev-Yao adversaries in collaborative systems. Inf. Comput. 238, 233–261 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kanovich, M., Kirigin, T.B., Nigam, V., Scedrov, A., Talcott, C.: Discrete vs. dense times in the analysis of cyber-physical security protocols. In: Focardi, R., Myers, A. (eds.) POST 2015. LNCS, vol. 9036, pp. 259–279. Springer, Heidelberg (2015)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kanovich, M., Kirigin, T.B., Nigam, V., Scedrov, A., Talcott, C.: A rewriting framework and logic for activities subject to regulations. Math. Struct. Comput. Sci. (2015). (online) doi:10.1017/S096012951500016X
  14. 14.
    Kanovich, M., Ban Kirigin, T., Nigam, V., Scedrov, A.: Bounded memory protocols and progressing collaborative systems. In: Crampton, J., Jajodia, S., Mayes, K. (eds.) ESORICS 2013. LNCS, vol. 8134, pp. 309–326. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kanovich, M., Kirigin, T.B., Nigam, V., Scedrov, A., Talcott, C.: Timed multiset rewriting and the verification of time-sensitive distributed systems. CoRR, abs/1606.07886 (2016)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kanovich, M.I., Kirigin, T.B., Nigam, V., Scedrov, A., Talcott, C.L., Perovic, R.: A rewriting framework for activities subject to regulations. In: RTA, pp. 305–322 (2012)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kanovich, M.I., Rowe, P., Scedrov, A.: Collaborative planning with confidentiality. J. Autom. Reason. 46(3–4), 389–421 (2011)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Laroussinie, F., Schnoebelen, P., Turuani, M.: On the expressivity and complexity of quantitative branching-time temporal logics. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 297(1), 297–315 (2003)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lutz, C., Walther, D., Wolter, F.: Quantitative temporal logics: PSPACE and below. In: TIME, pp. 138–146 (2005)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ölveczky, P.C., Meseguer, J.: Abstraction and completeness for real-time maude. Electron. Notes Theoret. Comput. Sci. 176(4), 5–27 (2007)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ölveczky, P.C., Meseguer, J.: The real-time maude tool. In: Ramakrishnan, C.R., Rehof, J. (eds.) TACAS 2008. LNCS, vol. 4963, pp. 332–336. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Papadimitriou, C.H.: Computational Complexity. Academic Internet Publ, Ventura (2007)MATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Savitch, W.J.: Relationship between nondeterministic and deterministic tape classes. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 4, 177–192 (1970)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Talcott, C., Arbab, F., Yadav, M.: Soft agents: exploring soft constraints to model robust adaptive distributed cyber-physical agent systems. In: De Nicola, R., Hennicker, R. (eds.) Wirsing Festschrift. LNCS, vol. 8950, pp. 273–290. Springer, Heidelberg (2015)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Talcott, C., Nigam, V., Arbab, F., Kappé, T.: Formal specification and analysis of robust adaptive distributed cyber-physical systems. In: Formal Methods for the Quantitative Evaluation of Collective AdaptiveSystems (2016)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Max Kanovich
    • 1
    • 5
  • Tajana Ban Kirigin
    • 2
  • Vivek Nigam
    • 3
  • Andre Scedrov
    • 4
    • 5
  • Carolyn Talcott
    • 6
  1. 1.University of London and University CollegeLondonUK
  2. 2.University of RijekaRijekaCroatia
  3. 3.Federal University of ParaíbaJoão PessoaBrazil
  4. 4.University of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphiaUSA
  5. 5.National Research University Higher School of EconomicsMoscowRussia
  6. 6.SRI InternationalMenlo ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations