Monitoring Networks through Multiparty Session Types

  • Laura Bocchi
  • Tzu-Chun Chen
  • Romain Demangeon
  • Kohei Honda
  • Nobuko Yoshida
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7892)

Abstract

In large-scale distributed infrastructures, applications are realised through communications among distributed components. The need for methods for assuring safe interactions in such environments is recognized, however the existing frameworks, relying on centralised verification or restricted specification methods, have limited applicability. This paper proposes a new theory of monitoredπ-calculus with dynamic usage of multiparty session types (MPST), offering a rigorous foundation for safety assurance of distributed components which asynchronously communicate through multiparty sessions. Our theory establishes a framework for semantically precise decentralised run-time enforcement and provides reasoning principles over monitored distributed applications, which complement existing static analysis techniques. We introduce asynchrony through the means of explicit routers and global queues, and propose novel equivalences between networks, that capture the notion of interface equivalence, i.e. equating networks offering the same services to a user. We illustrate our static-dynamic analysis system with an ATM protocol as a running example and justify our theory with results: satisfaction equivalence, local/global safety and transparency, and session fidelity.

References

  1. 1.
    Bettini, L., Coppo, M., D’Antoni, L., De Luca, M., Dezani-Ciancaglini, M., Yoshida, N.: Global progress in dynamically interleaved multiparty sessions. In: van Breugel, F., Chechik, M. (eds.) CONCUR 2008. LNCS, vol. 5201, pp. 418–433. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bocchi, L., Chen, T.-C., Demangeon, R., Honda, K., Yoshida, N.: Monitoring networks through multiparty session types. Technical Report 2013/3, Department of Computing, Imperial College London (2013)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bocchi, L., Honda, K., Tuosto, E., Yoshida, N.: A theory of design-by-contract for distributed multiparty interactions. In: Gastin, P., Laroussinie, F. (eds.) CONCUR 2010. LNCS, vol. 6269, pp. 162–176. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Capecchi, S., Castellani, I., Dezani-Ciancaglini, M.: Information flow safety in multiparty sessions. In: EXPRESS. EPTCS, vol. 64, pp. 16–30 (2011)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Capecchi, S., Giachino, E., Yoshida, N.: Global escape in multiparty session. In: FSTTCS 2010. LIPICS, vol. 8, pp. 338–351 (2010)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chen, F., Rosu, G.: MOP:An Efficient and Generic Runtime Verification Framework. In: OOPSLA, pp. 569–588 (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chen, T.-C.: Theories for Session-based Governance for Large-Scale Distributed Systems. PhD thesis, Queen Mary, University of London (to appear, 2013)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chen, T.-C., Bocchi, L., Deniélou, P.-M., Honda, K., Yoshida, N.: Asynchronous distributed monitoring for multiparty session enforcement. In: Bruni, R., Sassone, V. (eds.) TGC 2011. LNCS, vol. 7173, pp. 25–45. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    De Nicola, R., Ferrari, G., Pugliese, R.: Klaim: a kernel language for agents interaction and mobility. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 24, 315–330 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Demangeon, R., Honda, K.: Nested protocols in session types. In: Koutny, M., Ulidowski, I. (eds.) CONCUR 2012. LNCS, vol. 7454, pp. 272–286. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Deniélou, P.-M., Yoshida, N.: Dynamic multirole session types. In: POPL, pp. 435–446 (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Deniélou, P.-M., Yoshida, N.: Multiparty session types meet communicating automata. In: Seidl, H. (ed.) ESOP 2012. LNCS, vol. 7211, pp. 194–213. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ferrari, G., Moggi, E., Pugliese, R.: Guardians for ambient-based monitoring. In: F-WAN, pp. 141–202. Elsevier (2002)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Honda, K., Yoshida, N.: On reduction-based process semantics. TCS 151(2), 437–486 (1995)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Honda, K., Yoshida, N., Carbone, M.: Multiparty Asynchronous Session Types. In: POPL 2008, pp. 273–284. ACM (2008)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ligatti, J., Bauer, L., Walker, D.: Run-time enforcement of nonsafety policies. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. Secur. 12, 19:1–19:41 (2009)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
  18. 18.
    Schneider, F.B.: Enforceable security policies. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. Secur. 3, 30–50 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yoshida, N., Deniélou, P.-M., Bejleri, A., Hu, R.: Parameterised multiparty session types. In: Ong, L. (ed.) FOSSACS 2010. LNCS, vol. 6014, pp. 128–145. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Laura Bocchi
    • 1
  • Tzu-Chun Chen
    • 2
  • Romain Demangeon
    • 2
  • Kohei Honda
    • 2
  • Nobuko Yoshida
    • 3
  1. 1.University of LeicesterUK
  2. 2.Queen Mary, University of LondonUK
  3. 3.Imperial College LondonUK

Personalised recommendations