Transactional Correctness for Secure Nested Transactions

(Extended Abstract)
  • Dominic Duggan
  • Ye Wu
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7173)


Secure Nested Transactions are an adaptation of traditional nested transactions to support the synergy of language-based security and multi-level database security. They have application in security for enterprise applications, where transactional semantics are a critical feature in middleware systems. This article considers correctness in terms of transactional properties for secure nested transactions. Correctness is expressed in terms of a labeled transition system, the TauZero calculus.


Security Level Operational Semantic Label Transition System Covert Channel Reaction Rule 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Atluri, V., Jajodia, S., George, B.: Multilevel Secure Transaction Processing. Kluwer Academic Publishers (1999)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bertino, E., Catania, B., Ferrari, E.: A nested transaction model for multilevel secure database management systems. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. Secur. 4, 321–370 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Birgisson, A., Erlingsson, Ú.: An implementation and semantics for transactional memory introspection in haskell. In: PLAS, pp. 87–99 (2009)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Black, A., Cremet, V., Guerraoui, R., Odersky, M.: An Equational Theory for Transactions. In: Pandya, P.K., Radhakrishnan, J. (eds.) FSTTCS 2003. LNCS, vol. 2914, pp. 38–49. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Boudol, G., Castellani, I.: Noninterference for concurrent programs and thread systems. Theor. Comput. Sci. 281(1-2), 109–130 (2002)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cohen, A., van der Meyden, R., Zuck, L.D.: Access Control and Information Flow in Transactional Memory. In: Degano, P., Guttman, J., Martinelli, F. (eds.) FAST 2008. LNCS, vol. 5491, pp. 316–330. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Duggan, D., Wu, Y.: Security correctness for secure nested transactions. Technical Report, Stevens Institute of Technology (2012)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Duggan, D., Wu, Y.: Transactional correctness for secure nested transactions. Technical report, Stevens Institute of Technology (2012)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Eppinger, J., Mummert, L., Spector, A. (eds.): Camelot and Avalon: A Distributed Transaction Facility. Morgan Kaufmann (1993)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Harris, T., Marlow, S., Peyton-Jones, S., Herlihy, M.: Composable memory transactions. In: ACM Conference on Principles and Practice of Parallel Programming (2005)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Igarashi, A., Pierce, B., Wadler, P.: Featherweight Java: A core calculus for Java and GJ. In: Proceedings of ACM Symposium on Object-Oriented Programming: Systems, Languages and Applications, Denver, CO. ACM Press (1999)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jagannathan, S., Vitek, J., Welc, A., Hosking, A.: A transactional object calculus. Science of Computer Programming (2005)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kobayashi, N.: Type-based information flow analysis for the pi-calculus. Acta Informatica (2003)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Liskov, B.: Distributed programming in Argus. Communications of the ACM 31(3) (March 1988)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Moore, K., Grossman, D.: High-level small-step operational semantics for transactions. In: Proceedings of ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages (2008)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Moss, J.E.B.: Nested Transactions: An Approach to Reliable Distributed Computing. MIT Press (1985)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rushby, J.M.: Noninterference, transitivity and channel-control security policies. Technical report, SRI (1992)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sabelfeld, A.: Semantic Models for the Security of Sequential and Concurrent Programs. PhD thesis, Chalmers University of Technology and Gothenburg University, Gothenburg, Sweden (May 2001)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Smith, G., Volpano, D.: Secure information flow in a multi-threaded imperative language. In: Proceedings of ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, pp. 19–21 (1998)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Spector, A., Swedlow, K.: Guide to the Camelot distributed transaction facility: Release 1. Technical report, Carnegie Mellon University (1987)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wojciechowski, P.: Isolation-only transactions by typing and versioning. In: ACM Conference on Principles and Practice of Declarative Programming (2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dominic Duggan
    • 1
  • Ye Wu
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceStevens Institute of TechnologyHobokenUSA

Personalised recommendations