Statistically regulating program behavior via mainstream computing

We introduce mainstream computing, a collaborative system that dynamically checks a program--via runtime assertion checks--to ensure that it is running according to expectation. Rather than enforcing strict, statically-defined assertions, our system allows users to run with a set of assertions that are statistically guaranteed to fail at a rate bounded by a user-defined probability, pfail. For example, a user can request a set of assertions that will fail at most 0.5% of the times the application is invoked. Users who believe their usage of an application is mainstream can use relatively large settings for pfail. Higher values of pfail provide stricter regulation of the application which likely enhances security, but will also inhibit some legitimate program behaviors; in contrast, program behavior is unregulated when pfail = 0, leaving the user vulnerable to attack. We show that our prototype is able to detect denial of service attacks, integer overflows, frees of uninitialized memory, boundary violations, and an injection attack. In addition we perform experiments with a mainstream computing system designed to protect against soft errors.

[1]  Miguel Castro,et al.  Vigilante: end-to-end containment of internet worms , 2005, SOSP '05.

[2]  Manuel Costa,et al.  Bouncer: securing software by blocking bad input , 2008, WRAITS '08.

[3]  Angelos D. Keromytis,et al.  Software Self-Healing Using Collaborative Application Communities , 2006, NDSS.

[4]  Sudheendra Hangal,et al.  Tracking down software bugs using automatic anomaly detection , 2002, ICSE '02.

[5]  Olatunji Ruwase,et al.  A Practical Dynamic Buffer Overflow Detector , 2004, NDSS.

[6]  Shigeo Abe DrEng.  Pattern Classification , 2001, Springer London.

[7]  Miguel Castro,et al.  Securing software by enforcing data-flow integrity , 2006, OSDI '06.

[8]  Yuanyuan Zhou,et al.  Rx: treating bugs as allergies---a safe method to survive software failures , 2005, SOSP '05.

[9]  David Zhang,et al.  Secure program execution via dynamic information flow tracking , 2004, ASPLOS XI.

[10]  Crispan Cowan,et al.  StackGuard: Automatic Adaptive Detection and Prevention of Buffer-Overflow Attacks , 1998, USENIX Security Symposium.

[11]  Alessandro Orso,et al.  Dytan: a generic dynamic taint analysis framework , 2007, ISSTA '07.

[12]  Stephen McCamant,et al.  The Daikon system for dynamic detection of likely invariants , 2007, Sci. Comput. Program..

[13]  Stephen McCamant,et al.  Inference and enforcement of data structure consistency specifications , 2006, ISSTA '06.

[14]  Huiyang Zhou,et al.  Anomaly-based bug prediction, isolation, and validation: an automated approach for software debugging , 2009, ASPLOS.

[15]  Yuanyuan Zhou,et al.  BugBench: Benchmarks for Evaluating Bug Detection Tools , 2005 .

[16]  George C. Necula,et al.  CCured in the real world , 2003, PLDI '03.

[17]  David G. Stork,et al.  Pattern Classification , 1973 .

[18]  Miodrag Potkonjak,et al.  MediaBench: a tool for evaluating and synthesizing multimedia and communications systems , 1997, Proceedings of 30th Annual International Symposium on Microarchitecture.

[19]  Charles M. Grinstead,et al.  Introduction to probability , 1999, Statistics for the Behavioural Sciences.

[20]  Michael I. Jordan,et al.  Bug isolation via remote program sampling , 2003, PLDI.

[21]  Michael I. Jordan,et al.  Scalable statistical bug isolation , 2005, PLDI '05.

[22]  Emery D. Berger,et al.  DieHard: probabilistic memory safety for unsafe languages , 2006, PLDI '06.

[23]  Milo M. K. Martin,et al.  SoftBound: highly compatible and complete spatial memory safety for c , 2009, PLDI '09.

[24]  Michael D. Ernst,et al.  Automatically patching errors in deployed software , 2009, SOSP '09.

[25]  Daniel M. Roy,et al.  Enhancing Server Availability and Security Through Failure-Oblivious Computing , 2004, OSDI.

[26]  Derek Bruening,et al.  Secure Execution via Program Shepherding , 2002, USENIX Security Symposium.

[27]  A. Aiken,et al.  Distributed Program Sampling , 2002 .

[28]  Will Drewry,et al.  Insecure Context Switching: Inoculating Regular Expressions for Survivability , 2008, WOOT.