1 / 9

ASPIRE: Automated Systematic Protocol Implementation Robustness Evaluation

ASPIRE: Automated Systematic Protocol Implementation Robustness Evaluation. CONTENT. Introduction Definitions & Taxonomy of Application Layer Protocols Fault Generation Algorithms Experiments & Conclusions. Introduction.

elata
Download Presentation

ASPIRE: Automated Systematic Protocol Implementation Robustness Evaluation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ASPIRE: Automated Systematic Protocol Implementation Robustness Evaluation

  2. CONTENT • Introduction • Definitions & Taxonomy of Application Layer Protocols • Fault Generation Algorithms • Experiments & Conclusions

  3. Introduction • Robustness – Ability of an implementation to handle exceptional input in the form of faulty PDUs and continue normal protocol operation • Protocol implementations differ in their behavior on faulty inputs • Challenge in automated robustness protocol testing is systematic generation of faulty inputs • Taxonomy of Application layer protocols used to design test cases for testing robustness

  4. Defnitions • PDU : <c1,…cn>; ci = control fields • Protocol Specification: Defines syntax, semantics and allowed sequences of PDUs • Protocol Implementation: P={Si|Si=[<p1,h1,a1>….<pn,hn,an>]}; P=set of sequences, each triple<pi, hi, ai> represents an action ai (send or receive) on PDU pi by host hi

  5. Taxonomy of Application Layer Protocols • Stateless Protocols - HTTP: State information about a client (record of transaction) is not maintained; susceptible to syntactical faulty PDUs • Stateful Protocols – SMTP: State information about a client until the transaction is over is maintained; susceptible to semantic faulty PDUs

  6. Fault Generation Algorithms • Generating syntactically faulty PDUs : Maximally faulty PDUs grow exponentially in the number of fields – Pruning Strategy (pair wise testing constraint) • Generating semantically faulty PDUs : Semantic faulty PDUs grow polynomially (manageable); Test case consists of a state, list of semantically faulty PDUs related to that state and sequence of correct PDUs which will drive the protocol to that state

  7. Experiments & Conclusions • Evaluated Hypotheses: - Protocol implementations differ in their behavior in terms of robustness to faulty PDU input for both stateful & stateless protocols - Pair wise constraint in the pruning strategy does not reduce the capacity to evaluate robustness of different implementations

  8. Metrics -Reduced ratio = syntactic faulty PDUs by the generation algorithm / combinatorial enumeration - Robustness ratio = number of faulty inputs that were handled by implementation by continuing normal operation / total number of faulty inputs • Results show the following to prove the hypotheses: • Average robustness ratio is not different for syntactic faulty PDUset of all posssible faulty PDUs • Average robustness ratio of different implementations is different for semantic & syntactic faults

  9. Thank You

More Related