ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Social processes and proofs of theorems and programs, revisited
Full text PdfPdf (105 KB)
Source Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation archive
Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN 2004 conference on Programming language design and implementation table of contents
Washington DC, USA
Pages: 170 - 170  
Year of Publication: 2004
ISBN:1-58113-807-5
Author
Andrew W. Appel  Princeton University, Princeton, NJ
Sponsors
ACM: Association for Computing Machinery
SIGPLAN: ACM Special Interest Group on Programming Languages
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): n/a,   Downloads (12 Months): n/a,   Citation Count: 0
Additional Information:

abstract   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/996841.996842
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Language-based security is a protection mechanism that allows software components to interact in a shared address space, such that each component is guaranteed to respect its interfaces and not steal or corrupt internal data of other components. This protection mechanism is complicated to implement correctly, so we might want a formal verification of it.But we know by a famous result of DeMillo, Lipton, and Perlis (POPL 1978) that formal verification (1) is not what mathematicians do, (2) can never be practical, and (3) cannot tell us anything truly useful. Is this still true 25 years later?The question is, then, how can we carefully skirt the legitimate objections of DeMillo et al. and successfully use formal verification in a context where it can do some good. I'll talk about Foundational Proof-Carrying Code, a machine-checked soundness proof for a protection mechanism usable in Java-like virtual machines.