Search

This paper determines if a callback can be called by an event-driven framework in an unexpected state.Event-driven programming frameworks are pervasive for creating user-interactive apps on just about every modern platform.Control flow between callbacks is determined by the framework and largely opaque to the programmer.This opacity of the callback control flow not only causes difficulty for the programmer but is also difficult for those developing static analysis.Previous static analysis techniques address this opacity either by assuming an arbitrary framework implementation or attempting to eagerly specify all possible callback control flow, but this is either too coarse or too burdensome and tricky to get right.Instead, we present a middle way where the callback control flow can be gradually refined in a targeted manner to prove assertions of interest.The key insight to get this middle way is by reasoning about the history of method invocations at the boundary between app and framework code - enabling a decoupling of the specification of callback control flow from the analysis of app code.We call the sequence of such boundary-method invocations message histories and develop message-history logics to do this reasoning.In particular, we define the notion of an application-only transition system with boundary transitions, a message-history program logic for programs with such transitions, and a temporal specification logic for capturing callback control flow in a targeted and compositional manner.Then to utilize the logics in a goal-directed verifier, we define a way to combine after-the-fact an assertion about message histories with a specification of callback control flow.We implemented a prototype message history-based verifier called Historia that enables proving the absence of multi-callback bug patterns in real-world open-source Android apps., Comment: 40 pages, 8 figures, Accepted to OOPSLA 2023

We present a novel approach to differential cost analysis that, given a program revision, attempts to statically bound the difference in resource usage, or cost, between the two program versions. Differential cost analysis is particularly interesting because of the many compelling applications for it, such as detecting resource-use regressions at code-review time or proving the absence of certain side-channel vulnerabilities. One prior approach to differential cost analysis is to apply relational reasoning that conceptually constructs a product program on which one can over-approximate the difference in costs between the two program versions. However, a significant challenge in any relational approach is effectively aligning the program versions to get precise results. In this paper, our key insight is that we can avoid the need for and the limitations of program alignment if, instead, we bound the difference of two cost-bound summaries rather than directly bounding the concrete cost difference. In particular, our method computes a threshold value for the maximal difference in cost between two program versions simultaneously using two kinds of cost-bound summaries -- a potential function that evaluates to an upper bound for the cost incurred in the first program and an anti-potential function that evaluates to a lower bound for the cost incurred in the second. Our method has a number of desirable properties: it can be fully automated, it allows optimizing the threshold value on relative cost, it is suitable for programs that are not syntactically similar, and it supports non-determinism. We have evaluated an implementation of our approach on a number of program pairs collected from the literature, and we find that our method computes tight threshold values on relative cost in most examples., Comment: Extended version of the PLDI 2022 paper

We consider the problem of automatically proving resource bounds. That is, we study how to prove that an integer-valued resource variable is bounded by a given program expression. Automatic resource-bound analysis has recently received significant attention because of a number of important applications (e.g., detecting performance bugs, preventing algorithmic-complexity attacks, identifying side-channel vulnerabilities), where the focus has often been on developing precise amortized reasoning techniques to infer the most exact resource usage. While such innovations remain critical, we observe that fully precise amortization is not always necessary to prove a bound of interest. And in fact, by amortizing selectively, the needed supporting invariants can be simpler, making the invariant inference task more feasible and predictable. We present a framework for selectively-amortized analysis that mixes worst-case and amortized reasoning via a property decomposition and a program transformation. We show that proving bounds in any such decomposition yields a sound resource bound in the original program, and we give an algorithm for selecting a reasonable decomposition., Comment: This is an extended version of SAS'21 paper (with appendices)

We consider the problem of making expressive static analyzers interactive. Formal static analysis is seeing increasingly widespread adoption as a tool for verification and bug-finding, but even with powerful cloud infrastructure it can take minutes or hours to get batch analysis results after a code change. While existing techniques offer some demand-driven or incremental aspects for certain classes of analysis, the fundamental challenge we tackle is doing both for arbitrary abstract interpreters. Our technique, demanded abstract interpretation, lifts program syntax and analysis state to a dynamically evolving graph structure, in which program edits, client-issued queries, and evaluation of abstract semantics are all treated uniformly. The key difficulty addressed by our approach is the application of general incremental computation techniques to the complex, cyclic dependency structure induced by abstract interpretation of loops with widening operators. We prove that desirable abstract interpretation meta-properties, including soundness and termination, are preserved in our approach, and that demanded analysis results are equal to those computed by a batch abstract interpretation. Experimental results suggest promise for a prototype demanded abstract interpretation framework: by combining incremental and demand-driven techniques, our framework consistently delivers analysis results at interactive speeds, answering 95% of queries within 1.2 seconds., Comment: extended version of PLDI'21 paper (with appendices)

Developing interactive applications (apps) against event-driven software frameworks such as Android is notoriously difficult. To create apps that behave as expected, developers must follow complex and often implicit asynchronous programming protocols. Such protocols intertwine the proper registering of callbacks to receive control from the framework with appropriate application-programming interface (API) calls that in turn affect the set of possible future callbacks. An app violates the protocol when, for example, it calls a particular API method in a state of the framework where such a call is invalid. What makes automated reasoning hard in this domain is largely what makes programming apps against such frameworks hard: the specification of the protocol is unclear, and the control flow is complex, asynchronous, and higher-order. In this paper, we tackle the problem of specifying and modeling event-driven application-programming protocols. In particular, we formalize a core meta-model that captures the dialogue between event-driven frameworks and application callbacks. Based on this meta-model, we define a language called lifestate that permits precise and formal descriptions of application-programming protocols and the callback control flow imposed by the event-driven framework. Lifestate unifies modeling what app callbacks can expect of the framework with specifying rules the app must respect when calling into the framework. In this way, we effectively combine lifecycle constraints and typestate rules. To evaluate the effectiveness of lifestate modeling, we provide a dynamic verification algorithm that takes as input a trace of execution of an app and a lifestate protocol specification to either produce a trace witnessing a protocol violation or a proof that no such trace is realizable.

Developing interactive applications (apps) against event-driven software frameworks such as Android is notoriously difficult. To create apps that behave as expected, developers must follow complex and often implicit asynchronous programming protocols. Such protocols intertwine the proper registering of callbacks to receive control from the framework with appropriate application-programming interface (API) calls that in turn affect the set of possible future callbacks. An app violates the protocol when, for example, it calls a particular API method in a state of the framework where such a call is invalid. What makes automated reasoning hard in this domain is largely what makes programming apps against such frameworks hard: the specification of the protocol is unclear, and the control flow is complex, asynchronous, and higher-order. In this paper, we tackle the problem of specifying and modeling event-driven application-programming protocols. In particular, we formalize a core meta-model that captures the dialogue between event-driven frameworks and application callbacks. Based on this meta-model, we define a language called lifestate that permits precise and formal descriptions of application-programming protocols and the callback control flow imposed by the event-driven framework. Lifestate unifies modeling what app callbacks can expect of the framework with specifying rules the app must respect when calling into the framework. In this way, we effectively combine lifecycle constraints and typestate rules. To evaluate the effectiveness of lifestate modeling, we provide a dynamic verification algorithm that takes as input a trace of execution of an app and a lifestate protocol specification to either produce a trace witnessing a protocol violation or a proof that no such trace is realizable.

Developing interactive applications (apps) against event-driven software frameworks such as Android is notoriously difficult. To create apps that behave as expected, developers must follow complex and often implicit asynchronous programming protocols. Such protocols intertwine the proper registering of callbacks to receive control from the framework with appropriate application-programming interface (API) calls that in turn affect the set of possible future callbacks. An app violates the protocol when, for example, it calls a particular API method in a state of the framework where such a call is invalid. What makes automated reasoning hard in this domain is largely what makes programming apps against such frameworks hard: the specification of the protocol is unclear, and the control flow is complex, asynchronous, and higher-order. In this paper, we tackle the problem of specifying and modeling event-driven application-programming protocols. In particular, we formalize a core meta-model that captures the dialogue between event-driven frameworks and application callbacks. Based on this meta-model, we define a language called lifestate that permits precise and formal descriptions of application-programming protocols and the callback control flow imposed by the event-driven framework. Lifestate unifies modeling what app callbacks can expect of the framework with specifying rules the app must respect when calling into the framework. In this way, we effectively combine lifecycle constraints and typestate rules. To evaluate the effectiveness of lifestate modeling, we provide a dynamic verification algorithm that takes as input a trace of execution of an app and a lifestate protocol specification to either produce a trace witnessing a protocol violation or a proof that no such trace is realizable.

Developing interactive applications (apps) against event-driven software frameworks such as Android is notoriously difficult. To create apps that behave as expected, developers must follow complex and often implicit asynchronous programming protocols. Such protocols intertwine the proper registering of callbacks to receive control from the framework with appropriate application-programming interface (API) calls that in turn affect the set of possible future callbacks. An app violates the protocol when, for example, it calls a particular API method in a state of the framework where such a call is invalid. What makes automated reasoning hard in this domain is largely what makes programming apps against such frameworks hard: the specification of the protocol is unclear, and the control flow is complex, asynchronous, and higher-order. In this paper, we tackle the problem of specifying and modeling event-driven application-programming protocols. In particular, we formalize a core meta-model that captures the dialogue between event-driven frameworks and application callbacks. Based on this meta-model, we define a language called lifestate that permits precise and formal descriptions of application-programming protocols and the callback control flow imposed by the event-driven framework. Lifestate unifies modeling what app callbacks can expect of the framework with specifying rules the app must respect when calling into the framework. In this way, we effectively combine lifecycle constraints and typestate rules. To evaluate the effectiveness of lifestate modeling, we provide a dynamic verification algorithm that takes as input a trace of execution of an app and a lifestate protocol specification to either produce a trace witnessing a protocol violation or a proof that no such trace is realizable., Comment: 26 pages, 11 figures, ECOOP 2019

Our aim is to statically verify that in a given reactive program, the length of collection variables does not grow beyond a given bound. We propose a scalable type-based technique that checks that each collection variable has a given refinement type that specifies constraints about its length. A novel feature of our refinement types is that the refinements can refer to AST counters that track how many times an AST node has been executed. This feature enables type refinements to track limited flow-sensitive information. We generate verification conditions that ensure that the AST counters are used consistently, and that the types imply the given bound. The verification conditions are discharged by an off-the-shelf SMT solver. Experimental results demonstrate that our technique is scalable, and effective at verifying reactive programs with respect to requirements on length of collections.

In stream-based programming, data sources are abstracted as a stream of values that can be manipulated via callback functions. Stream-based programming is exploding in popularity, as it provides a powerful and expressive paradigm for handling asynchronous data sources in interactive software. However, high-level stream abstractions can also make it difficult for developers to reason about control- and data-flow relationships in their programs. This is particularly impactful when asynchronous stream-based code interacts with thread-limited features such as UI frameworks that restrict UI access to a single thread, since the threading behavior of streaming constructs is often non-intuitive and insufficiently documented. In this paper, we present a type-based approach that can statically prove the thread-safety of UI accesses in stream-based software. Our key insight is that the fluent APIs of stream-processing frameworks enable the tracking of threads via type-refinement, making it possible to reason automatically about what thread a piece of code runs on -- a difficult problem in general. We implement the system as an annotation-based Java typechecker for Android programs built upon the popular ReactiveX framework and evaluate its efficacy by annotating and analyzing 8 open-source apps, where we find 33 instances of unsafe UI access while incurring an annotation burden of only one annotation per 186 source lines of code. We also report on our experience applying the typechecker to two much larger apps from the Uber Technologies Inc. codebase, where it currently runs on every code change and blocks changes that introduce potential threading bugs.

We consider the problem of generating relevant execution traces to test rich interactive applications. Rich interactive applications, such as apps on mobile platforms, are complex stateful and often distributed systems where sufficiently exercising the app with user-interaction (UI) event sequences to expose defects is both hard and time-consuming. In particular, there is a fundamental tension between brute-force random UI exercising tools, which are fully-automated but offer low relevance, and UI test scripts, which are manual but offer high relevance. In this paper, we consider a middle way---enabling a seamless fusion of scripted and randomized UI testing. This fusion is prototyped in a testing tool called ChimpCheck for programming, generating, and executing property-based randomized test cases for Android apps. Our approach realizes this fusion by offering a high-level, embedded domain-specific language for defining custom generators of simulated user-interaction event sequences. What follows is a combinator library built on industrial strength frameworks for property-based testing (ScalaCheck) and Android testing (Android JUnit and Espresso) to implement property-based randomized testing for Android development. Driven by real, reported issues in open source Android apps, we show, through case studies, how ChimpCheck enables expressing effective testing patterns in a compact manner., Comment: 20 pages, 21 figures, Symposium on New ideas, New Paradigms, and Reflections on Programming and Software (Onward!2017)

What properties about the internals of a program explain the possible differences in its overall running time for different inputs? In this paper, we propose a formal framework for considering this question we dub trace-set discrimination. We show that even though the algorithmic problem of computing maximum likelihood discriminants is NP-hard, approaches based on integer linear programming (ILP) and decision tree learning can be useful in zeroing-in on the program internals. On a set of Java benchmarks, we find that compactly-represented decision trees scalably discriminate with high accuracy---more scalably than maximum likelihood discriminants and with comparable accuracy. We demonstrate on three larger case studies how decision-tree discriminants produced by our tool are useful for debugging timing side-channel vulnerabilities (i.e., where a malicious observer infers secrets simply from passively watching execution times) and availability vulnerabilities., Comment: Published in TACAS 2017

Event-driven programming frameworks, such as Android, are based on components with asynchronous interfaces. The protocols for interacting with these components can often be described by finite-state machines we dub *callback typestates*. Callback typestates are akin to classical typestates, with the difference that their outputs (callbacks) are produced asynchronously. While useful, these specifications are not commonly available, because writing them is difficult and error-prone. Our goal is to make the task of producing callback typestates significantly easier. We present a callback typestate assistant tool, DroidStar, that requires only limited user interaction to produce a callback typestate. Our approach is based on an active learning algorithm, L*. We improved the scalability of equivalence queries (a key component of L*), thus making active learning tractable on the Android system. We use DroidStar to learn callback typestates for Android classes both for cases where one is already provided by the documentation, and for cases where the documentation is unclear. The results show that DroidStar learns callback typestates accurately and efficiently. Moreover, in several cases, the synthesized callback typestates uncovered surprising and undocumented behaviors., Comment: Appearing at ICSE 2018

Differential performance debugging is a technique to find performance problems. It applies in situations where the performance of a program is (unexpectedly) different for different classes of inputs. The task is to explain the differences in asymptotic performance among various input classes in terms of program internals. We propose a data-driven technique based on discriminant regression tree (DRT) learning problem where the goal is to discriminate among different classes of inputs. We propose a new algorithm for DRT learning that first clusters the data into functional clusters, capturing different asymptotic performance classes, and then invokes off-the-shelf decision tree learning algorithms to explain these clusters. We focus on linear functional clusters and adapt classical clustering algorithms (K-means and spectral) to produce them. For the K-means algorithm, we generalize the notion of the cluster centroid from a point to a linear function. We adapt spectral clustering by defining a novel kernel function to capture the notion of linear similarity between two data points. We evaluate our approach on benchmarks consisting of Java programs where we are interested in debugging performance. We show that our algorithm significantly outperforms other well-known regression tree learning algorithms in terms of running time and accuracy of classification., Comment: To Appear in AAAI 2018

We present lifestate rules--an approach for abstracting event-driven object protocols. Developing applications against event-driven software frameworks is notoriously difficult. One reason why is that to create functioning applications, developers must know about and understand the complex protocols that abstract the internal behavior of the framework. Such protocols intertwine the proper registering of callbacks to receive control from the framework with appropriate application programming interface (API) calls to delegate back to it. Lifestate rules unify lifecycle and typestate constraints in one common specification language. Our primary contribution is a model of event-driven systems from which lifestate rules can be derived. We then apply specification mining techniques to learn lifestate specifications for Android framework types. In the end, our implementation is able to find several rules that characterize actual behavior of the Android framework.

Today's programmers face a false choice between creating software that is extensible and software that is correct. Specifically, dynamic languages permit software that is richly extensible (via dynamic code loading, dynamic object extension, and various forms of reflection), and today's programmers exploit this flexibility to "bring their own language features" to enrich extensible languages (e.g., by using common JavaScript libraries). Meanwhile, such library-based language extensions generally lack enforcement of their abstractions, leading to programming errors that are complex to avoid and predict. To offer verification for this extensible world, we propose online verification-validation (OVV), which consists of language and VM design that enables a "phaseless" approach to program analysis, in contrast to the standard static-dynamic phase distinction. Phaseless analysis freely interposes abstract interpretation with concrete execution, allowing analyses to use dynamic (concrete) information to prove universal (abstract) properties about future execution. In this paper, we present a conceptual overview of OVV through a motivating example program that uses a hypothetical database library. We present a generic semantics for OVV, and an extension to this semantics that offers a simple gradual type system for the database library primitives. The result of instantiating this gradual type system in an OVV setting is a checker that can progressively type successive continuations of the program until a continuation is fully verified. To evaluate the proposed vision of OVV for this example, we implement the VM semantics (in Rust), and show that this design permits progressive typing in this manner.

This paper presents incremental verification-validation, a novel approach for checking rich data structure invariants expressed as separation logic assertions. Incremental verification-validation combines static verification of separation properties with efficient, short-circuiting dynamic validation of arbitrarily rich data constraints. A data structure invariant checker is an inductive predicate in separation logic with an executable interpretation; a short-circuiting checker is an invariant checker that stops checking whenever it detects at run time that an assertion for some sub-structure has been fully proven statically. At a high level, our approach does two things: it statically proves the separation properties of data structure invariants using a static shape analysis in a standard way but then leverages this proof in a novel manner to synthesize short-circuiting dynamic validation of the data properties. As a consequence, we enable dynamic validation to make up for imprecision in sound static analysis while simultaneously leveraging the static verification to make the remaining dynamic validation efficient. We show empirically that short-circuiting can yield asymptotic improvements in dynamic validation, with low overhead over no validation, even in cases where static verification is incomplete.

The aim of static analysis is to infer invariants about programs that are precise enough to establish semantic properties, such as the absence of run-time errors. Broadly speaking, there are two major branches of static analysis for imperative programs. Pointer and shape analyses focus on inferring properties of pointers, dynamically-allocated memory, and recursive data structures, while numeric analyses seek to derive invariants on numeric values. Although simultaneous inference of shape-numeric invariants is often needed, this case is especially challenging and is not particularly well explored. Notably, simultaneous shape-numeric inference raises complex issues in the design of the static analyzer itself. In this paper, we study the construction of such shape-numeric, static analyzers. We set up an abstract interpretation framework that allows us to reason about simultaneous shape-numeric properties by combining shape and numeric abstractions into a modular, expressive abstract domain. Such a modular structure is highly desirable to make its formalization and implementation easier to do and get correct. To achieve this, we choose a concrete semantics that can be abstracted step-by-step, while preserving a high level of expressiveness. The structure of abstract operations (i.e., transfer, join, and comparison) follows the structure of this semantics. The advantage of this construction is to divide the analyzer in modules and functors that implement abstractions of distinct features., Comment: In Proceedings Festschrift for Dave Schmidt, arXiv:1309.4557

Static analysis designers must carefully balance precision and efficiency. In our experience, many static analysis tools are built around an elegant, core algorithm, but that algorithm is then extensively tweaked to add just enough precision for the coding idioms seen in practice, without sacrificing too much efficiency. There are several downsides to adding precision in this way: the tool's implementation becomes much more complicated; it can be hard for an end-user to interpret the tool's results; and as software systems vary tremendously in their coding styles, it may require significant algorithmic engineering to enhance a tool to perform well in a particular software domain. In this paper, we present Mix, a novel system that mixes type checking and symbolic execution. The key aspect of our approach is that these analyses are applied independently on disjoint parts of the program, in an off-the-shelf manner. At the boundaries between nested type checked and symbolically executed code regions, we use special mix rules to communicate information between the off-the-shelf systems. The resulting mixture is a provably sound analysis that is more precise than type checking alone and more efficient than exclusive symbolic execution. In addition, we also describe a prototype implementation, Mixy, for C. Mixy checks for potential null dereferences by mixing a null/non-null type qualifier inference system with a symbolic executor

Static analysis designers must carefully balance precision and efficiency. In our experience, many static analysis tools are built around an elegant, core algorithm, but that algorithm is then extensively tweaked to add just enough precision for the coding idioms seen in practice, without sacrificing too much efficiency. There are several downsides to adding precision in this way: the tool's implementation becomes much more complicated; it can be hard for an end-user to interpret the tool's results; and as software systems vary tremendously in their coding styles, it may require significant algorithmic engineering to enhance a tool to perform well in a particular software domain. In this paper, we present Mix, a novel system that mixes type checking and symbolic execution. The key aspect of our approach is that these analyses are applied independently on disjoint parts of the program, in an off-the-shelf manner. At the boundaries between nested type checked and symbolically executed code regions, we use special mix rules to communicate information between the off-the-shelf systems. The resulting mixture is a provably sound analysis that is more precise than type checking alone and more efficient than exclusive symbolic execution. In addition, we also describe a prototype implementation, Mixy, for C. Mixy checks for potential null dereferences by mixing a null/non-null type qualifier inference system with a symbolic executor