We seek to enable more flexible use of rich specifications in a variety of ways that smoothly extend conventional software development practice. We show how a single specification language, based on separation logic to capture the subtle ownership disciplines of systems code, can be used for runtime assertion checking, for property-based testing, and for formal machine-checked proof—and how each of these complements and supports the others. We demonstrate all this on a challenging example: a component of a production hypervisor, running both stand-alone at user level and in situ in the hypervisor.

Memory safety concerns continue to be a major source of security vulnerabilities. The CHERI architecture, as instantiated in prototype CHERI-RISC-V cores, the Arm Morello system, and Microsoft's CHERIoT embedded core, provides fine-grained memory access control through unforgeable hardware capabilities. The impact of CHERI on spatial memory safety is well understood. This paper systematically examines temporal memory safety within CHERI C -- a dialect of the C programming language for CHERI -- and proposes a formal approach to defining and ensuring it. In particular: 1) we examine the impact of five existing capability revocation mechanisms on CHERI C semantics and present a specialised object memory model tailored to CHERI C; 2) we introduce a new CHERI-specific pointer provenance tracking scheme; and 3) we formally define the security guarantees provided by this memory model, supported by a Coq proof of their correctness, expressed as invariants of the memory state.

Developing systems code that robustly provides its intended security guarantees remains very challenging: conventional practice does not suffice, and full functional verification, while now feasible in some contexts, has substantial barriers to entry and use.

Separation logic has become an important tool for formally capturing and reasoning about the ownership patterns of imperative programs, originally for paper proof, and now the foundation for industrial static analyses and multiple proof tools. However, there has been very little work on program testing of separationlogic specifications in concrete execution. At first sight, separation-logic formulas are hard to evaluate in reasonable time, with their implicit quantification over heap splittings, and other explicit existentials. In this paper we observe that a restricted fragment of separation logic, adopted in the CN proof tool to enable predictable proof automation, also has a natural and readable computational interpretation, that makes it practically usable in runtime testing. We discuss various design issues and develop this as a C + CN source to C source translation, Fulminate. This adds checks – including ownership checks and ownership transfer – for C code annotated with CN pre- and post-conditions; we demonstrate this on nontrivial examples, including the allocator from a production hypervisor. We formalise our runtime ownership testing scheme, showing (and proving) how its reified ghost state correctly captures ownership passing, in a semantics for a small C-like language.

Memory safety issues are a persistent source of security vulnerabilities, with conventional architectures and the C codebase chronically prone to exploitable errors. The CHERI research project has shown how one can provide radically improved security for that existing codebase with minimal modification, using unforgeable hardware capabilities in place of machine-word pointers in CHERI dialects of C, implemented as adaptions of Clang/LLVM and GCC. CHERI was first prototyped as extensions of MIPS and RISC-V; it is currently being evaluated by Arm and others with the Arm Morello experimental architecture, processor, and platform, to explore its potential for mass-market adoption, and by Microsoft in their CHERIoT design for embedded cores.

Despite significant progress in the verification of hypervisors, operating systems, and compilers, and in verification tooling, there exists a wide gap between the approaches used in verification projects and conventional development of systems software. We see two main challenges in bringing these closer together: verification handling the complexity of code and semantics of conventional systems software, and verification usability. We describe an experiment in verification tool design aimed at addressing some aspects of both: we design and implement CN, a separation-logic refinement type system for C systems software, aimed at predictable proof automation, based on a realistic semantics of ISO C. CN reduces refinement typing to decidable propositional logic reasoning, uses first-class resources to support pointer aliasing and pointer arithmetic, features resource inference for iterated separating conjunction, and uses a novel syntactic restriction of ghost variables in specifications to guarantee their successful inference. We implement CN and formalise key aspects of the type system, including a soundness proof of type checking. To demonstrate the usability of CN we use it to verify a substantial component of Google's pKVM hypervisor for Android.

Systems code often requires fine-grained control over memory layout and pointers, expressed using low-level ( e.g. , bitwise) operations on pointer values. Since these operations go beyond what basic pointer arithmetic in C allows, they are performed with the help of integer-pointer casts . Prior work has explored increasingly realistic memory object models for C that account for the desired semantics of integer-pointer casts while also being sound w.r.t. compiler optimisations, culminating in PNVI, the preferred memory object model in ongoing discussions within the ISO WG14 C standards committee. However, its complexity makes it an unappealing target for verification, and no tools currently exist to verify C programs under PNVI. In this paper, we introduce VIP, a new memory object model aimed at supporting C verification. VIP sidesteps the complexities of PNVI with a simple but effective idea: a new construct that lets programmers express the intended provenances of integer-pointer casts explicitly. At the same time, we prove VIP compatible with PNVI, thus enabling verification on top of VIP to benefit from PNVI’s validation with respect to practice. In particular, we build a verification tool, RefinedC-VIP, for verifying programs under VIP semantics. As the name suggests, RefinedC-VIP extends the recently developed RefinedC tool, which is automated yet also produces foundational proofs in Coq. We evaluate RefinedC-VIP on a range of systems-code idioms, and validate VIP’s expressiveness via an implementation in the Cerberus C semantics.

Given the central role that C continues to play in systems software, and the difficulty of writing safe and correct C code, it remains a grand challenge to develop effective formal methods for verifying C programs. In this paper, we propose a new approach to this problem: a type system we call RefinedC, which combines ownership types (for modular reasoning about shared state and concurrency) with refinement types (for encoding precise invariants on C data types and Hoare-style specifications for C functions).

C remains central to our infrastructure, making verification of C code an essential and much-researched topic, but the semantics of C is remarkably complex, and important aspects of it are still unsettled, leaving programmers and verification tool builders on shaky ground. This paper describes a tool, Cerberus-BMC, that for the first time provides a principled reference semantics that simultaneously supports (1) a choice of concurrency memory model (including substantial fragments of the C11, RC11, and Linux kernel memory models), (2) a modern memory object model, and (3) a well-validated thread-local semantics for a large fragment of the language. The tool should be useful for C programmers, compiler writers, verification tool builders, and members of the C/C++ standards committees.

The semantics of pointers and memory objects in C has been a vexed question for many years. C values cannot be treated as either purely abstract or purely concrete entities: the language exposes their representations, but compiler optimisations rely on analyses that reason about provenance and initialisation status, not just runtime representations. The ISO WG14 standard leaves much of this unclear, and in some respects differs with de facto standard usage --- which itself is difficult to investigate. In this paper we explore the possible source-language semantics for memory objects and pointers, in ISO C and in C as it is used and implemented in practice, focussing especially on pointer provenance. We aim to, as far as possible, reconcile the ISO C standard, mainstream compiler behaviour, and the semantics relied on by the corpus of existing C code. We present two coherent proposals, tracking provenance via integers and not; both address many design questions. We highlight some pros and cons and open questions, and illustrate the discussion with a library of test cases. We make our semantics executable as a test oracle, integrating it with the Cerberus semantics for much of the rest of C, which we have made substantially more complete and robust, and equipped with a web-interface GUI. This allows us to experimentally assess our proposals on those test cases. To assess their viability with respect to larger bodies of C code, we analyse the changes required and the resulting behaviour for a port of FreeBSD to CHERI, a research architecture supporting hardware capabilities, which (roughly speaking) traps on the memory safety violations which our proposals deem undefined behaviour. We also develop a new runtime instrumentation tool to detect possible provenance violations in normal C code, and apply it to some of the SPEC benchmarks. We compare our proposal with a source-language variant of the twin-allocation LLVM semantics proposal of Lee et al. Finally, we describe ongoing interactions with WG14, exploring how our proposals could be incorporated into the ISO standard.

The C/C++11 concurrency model balances two goals: it is relaxed enough to be efficiently implementable and (leaving aside the ``thin-air'' problem) it is strong enough to give useful guarantees to programmers. It is mathematically precise and has been used in verification research and compiler testing. However, the model is expressed in an axiomatic style, as predicates on complete candidate executions. This suffices for computing the set of allowed executions of a small litmus test, but it does not directly support the incremental construction of executions of larger programs. It is also at odds with conventional operational semantics, as used implicitly in the rest of the C/C++ standards.

C remains central to our computing infrastructure. It is notionally defined by ISO standards, but in reality the properties of C assumed by systems code and those implemented by compilers have diverged, both from the ISO standards and from each other, and none of these are clearly understood. We make two contributions to help improve this error-prone situation. First, we describe an in-depth analysis of the design space for the semantics of pointers and memory in C as it is used in practice. We articulate many specific questions, build a suite of semantic test cases, gather experimental data from multiple implementations, and survey what C experts believe about the de facto standards. We identify questions where there is a consensus (either following ISO or differing) and where there are conflicts. We apply all this to an experimental C implemented above capability hardware. Second, we describe a formal model, Cerberus, for large parts of C. Cerberus is parameterised on its memory model; it is linkable either with a candidate de facto memory object model, under construction, or with an operational C11 concurrency model; it is defined by elaboration to a much simpler Core language for accessibility, and it is executable as a test oracle on small examples. This should provide a solid basis for discussion of what mainstream C is now: what programmers and analysis tools can assume and what compilers aim to implement. Ultimately we hope it will be a step towards clear, consistent, and accepted semantics for the various use-cases of C.

Shared memory concurrency relies on synchronisation primitives: compare-and-swap, load-reserve/store-conditional (aka LL/SC), language-level mutexes, and so on. In a sequentially consistent setting, or even in the TSO setting of x86 and Sparc, these have well-understood semantics. But in the very relaxed settings of IBM®, POWER®, ARM, or C/C++, it remains surprisingly unclear exactly what the programmer can depend on.

The upcoming C and C++ revised standards add concurrency to the languages, for the first time, in the form of a subtle *relaxed memory model* (the *C++11 model*). This aims to permit compiler optimisation and to accommodate the differing relaxed-memory behaviours of mainstream multiprocessors, combining simple semantics for most code with high-performance *low-level atomics* for concurrency libraries. In this paper, we first establish two simpler but provably equivalent models for C++11, one for the full language and another for the subset without consume operations. Subsetting further to the fragment without low-level atomics, we identify a subtlety arising from atomic initialisation and prove that, under an additional condition, the model is equivalent to sequential consistency for race-free programs.