Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Stan Rosenberg

dblp:72/963 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
4ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2013
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 2 · 1 first-authorSecurity and privacy · 1Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 1

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
2 papers
Program verification · 86% Requirements engineering and software design · 9% Programming languages and type systems · 5%
Network and information security
1 paper
Systems and software security · 100%

Topics — the 7 heaviest of 8, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Program verification
modular verification
0.212013
Local Reasoning for Global Invariants, Part I: Region Logic · J. ACM 2013
Program verification › program logic
separation logic
0.212013
Local Reasoning for Global Invariants, Part I: Region Logic · J. ACM 2013
Systems and software security › information flow control
declassification policies
0.112008
Expressive Declassification Policies and Modular Static Enforcement · SP 2008
Systems and software security
information flow control
0.112008
Expressive Declassification Policies and Modular Static Enforcement · SP 2008
Program verification › program logic
frame conditions
0.012013
Local Reasoning for Global Invariants, Part I: Region Logic · J. ACM 2013
Requirements engineering and software design › software design principles
information hiding
0.012013
Local Reasoning for Global Invariants, Part I: Region Logic · J. ACM 2013
Programming languages and type systems › type systems
security type systems
0.012008
Expressive Declassification Policies and Modular Static Enforcement · SP 2008

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

region expressions · 0.2ghost fields · 0.2type checking · 0.2program verification · 0.2
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2013 Local Reasoning for Global Invariants, Part I: Region Logic
abstract
Dedicated to the memory of Stephen L. Bloom (1940--2010). Shared mutable objects pose grave challenges in reasoning, especially for information hiding and modularity. This article presents a novel technique for reasoning about error-avoiding partial correctness of programs featuring shared mutable objects, and investigates the technique by formalizing a logic. Using a first-order assertion language, the logic provides heap-local reasoning about mutation and separation, via ghost fields and variables of type “region” (finite sets of object references). A new form of frame condition specifies write, read, and allocation effects using region expressions; this supports a frame rule that allows a command to read state on which the framed predicate depends. Soundness is proved using a standard program semantics. The logic facilitates heap-local reasoning about object invariants, as shown here by examples. Part II of this article extends the logic with second-order framing which formalizes the hiding of data invariants.
Anindya Banerjee 0001, David A. Naumann, Stan Rosenberg
J. ACM3
2012 Decision Procedures for Region Logic
Stan Rosenberg, Anindya Banerjee 0001, David A. Naumann
VMCAI1
2008 Regional Logic for Local Reasoning about Global Invariants
Anindya Banerjee 0001, David A. Naumann, Stan Rosenberg
ECOOP3
2008 Expressive Declassification Policies and Modular Static Enforcement
abstract
This paper provides a way to specify expressive declassification policies, in particular, when, what, and where policies that include conditions under which downgrading is allowed. Secondly, an end-to-end semantic property is introduced, based on a model that allows observations of intermediate low states as well as termination. An attacker's knowledge only increases at explicit declassification steps, and within limits set by policy. Thirdly, static enforcement is provided by combining type-checking with program verification techniques applied to the small subprograms that carry out declassifications. Enforcement is proved sound for a simple programming language and the extension to object-oriented programs is described.
Anindya Banerjee 0001, David A. Naumann, Stan Rosenberg
SP3