Publications
Preprint
Conference and Journal
Gradual C0: Symbolic Execution for Gradual Verification
Current static verification techniques such as separation logic support a wide range of programs. However, such techniques only support complete and detailed specifications, which places an undue burden on users. To solve this problem, prior work proposed gradual verification, which handles complete, partial, or missing specifications by soundly combining static and dynamic checking. Gradual verification has also been extended to programs that manipulate recursive, mutable data structures on the heap. Unfortunately, this extension does not reward users with decreased dynamic checking as more specifications are written and more static guarantees are made. In fact, all properties are checked dynamically regardless of any static guarantees. Additionally, no full-fledged implementation of gradual verification exists so far, which prevents studying its performance and applicability in practice.
We present Gradual C0, the first practicable gradual verifier for recursive heap data structures, which targets C0, a safe subset of C designed for education. Static verifiers supporting separation logic or implicit dynamic frames use symbolic execution for reasoning; so Gradual C0, which extends one such verifier, adopts symbolic execution at its core instead of the weakest liberal precondition approach used in prior work. Our approach addresses technical challenges related to symbolic execution with imprecise specifications, heap ownership, and branching in both program statements and specification formulas. We also deal with challenges related to minimizing insertion of dynamic checks and extensibility to other programming languages beyond C0. Finally, we provide the first empirical performance evaluation of a gradual verifier, and found that on average, Gradual C0 decreases run-time overhead between 7.1-40.2% compared to the fully-dynamic approach used in prior work (for context, the worst cases for Wise et al. [2020]’s approach range from 0.1-4.5 seconds depending on the benchmark). Further, the worst-case scenarios for performance are predictable and avoidable. This work paves the way towards evaluating gradual verification at scale.
Sound Gradual Verification with Symbolic Execution
Gradual verification, which supports explicitly partial specifications and verifies them with a combination of static and dynamic checks, makes verification more incremental and provides earlier feedback to developers. While an abstract, weakest precondition-based approach to gradual verification was previously proven sound, the approach did not provide sufficient guidance for implementation and optimization of the required run-time checks. More recently, gradual verification was implemented using symbolic execution techniques, but the soundness of the approach (as with related static checkers based on implicit dynamic frames) was an open question. This paper puts practical gradual verification on a sound footing with a formalization of symbolic execution, optimized run-time check generation, and run time execution. We prove our approach is sound; our proof also covers a core subset of the Viper tool, for which we are aware of no previous soundness result. Our formalization enabled us to find a soundness bug in an implemented gradual verification tool and describe the fix necessary to make it sound.
Workshop
Gradual Exact Logic: Unifying Hoare Logic and Incorrectness Logic via Gradual Verification
Previously, gradual verification has been developed using overapproximating logics such as Hoare logic. We show that the static verification component of gradual verification is also connected to underapproximating logics like incorrectness logic. To do this, we use a novel definition of gradual verification and a novel gradualization of exact logic [Maksimovic et al. 2023] which we call gradual exact logic. Further, we show that Hoare logic, incorrectness logic, and gradual verification can be defined in terms of gradual exact logic. We hope that this connection can be used to develop tools and techniques that apply to both gradual verification and bug-finding. For example, we envision that techniques defined in terms of exact logic can be directly applied to verification, bug-finding, and gradual verification, using the principles of gradual typing [Garcia et al. 2016].
Latte: Lightweight Alias Tracking for Java
Many existing systems track aliasing and uniqueness, each with their own trade-off between expressiveness and developer effort. We propose Latte, a new approach that aims to minimize both the amount of annotations and the complexity of invariants necessary for reasoning about aliasing in an object-oriented language with mutation. Our approach only requires annotations for parameters and fields, while annotations for local variables are inferred. Furthermore, it relaxes uniqueness to allow aliasing among local variables, as long as this aliasing can be precisely determined. This enables support for destructive reads without changes to the language or its run-time semantics. Despite this simplicity, we show how this design can still be used for tracking uniqueness and aliasing in a local sequential setting, with practical applications, such as modeling a stack.
Miscellaneous
Implementation of an end-to-end gradual verification system
Static verification is used to ensure the correctness of programs. While useful in critical applications, the high overhead associated with writing specifications limits its general applicability. Similarly, the run-time costs introduced by dynamic verification limit its practicality. Gradual verification validates partially specified code statically where possible and dynamically where necessary. As a result, software developers gain granular control over the trade-offs between static and dynamic verification. This paper contains an end-to-end presentation of gradual verification in action, with a focus on applying it to C0 (a safe subset of C) and implementing the required dynamic verification.