BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Vivek Nigam

Vivek Nigam contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Logic in Computer ScienceCryptography and Securityeess.SYFormal Languages and Automata TheoryProgramming LanguagesSystems and Control

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 19 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
5works
0followers
6topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

5 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Automating Safety and Security Co-Design through Semantically-Rich Architecture Patterns

During the design of safety-critical systems, safety and security engineers make use of architecture patterns, such as Watchdog and Firewall, to address identified failures and threats. Often, however, the deployment of safety patterns has consequences on security, e.g., the deployment of a safety pattern may lead to new threats. The other way around may also be possible, i.e., the deployment of a security pattern may lead to new failures. Safety and security co-design is, therefore, required to understand such consequences and trade-offs, in order to reach appropriate system designs. Currently, pattern descriptions, including their consequences, are described using natural language. Therefore, their deployment in system design is carried out manually, thus time-consuming and prone to human-error, especially given the high system complexity. We propose the use of semantically-rich architecture patterns to enable automated support for safety and security co-design by using Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KRR) methods. Based on our domain-specific language, we specify reasoning principles as logic specifications written as answer-set programs. KRR engines enable the automation of safety and security co-engineering activities, including the automated recommendation of which architecture patterns can address failures or threats and consequences of deploying such patterns. We demonstrate our approach on an example taken from the ISO 21434 standard.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Security Engineering for ISO 21434

The ISO 21434 is a new standard that has been proposed to address the future challenges of automotive cybersecurity. This white paper takes a closer look at the ISO 21434 helping engineers to understand the ISO 21434 parts, the key activities to be carried out and the main artefacts that shall be produced. As any certification, obtaining the ISO 21434 certification can be daunting at first sight. Engineers have to deploy processes that include several security risk assessment methods to produce security arguments and evidence supporting item security claims. In this white paper, we propose a security engineering approach that can ease this process by relying on Rigorous Security Assessments and Incremental Assessment Maintenance methods supported by automation. We demonstrate by example that the proposed approach can greatly increase the quality of the produced artefacts, the efficiency to produce them, as well as enable continuous security assessment. Finally, we point out some key research directions that we are investigating to fully realize the proposed approach.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Less Manual Work for Safety Engineers: Towards an Automated Safety Reasoning with Safety Patterns

The development of safety-critical systems requires the control of hazards that can potentially cause harm. To this end, safety engineers rely during the development phase on architectural solutions, called safety patterns, such as safety monitors, voters, and watchdogs. The goal of these patterns is to control (identified) faults that can trigger hazards. Safety patterns can control such faults by e.g., increasing the redundancy of the system. Currently, the reasoning of which pattern to use at which part of the target system to control which hazard is documented mostly in textual form or by means of models, such as GSN-models, with limited support for automation. This paper proposes the use of logic programming engines for the automated reasoning about system safety. We propose a domain-specific language for embedded system safety and specify as disjunctive logic programs reasoning principles used by safety engineers to deploy safety patterns, e.g., when to use safety monitors, or watchdogs. Our machinery enables two types of automated safety reasoning: (1) identification of which hazards can be controlled and which ones cannot be controlled by the existing safety patterns; and (2) automated recommendation of which patterns could be used at which place of the system to control potential hazards. Finally, we apply our machinery to two examples taken from the automotive domain: an adaptive cruise control system and a battery management system.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

A Proof Theoretic Study of Soft Concurrent Constraint Programming

Concurrent Constraint Programming (CCP) is a simple and powerful model for concurrency where agents interact by telling and asking constraints. Since their inception, CCP-languages have been designed for having a strong connection to logic. In fact, the underlying constraint system can be built from a suitable fragment of intuitionistic (linear) logic --ILL-- and processes can be interpreted as formulas in ILL. Constraints as ILL formulas fail to represent accurately situations where "preferences" (called soft constraints) such as probabilities, uncertainty or fuzziness are present. In order to circumvent this problem, c-semirings have been proposed as algebraic structures for defining constraint systems where agents are allowed to tell and ask soft constraints. Nevertheless, in this case, the tight connection to logic and proof theory is lost. In this work, we give a proof theoretical interpretation to soft constraints: they can be defined as formulas in a suitable fragment of ILL with subexponentials (SELL) where subexponentials, ordered in a c-semiring structure, are interpreted as preferences. We hence achieve two goals: (1) obtain a CCP language where agents can tell and ask soft constraints and (2) prove that the language in (1) has a strong connection with logic. Hence we keep a declarative reading of processes as formulas while providing a logical framework for soft-CCP based systems. An interesting side effect of (1) is that one is also able to handle probabilities (and other modalities) in SELL, by restricting the use of the promotion rule for non-idempotent c-semirings.This finer way of controlling subexponentials allows for considering more interesting spaces and restrictions, and it opens the possibility of specifying more challenging computational systems.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2012arXiv

Abstract Effects and Proof-Relevant Logical Relations

We introduce a novel variant of logical relations that maps types not merely to partial equivalence relations on values, as is commonly done, but rather to a proof-relevant generalisation thereof, namely setoids. The objects of a setoid establish that values inhabit semantic types, whilst its morphisms are understood as proofs of semantic equivalence. The transition to proof-relevance solves two well-known problems caused by the use of existential quantification over future worlds in traditional Kripke logical relations: failure of admissibility, and spurious functional dependencies. We illustrate the novel format with two applications: a direct-style validation of Pitts and Stark's equivalences for "new" and a denotational semantics for a region-based effect system that supports type abstraction in the sense that only externally visible effects need to be tracked; non-observable internal modifications, such as the reorganisation of a search tree or lazy initialisation, can count as `pure' or `read only'. This `fictional purity' allows clients of a module soundly to validate more effect-based program equivalences than would be possible with traditional effect systems.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access