Gabriel Ferreira

Gabriel Ferreira, Christian Kästner, Joshua Sunshine et al.

In many domains, software systems cannot be deployed until authorities judge them fit for use in an intended operating environment. Certification standards and processes have been devised and deployed to regulate operations of software systems and prevent their failures. However, practitioners are often unsatisfied with the efficiency and value proposition of certification efforts. In this study, we compare two certification standards, Common Criteria and DO-178C, and collect insights from literature and from interviews with subject-matter experts to identify design options relevant to the design of standards. The results of the comparison of certification efforts---leading to the identification of design dimensions that affect their quality---serve as a framework to guide the comparison, creation, and revision of certification standards and processes. This paper puts software engineering research in context and discusses key issues around process and quality assurance and includes observations from industry about relevant topics such as recertification, timely evaluations, but also technical discussions around model-driven approaches and formal methods. Our initial characterization of the design space of certification efforts can be used to inform technical discussions and to influence the directions of new or existing certification efforts. Practitioners, technical commissions, and government can directly benefit from our analytical framework.

Gabriel Ferreira, Momin Malik, Christian Kästner et al.

Preprocessors support the diversification of software products with #ifdefs, but also require additional effort from developers to maintain and understand variable code. We conjecture that #ifdefs cause developers to produce more vulnerable code because they are required to reason about multiple features simultaneously and maintain complex mental models of dependencies of configurable code. We extracted a variational call graph across all configurations of the Linux kernel, and used configuration complexity metrics to compare vulnerable and non-vulnerable functions considering their vulnerability history. Our goal was to learn about whether we can observe a measurable influence of configuration complexity on the occurrence of vulnerabilities. Our results suggest, among others, that vulnerable functions have higher variability than non-vulnerable ones and are also constrained by fewer configuration options. This suggests that developers are inclined to notice functions appear in frequently-compiled product variants. We aim to raise developers' awareness to address variability more systematically, since configuration complexity is an important, but often ignored aspect of software product lines.