HackerPapers

arXiv:1901.08338cs.OS

Can We Prove Time Protection?

Gernot Heiser, Gerwin Klein, Toby Murray

Early discovery. Linked by one identifiable commenter. This paper is outside the main ranking; a mention is not an endorsement.

Abstract

Timing channels are a significant and growing security threat in computer systems, with no established solution. We have recently argued that the OS must provide time protection, in analogy to the established memory protection, to protect applications from information leakage through timing channels. Based on a recently-proposed implementation of time protection in the seL4 microkernel, we investigate how such an implementation could be formally proved to prevent timing channels. We postulate that this should be possible by reasoning about a highly abstracted representation of the shared hardware resources that cause timing channels.

arXiv comments
6 pages, 1 figure
Journal reference
DOI
Subjects
cs.OSOperating Systems

On Hacker News

Linked by 1 identifiable commenter in 1 comment across 1 thread, from Mar 2021 to Mar 2021. Found in 1 HN submission from Jan 2019 to Jan 2019. Open submission discussions.

Comments linking this paper, per year.

Discussed in comments1 thread

    • That would be great. But isn't there a danger, that such a CPU, at least if implemented naievely, would basically mostly idle, since modern OoO processors schedule memory access dynamically? For hard real-time tasks, some CPUs don't have caches, to make timing more predictable…

      GregarianChildView on HNParent context

Submitted to Hacker News

Connected through shared HN threads, not inferred similarity or a recommendation.