The software bill of materials (SBOM) concept aims to provide more information about a software build, including copyrights, dependencies, and security references. However, SBOM lacks visibility into the process for building a package. Efforts such as Supply-chain Levels for Software Artifacts (SLSA) attempt to address this issue by focusing on the quality of the build process. However, these efforts are purely qualitative and lack quantitative assessment of that quality. To fill this gap, a new form of assurance case called process reduction is introduced. This assurance case is quantitative and can measure the strength of a toolchain by quantifying the strength of the reduction. By structuring the assurance case as a process reduction, it becomes possible to assess the effectiveness of a toolchain in terms of finding faults. In addition to metrics such as input space coverage, code coverage, or kill ratios used to evaluate software test suites, these metrics should be represented as Beta distributions within the framework. For example, with mutation testing, successes and failures of a test suite can be represented by a Beta probability density function (PDF), where success is determined by whether the suite causes a mutation in the program under test to exhibit some observable difference in behavior when executed. The effectiveness of a test suite should also be represented within a toolchain since metrics may not always correlate well with finding faults. Correlation should have its own Beta PDF, and Bayesian updates over time can be performed to learn how well the metric correlates with finding faults in a given system. Overall, attacks on software supply chains have highlighted the need for reliable and safe systems. While informal evidence like SBOMs and qualitative efforts like SLSA provide some level of assurance at one end of an evidence spectrum, more rigorous evidence such as proof-carrying code (PCC) exists at the opposite end. The proposed approach aims to provide quantitative evidence for software that falls somewhere between these two endpoints. In conclusion, the introduction of a quantitative assurance case using process reduction provides a means to measure the strength of a toolchain and assess its effectiveness in finding faults. This approach bridges the gap between qualitative efforts and more rigorous evidence, offering a valuable contribution to ensuring reliable and safe software systems.
- - The software bill of materials (SBOM) concept aims to provide more information about a software build, including copyrights, dependencies, and security references.
- - SBOM lacks visibility into the process for building a package.
- - Supply-chain Levels for Software Artifacts (SLSA) focuses on the quality of the build process but lacks quantitative assessment.
- - A new form of assurance case called process reduction is introduced to fill this gap.
- - Process reduction allows for quantitative measurement of the strength of a toolchain by quantifying the strength of the reduction.
- - Metrics such as input space coverage, code coverage, and kill ratios should be represented as Beta distributions within the framework.
- - Test suite effectiveness can be represented using Beta probability density functions (PDFs).
- - Correlation between metrics and finding faults should have its own Beta PDF, with Bayesian updates over time to learn how well the metric correlates with finding faults in a system.
- - Attacks on software supply chains highlight the need for reliable and safe systems.
- - The proposed approach provides quantitative evidence that falls between informal evidence like SBOMs and more rigorous evidence like proof-carrying code (PCC).
- - The introduction of a quantitative assurance case using process reduction measures toolchain strength and assesses its effectiveness in finding faults.
The software bill of materials (SBOM) is a concept that gives more information about a software build, like copyrights, dependencies, and security references. SBOM doesn't show how the package was made. Supply-chain Levels for Software Artifacts (SLSA) focuses on how well the package was made but doesn't measure it exactly. Process reduction is a new way to measure how strong the tools used to make the package are. It uses metrics like input space coverage and code coverage to see how well they work. The proposed approach measures the strength of the tools and checks if they can find faults in the system."
Definitions- Software bill of materials (SBOM): A list of information about a software build, including copyrights, dependencies, and security references.
- Dependencies: Things that a software build needs in order to work properly.
- Supply-chain Levels for Software Artifacts (SLSA): A method that focuses on the quality of how a software package is built.
- Quantitative assessment: Measuring something using numbers or amounts.
- Process reduction: A new way to measure how strong the tools used to make a software package are.
- Metrics: Measurements or data used to evaluate something.
- Input space coverage: How much of all possible inputs are tested in a software build.
- Code coverage: How much of the code in a software build is tested.
- Kill ratios: Measures how many bugs or problems are found and fixed during testing.
- Beta distributions: A statistical model
Exploring the Benefits of Quantitative Assurance Cases for Software Supply Chains
Software supply chains are increasingly vulnerable to malicious attacks, making it essential to ensure reliable and safe systems. To this end, the software bill of materials (SBOM) concept has been developed to provide more information about a software build, including copyrights, dependencies, and security references. However, SBOM lacks visibility into the process for building a package.
In an effort to fill this gap in knowledge and create more secure software supply chains, researchers have proposed introducing quantitative assurance cases using process reduction as a means of measuring the strength of a toolchain and assessing its effectiveness in finding faults. This article will explore these efforts in detail by discussing qualitative approaches such as Supply-chain Levels for Software Artifacts (SLSA), metrics used to evaluate test suites such as input space coverage or kill ratios, Beta probability density functions (PDFs), correlation with fault-finding ability represented by Beta PDFs over time through Bayesian updates, proof-carrying code (PCC) at one end of an evidence spectrum versus informal evidence like SBOMs at the other end—all culminating in an exploration of how quantitative assurance cases can bridge this gap between qualitative efforts and rigorous evidence.
Qualitative Approaches: SLSA
Efforts such as Supply-chain Levels for Software Artifacts (SLSA) attempt to address gaps in visibility into software builds by focusing on the quality of the build process. However, these efforts are purely qualitative and lack quantitative assessment of that quality. To fill this gap between informal evidence like SBOMs and rigorous evidence like PCC, researchers have proposed introducing quantitative assurance cases using process reduction as a means of measuring the strength of a toolchain and assessing its effectiveness in finding faults within software supply chains.
Metrics Used To Evaluate Test Suites
Metrics such as input space coverage or kill ratios are commonly used to evaluate test suites; however they may not always correlate well with finding faults within a given system due to their qualitative nature. In order to measure how effective these metrics are when it comes to fault-finding ability within software supply chains, correlation should be represented by Beta probability density functions (PDFs). These Beta PDFs can then be updated over time through Bayesian updates so that their accuracy is constantly improving based on new data points collected from testing results over time.
Proof Carrying Code & Informal Evidence
At one end of an evidence spectrum lies proof carrying code (PCC), which provides highly accurate but costly methods for ensuring reliable systems; while at the other end lies informal evidence such as SBOMs which provide less detailed information but cost far less than PCC solutions do—making them ideal for use during development stages where budget constraints may be tightest yet reliability must still remain high enough so that further development can continue safely without interruption due to security flaws or bugs being discovered too late after deployment has already occurred.
Quantitative Assurance Cases: Process Reduction
To bridge this gap between PCC's rigorosity and SBOM's informality while still providing valuable insight into whether or not certain toolsets are capable enough when it comes down detecting potential faults before deployment occurs—researchers have proposed introducing quantitative assurance cases using process reduction as a means of measuring the strength of a toolchain and assessing its effectiveness in finding faults within software supply chains. By structuring these assurance cases around process reductions rather than solely relying on metrics alone—it becomes possible assess both how effective certain toolsets are when it comes down detecting potential issues before deployment occurs while also gaining insight into how well those same toolsets correlate with actually discovering real problems once deployed out into production environments instead just relying on theoretical simulations alone which may not accurately reflect actual conditions found out there "in The Wild".
Conclusion
Overall attacks on software supply chains have highlighted just how important reliable systems truly are; especially considering just how quickly malicious actors can take advantage if even minor vulnerabilities exist somewhere along any given chain no matter what industry is involved either directly or indirectly with whatever project is currently being worked upon regardless if said project is related towards commercial applications or something else entirely different altogether since all types digital assets need protecting nowadays no matter what form they take shape inside off now days thanks largely due advancements made throughout various fields ranging from computer science all way up towards artificial intelligence itself now days too! With introduction quantitatively based assurance case utilizing processes reductions becoming available soon though—software developers everywhere will finally gain access powerful set tools allowing them measure strengths associated any given toolchains plus assess overall effectiveness terms discovering actual issues before deployments occur instead having rely solely upon traditional metrics alone anymore either thus making much easier detect potential threats ahead time instead waiting until after fact unfortunately happens first place too!