Improving the Safety and Security of Software Systems by Mediating SAP Verification
Source abstract
Abstract
Security and performance (SAP) are two critical NFRs that affect the successful completion of software projects. Organizations need to follow the practices that are vital to SAP verification. These practices must be incorporated into the software development process to identify SAP-related defects and avoid failures after deployment. This can only be achieved if organizations are fully aware of SAP verification activities and appropriately include them in the software development process. However, there is a lack of awareness of the factors that influence SAP verification, which makes it difficult for businesses to improve their verification efforts and ensure that the released software meets these requirements. To fill this gap, this research study aimed to identify the mediating factors (MFs) influencing SAP verification and the actions to promote them. Ten MFs and their corresponding actions were identified after thoroughly reviewing the existing literature. The mapping of MFs and their corresponding actions were initially evaluated with the help of a pilot study. Mathematical modeling was utilized to model these MFs and examine each MF’s unique effect on software SAP verification. In addition, two case studies with a small- and a medium-sized organization were used to better understand the function these MFs play in the process of SAP verification. The research findings suggested that MFs assist software development organizations in their efforts to integrate SAP verification procedures into their standard software systems. Further investigation is required to support the understanding of these MFs when building modern software systems.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Software System Performance and Reliability · Software Reliability and Analysis Research · Software Engineering Research
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Information systems, College of Computer and Information Sciences, Jouf University, Sakaka 72347, Saudi Arabia
Funding
Deanship of Scientific Research at Jouf University
References (43)
Show source-provided references
1. Case study on non-functional requirement change impact traceability for Agile software development10.18517/ijaseit.10.1.10176 ↗
2. Rahman, M.S., and Reza, H. (2020–1, January 31). Systematic mapping study of non-functional requirements in big data system. Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE International Conference on Electro Information Technology (EIT), Chicago, IL, USA.10.1109/EIT48999.2020.9208288 ↗
3. Alwadi, A., Nahhas, A., Bosse, S., Jamous, N., and Turowski, K. (2019, January 3–7). A Modernized Model for Performance Requirements and their Interdependencies. Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE/ACS 16th International Conference on Computer Systems and Applications (AICCSA), Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.10.1109/AICCSA47632.2019.9035337 ↗
4. Alwadi, A., Nahhas, A., Bosse, S., Jamous, N., and Turowski, K. (2018, January 1–2). Toward a performance requirements model for the early design phase of IT systems. Proceedings of the 2018 Sixth International Conference on Enterprise Systems (ES), Limassol, Cyprus.10.1109/ES.2018.00009 ↗
5. Understanding software security from design to deployment10.1145/3385678.3385687 ↗
6. Security Threat and Vulnerability Assessment and Measurement in Secure Software Development
7. Fault attacks on secure embedded software: Threats, design, and evaluation10.1007/s41635-018-0038-1 ↗
8. 2022. Safety and security collaborative analysis framework for high-performance embedded computing devices10.1016/j.micpro.2022.104572 ↗
9. Aruna, E., Reddy, A.R.M., and Sunitha, K. (2022). Secure SDLC Using Security Patterns 2.0. IOT with Smart Systems, Springer.10.1007/978-981-16-3945-6_69 ↗
10. Ribeiro, V.V., Cruzes, D.S., and Travassos, G.H. (2018, January 26–30). A perception of the practice of software security and performance verification. Proceedings of the 2018 25th Australasian Software Engineering Conference (ASWEC), Adelaide, SA, Australia.10.1109/ASWEC.2018.00018 ↗
11. Systematic Literature Review on Security Risks and its Practices in Secure Software Development10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3140181 ↗
12. Software verification and validation technologies and tools10.1109/MS.2018.2883354 ↗
13. Fujdiak, R., Mlynek, P., Mrnustik, P., Barabas, M., Blazek, P., Borcik, F., and Misurec, J. (2019, January 24–26). Managing the secure software development. Proceedings of the 2019 10th IFIP International Conference on New Technologies, Mobility and Security (NTMS), Canary Islands, Spain.10.1109/NTMS.2019.8763845 ↗
14. Kamal, A.H.A., Yen, C.C.Y., Hui, G.J., and Ling, P.S. (2020). Risk Assessment, Threat Modeling and Security Testing in SDLC. arXiv.
15. CARMEN: A framework for the verification and diagnosis of the specification of security requirements in cyber-physical systems10.1016/j.compind.2021.103524 ↗
16. Zhu, J., He, S., Liu, J., He, P., Xie, Q., Zheng, Z., and Lyu, M.R. (2019, January 27). Tools and benchmarks for automated log parsing. Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE/ACM 41st International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice (ICSE-SEIP), Montreal, QC, Canada.10.1109/ICSE-SEIP.2019.00021 ↗
17. Discovering and utilising expert knowledge from security event logs
18. Dieber, B., White, R., Taurer, S., Breiling, B., Caiazza, G., Christensen, H., and Cortesi, A. (2020). Penetration testing ROS. Robot Operating System (ROS), Springer.10.1007/978-3-030-20190-6_8 ↗
19. Hong, K. (2019). Performance, Security, and Safety Requirements Testing for Smart Systems through Systematic Software Analysis. [Doctoral Dissertation, University of Michigan Library].
20. Ismail, A.A., Hamza, H.S., and Kotb, A.M. (2018, January 5–7). Performance evaluation of open source iot platforms. Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE global conference on internet of things (GCIoT), Alexandria, Egypt.10.1109/GCIoT.2018.8620130 ↗
21. Mandrioli, C., and Maggio, M. (2020, January 19–28). Testing self-adaptive software with probabilistic guarantees on performance metrics. Proceedings of the 28th ACM Joint Meeting on European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering, Piraeus, Greece.10.1145/3368089.3409685 ↗
22. Performance metrics in scrum software engineering companies
23. Data-efficient performance learning for configurable systems10.1007/s10664-017-9573-6 ↗
24. Transforming systems of consumption and production for achieving the sustainable development goals: Moving beyond efficiency10.1007/s11625-018-0582-1 ↗
25. Ferme, V., and Pautasso, C. (2018, January 9–13). A declarative approach for performance tests execution in continuous software development environments. Proceedings of the 2018 ACM/SPEC International Conference on Performance Engineering, Berlin, Germany.10.1145/3184407.3184417 ↗
26. Ribeiro, V., Cruzes, D.S., and Travassos, G.H. (2020, January 1–4). Understanding Factors and Practices of Software Security and Performance Verification. Proceedings of the 19th Brazilian Symposium on Software Quality, Sbcopenlib, Brazil, December 2020, Sbcopenlib, Brazil.
27. Zhioua, Z., Short, S., and Roudier, Y. (2014, January 21–25). Static code analysis for software security verification: Problems and approaches. Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE 38th International Computer Software and Applications Conference Workshops, Vasteras, Sweden.10.1109/COMPSACW.2014.22 ↗
28. Cortellessa, V., Trubiani, C., Mostarda, L., and Dulay, N. (2010, January 23–25). An architectural framework for analyzing tradeoffs between software security and performance. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Architecting Critical Systems, Prague, Czech Republic.10.1007/978-3-642-13556-9_1 ↗
29. Moderator factors of software security and performance verification10.1016/j.jss.2021.111137 ↗
30. Hong, D.K. (2022, December 10). Requirements Testing and Verification for Smart Systems through Systematic Software Analysis. Available online: http://www.hongkedavid.com/academic/phd-defense-ke.pdf.
31. Assal, H., and Chiasson, S. (2018, January 12–14). Security in the software development lifecycle. Proceedings of the Fourteenth Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS 2018), Baltimore, MD, USA.
32. Situated learning in cross-functional virtual teams
33. The audit of business intelligence solutions
34. Mao, M., and Humphrey, M. (2013, January 20–24). Scaling and scheduling to maximize application performance within budget constraints in cloud workflows. Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE 27th International Symposium on Parallel and Distributed Processing, Cambridge, MA, USA.10.1109/IPDPS.2013.61 ↗
35. Soft factors affecting the performance of software development teams10.1108/13527591111143718 ↗
36. Kessel, M., and Atkinson, C. (2018, January 29). Integrating reuse into the rapid, continuous software engineering cycle through test-driven search. Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE/ACM 4th International Workshop on Rapid Continuous Software Engineering (RCoSE), Gothenburg, Sweden.10.1145/3194760.3194761 ↗
37. Blockchain-based trustworthy energy dispatching approach for high renewable energy penetrated power systems10.1109/JIOT.2021.3117924 ↗
38. Economic and mathematical modeling of food security level in view of import substitution10.5539/ass.v11n20p178 ↗
39. Case study method: A step-by-step guide for business researchers10.1177/1609406919862424 ↗
40. A maturity model for secure software design: A multivocal study10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3040220 ↗
41. A measurement framework for assessing the maturity of requirements engineering process10.1007/s11219-007-9033-4 ↗
42. A maturity model for secure requirements engineering10.1016/j.cose.2020.101852 ↗
43. Niazi, M., El-Attar, M., Usman, M., and Ikram, N. (2012, January 18–23). An empirical study identifying high perceived value requirements engineering practices in global software development projects. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Software Engineering Advances (ICSEA), Lisbon, Portugal.