Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorWatson, Robert
dc.contributor.authorBaldwin, John
dc.contributor.authorChen, Tony
dc.contributor.authorChisnall, David
dc.contributor.authorClarke, Jessica
dc.contributor.authorDavis, Brooks
dc.contributor.authorFilardo, Nathaniel
dc.contributor.authorGutstein, Brett
dc.contributor.authorJenkinson, Graeme
dc.contributor.authorLaurie, Ben
dc.contributor.authorMazzinghi, Alfredo
dc.contributor.authorMoore, Simon
dc.contributor.authorNeumann, Peter
dc.contributor.authorOkhravi, Hamed
dc.contributor.authorRebert, Alex
dc.contributor.authorRichardson, Alex
dc.contributor.authorSewell, Peter
dc.contributor.authorTratt, Laurence
dc.contributor.authorVijayaraghavan, Muralidaran
dc.contributor.authorVincent, Hugo
dc.contributor.authorWitaszczyk, Konrad
dc.date.accessioned2025-02-18T18:31:32Z
dc.date.available2025-02-18T18:31:32Z
dc.date.issued2025-02-01
dc.identifier.issn0001-0782
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/158237
dc.description.abstractIn this Inside Risks column, we explore memory-safety standardization, which we argue is an essential step to promoting universal strong memory safety in government and industry, and, in turn, to ensure access to more secure software for all. During the last two decades, a set of research technologies for strong memory safety—memory-safe languages, hardware and software protection, formal approaches, and software compartmentalization—have reached sufficient maturity to see early deployment in security-critical use cases. However, there remains no shared, technology-neutral terminology or framework with which to specify memory-safety requirements. This is needed to enable reliable specification, design, implementation, auditing, and procurement of strongly memory-safe systems. Failure to speak in a common language makes it difficult to understand the possibilities or communicate accurately with each other, limiting perceived benefits and hence actual demand. The lack of such a framework also acts as an impediment to potential future policy interventions, and as an impediment to stating requirements to address observed market failures preventing adoption of these technologies. Standardization would also play a critical role in improving industrial best practice, another key aspect of adoption.en_US
dc.publisherAssociation for Computing Machineryen_US
dc.relation.isversionofhttps://doi.org/10.1145/3708553en_US
dc.rightsArticle is made available in accordance with the publisher's policy and may be subject to US copyright law. Please refer to the publisher's site for terms of use.en_US
dc.sourceAssociation for Computing Machineryen_US
dc.titleIt Is Time to Standardize Principles and Practices for Software Memory Safetyen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.citationWatson, Robert, Baldwin, John, Chen, Tony, Chisnall, David, Clarke, Jessica et al. 2025. "It Is Time to Standardize Principles and Practices for Software Memory Safety." Communications of the ACM, 68 (2).
dc.contributor.departmentLincoln Laboratory
dc.relation.journalCommunications of the ACMen_US
dc.identifier.mitlicensePUBLISHER_POLICY
dc.eprint.versionFinal published versionen_US
dc.type.urihttp://purl.org/eprint/type/JournalItemen_US
eprint.statushttp://purl.org/eprint/status/NonPeerRevieweden_US
dc.date.updated2025-02-01T08:58:19Z
dc.language.rfc3066en
dc.rights.holderThe author(s)
dspace.date.submission2025-02-01T08:58:20Z
mit.journal.volume68en_US
mit.journal.issue2en_US
mit.licensePUBLISHER_POLICY
mit.metadata.statusAuthority Work and Publication Information Neededen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record