The Open UniversitySkip to content

Arguing security: validating security requirements using structured argumentation

Haley, Charles B.; Moffett, Jonathan D.; Laney, Robin and Nuseibeh, Bashar (2005). Arguing security: validating security requirements using structured argumentation. In: Third Symposium on Requirements Engineering for Information Security (SREIS'05) held in conjunction with the 13th International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE'05), 29 Aug 2005, Paris, France.

Full text available as:
PDF (Not Set) - Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
Download (190Kb)
Google Scholar: Look up in Google Scholar


This paper proposes using both formal and structured informal arguments to show that an eventual realized system can satisfy its security requirements. These arguments, called 'satisfaction arguments', consist of two parts: a formal argument based upon claims about domain properties, and a set of informal arguments that justify the claims. Building on our earlier work on trust assumptions and security requirements, we show how using satisfaction arguments assists in clarifying how a system satisfies its security requirements, in the process identifying those properties of domains that are critical to the requirements.

Item Type: Conference Item
Keywords: argumentation; security requirements
Academic Unit/Department: Mathematics, Computing and Technology > Computing & Communications
Mathematics, Computing and Technology
Interdisciplinary Research Centre: Centre for Research in Computing (CRC)
Item ID: 2488
Depositing User: Charles Haley
Date Deposited: 12 Jun 2006
Last Modified: 25 Feb 2016 13:45
Share this page:

Actions (login may be required)

Policies | Disclaimer

© The Open University   + 44 (0)870 333 4340