Dependability in FP 6 Brian Randell Pisa Workshop, November 2002

2 An “FP6 Dependability Initiative” Our original suggestion (a year ago) was for an official IST Dependability Initiative (ISDI), encompassing all of IST’s activities in dependability, security, trust & confidence, etc. - a “Son of DEPPY” The “new instruments” and associated policies make this infeasible across multiple IP’s/NoE’s But it is feasible to create an IP/NoE pair that facilitates achievement of similar overall goals by Taking a holistic approach to dependability Setting up, by prior agreement, means of co-ordination with other related IP’s and NoE’s

Pisa Workshop, November A Holistic Approach System Dependability needs to be treated holistically, to: cover all potentially relevant dependability attributes, since a balance is invariably needed allow for all types of faults — e.g. intermittent h/w faults, s/w specification and design faults, human-machine interaction faults including intrusions make use, as appropriate, of all major means for achieving dependability means: fault prevention (rigorous design), fault tolerance, fault removal (verification and validation), fault prediction (system evaluation) but also involve other relevant disciplines: legal, cognitive ergonomics, socio-economic. cope with dependability threats (fault/error/failure) “chains” between systems, via system interaction, composition and creation

Pisa Workshop, November A Set of “Co-ordination” Activities Links to other research communities, and in particular to related IP’s and NoE’s Policy support International co-operation Knowledge sharing platform Education & training, and “best practice” Synergies between DeSIRE and DeFINE

Pisa Workshop, November Links to other IP’s and NoE’s DeSIRE/DeFINE will contribute to the goal of achieving an overall FP6 IST Dependability Initiative through their nature and aims, and via overlapping activities with other IPs and NoEs in specific dependability-critical application domains, and on particular dependability-related technologies, e.g.: Embedded Systems Aeronautics, health care, etc. Security, privacy Risk Management Collaboration with other IP’s and NoE’s should provide mutual benefits but without creating additional risks for parties involved. Loose coupling: express intent for collaboration, provide place-holder tasks for collaboration but fill in after a certain progress of the projects. Link to relevant research community if their IP/NoE does not go ahead

Pisa Workshop, November Policy support European Research Area: Strengthen co-operation between national and EU activities Dependability policy research –Policy options, public-private partnership models Scientific support to policy making process –Prospective research on novel dependability drivers, frameworks and computing models (AmI, etc) –Inventory of R&D and other initiatives –Outreach: interface between dependability R&D community and policy makers

Pisa Workshop, November International Collaboration Turn the extended discussions with DARPA and NSF on collaboration with complementary research communities in the USA on dependability into reality Investigate other possible international collaborations In particular, for areas such as critical infrastructure protection and intrusion management, targeted international collaboration is an evident necessity

Pisa Workshop, November Knowledge sharing platforms Common workshops Technology assessment –Impact of open source solutions –Demonstrators –Compliance with standards and regulatory requirements Reference databases –Concepts –Incidents/attacks indicators

Pisa Workshop, November Education & Training, and Best Practice Selection and development of dependability curricula Specific actions targeted to the Accession Countries ”Investigation of the practicality of a “dependability-enhanced” CMM (CMU Software Engineering Institute’s Capability Maturity Model)

Pisa Workshop, November Synergies - DeSIRE and DeFINE Centred on, and organised via, the common concern for the four major technologies for achieving dependability: –fault prevention (rigorous design), fault tolerance, fault removal (verification and validation), and fault forecasting (system evaluation) Effective channels for feedback between system developers and technology researchers: –Identification of strengths and limitations of best current tools and techniques –Selection of future research priorities

Pisa Workshop, November One view of DeSIRE Aerospace Fault Forecasting e-Business Healthcare Infrastructure Inter- dependencies Dependability Case Support Intrusion Management Modelling And Simulation Training, Best Practice Application Studies Tools and Components Support Measures || Fault Tolerance Fault Removal Fault Prevention Dependability Policy Support

Pisa Workshop, November A similar view of DeFINE Open Infrastructure Fault Forecasting Proactive Computing Mobile Computing Embedded Systems Critical Infrastructure Protection Concepts Policy Issues Support Measures | Fault Tolerance Fault Removal Fault Prevention Education