Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Foster, H.; Spanoudakis, G.; Mahbub, K. (2012)
Publisher: IEEE
Languages: English
Types: Article,Part of book or chapter of book
Subjects: QA75
With the increased awareness of security and safety of services in on-demand distributed service provisioning (such as the recent adoption of Cloud infrastructures), certification and compliance checking of services is becoming a key element for service engineering. Existing certification techniques tend to support mainly design-time checking of service properties and tend not to support the run-time monitoring and progressive certification in the service execution environment. In this paper we discuss an approach which provides both design-time and runtime behavioural compliance checking for a services architecture, through enabling a progressive event-driven model-checking technique. Providing an integrated approach to certification and compliance is a challenge however using analysis and monitoring techniques we present such an approach for on-going compliance checking.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • [1] C. Hang, Y. Wang, and S. M.P., “Operators for propagating trust and their evaluation in social networks,” in 8th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS). Budapest, Hungary: ACM, 2009.
    • [2] L. Wilkes, “Policy driven practices for soa,” in presented at the CBDI SOA Seminar, 2006.
    • [3] H. Foster, S. Uchitel, J. Magee, and J. Kramer, “An integrated workbench for model-based engineering of service compositions,” IEEE Transactions on Services Computing, vol. 3, pp. 131-144, 2010.
    • [4] ASSERT4SOA, “Advanced security service certificate for soa,” in EU Project ICT-2009.1.4., Available from: http://assert4soa.eu/, 2009.
    • [5] H. Foster and G. Spanoudakis, “Advanced service monitoring configurations with sla decomposition and selection,” in Proceedings of the 2011 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, ser. SAC '11. New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2011, pp. 1582-1589. [Online]. Available: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1982185.1982519
    • [6] R. Milner, Communication and Concurrency. NJ, USA.: Prentice-Hall Inc, 1989.
    • [7] J. Magee, J. Kramer, and D. Giannakopoulou, “Analysing the behaviour of distributed software architectures: a case study,” in 5th IEEE Workshop on Future Trends of Distributed Computing Systems, Tunisia, 1997.
    • [8] J. Magee and J. Kramer, Concurrency - State Models and Java Programs - 2nd Edition. John Wiley, 2006.
    • [9] G. Spanoudakis and K. Mahbub, “Non intrusive monitoring of service based systems,” International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems, vol. 15, pp. 325-358, 2006.
    • [10] G. Spanoudakis, C. Kloukinas, and K. Mahbub, “The serenity runtime monitoring framework,” Security and Dependability for Ambient Intelligence, Advances in Information Security Series, vol. 15, 2009.
    • [11] K. Mahbub, G. Spanoudakis, and T. Tsigkritis, “Translation of slas into monitoring specifications,” in Service Level Agreements for Cloud Computing, R. Yahyapour, P. Weider (eds). Springer-Verlag, 2011.
    • [12] Ruopeng Lu, Shazia Sadiq, Guido Governatori, and Xiaoping Yang, “Defining adaptation constraints for business process variants,” in 12th International Conference on Business Information Systems, Poznan, Poland, 2009.
    • [13] A. Rozinat and W. M. P. van der Aalst, “Conformance checking of processes based on monitoring real behavior,” Inf. Syst., vol. 33, pp. 64-95, March 2008. [Online]. Available: http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1316082.1316257
    • [14] A.J.M.M. Weijters and W.M.P van der Aalst, “Process mining discovering workflow models from event-based data,” in Proceedings of the ECAI Workshop on Knowledge Discovery and Spatial Data, 2001, pp. 283-290.
    • [15] L. Baresi and S. Guinea, “Towards dynamic monitoring of ws-bpel processes,” in ICSOC, ser. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, B. Benatallah, F. Casati, and P. Traverso, Eds., vol. 3826. Springer, 2005, pp. 269-282.
    • [16] O. Moser, F. Rosenberg, and S. Dustdar, “Non-intrusive monitoring and service adaptation for ws-bpel,” in Proceedings of the 17th international conference on World Wide Web, ser. WWW '08. New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2008, pp. 815-824. [Online]. Available: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1367497.1367607
    • [17] M. Reichert and P. Dadam, “Adaptflex: Supporting dynamic changes of workflow without loosing control,” Journal of Intelligent Information Systems, vol. 10, pp. 93-129, 1998.
    • [18] W. Ma, V. Tosic, B. Esfandiari, and B. Pagurek, “Extending apache axis for monitoring of web service offerings,” in Proceedings of the IEEE EEE05 international workshop on Business services networks, 2005.
    • [19] S. Nakajima, “Model-checking verification for reliable web service,” in Workshop on Object-Oriented Web Services at OOPSLA, Seattle, Washington, 2002.
    • [20] F. Leymann, “Web services flow language specification (wsfl 1.0),” IBM, Tech. Rep., 2001.
    • [21] S. Nakajima, “On verifying web service flows,” in The 2002 International Symposium on Applications and the Internet (SAINT02), Nara city, Nara, Japan, 2002.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Download from

Published in

Funded by projects


Cite this article