DOCSLIB.ORG

Security Target Pikeos Separation Kernel V4.2.2

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Security Target Pikeos Separation Kernel V4.2.2 Security Target PikeOS Separation Kernel v4.2.2 Document ID Revision DOORS Baseline Date State 00101-8000-ST 20.6 N.A. 2018-10-10 App Author: Dominic Eschweiler SYSGO AG Am Pfaffenstein 14, D-55270 Klein-Winternheim Notice: The contents of this document are proprietary to SYSGO AG and shall not be disclosed, disseminated, copied, or used except for purposes expressly authorized in writing by SYSGO AG. Doc. ID: 00101-8000-ST Revision: 20.6 This page intentionally left blank Copyright 2018 Page 2 of 47 All rights reserved. SYSGO AG Doc. ID: 00101-8000-ST Revision: 20.6 This page intentionally left blank Copyright 2018 Page 3 of 47 All rights reserved. SYSGO AG Doc. ID: 00101-8000-ST Revision: 20.6 Table of Contents 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 6 1.1 Purpose of this Document ........................................................................................... 6 1.2 Document References ................................................................................................ 6 1.2.1 Applicable Documents......................................................................................... 6 1.2.2 Referenced Documents ....................................................................................... 6 1.3 Abbreviations and Acronyms ....................................................................................... 6 1.4 Terms and Definitions................................................................................................. 8 1.5 Imperative Terms ..................................................................................................... 11 2 ST Introduction ............................................................................................................. 12 2.1 ST Reference .......................................................................................................... 12 2.2 TOE Re fe rence ....................................................................................................... 12 2.3 TOE Overview ......................................................................................................... 12 2.3.1 Usage and Major Security Services of the TOE ..................................................... 12 2.3.2 TOE Type ....................................................................................................... 13 2.4 TOE Description ...................................................................................................... 13 2.4.1 TOE Architec tu re.............................................................................................. 13 2.4.2 TOE ............................................................................................................... 14 2.4.3 TOE Operational Environment ............................................................................ 14 2.4.4 TOE Life Cycle................................................................................................. 16 2.4.5 TOE Physical Boundary .................................................................................... 18 2.4.6 TOE Logical Boundary ...................................................................................... 20 3 Conformance Claims ..................................................................................................... 21 3.1 CC Conformance Claim ............................................................................................ 21 3.2 Protection Profile Claim ............................................................................................ 21 3.3 Package Claim ........................................................................................................ 21 3.4 Conformance Rationale ............................................................................................ 21 4 Security Problem Definition ............................................................................................ 22 4.1 A sse t s.................................................................................................................... 22 4.2 Threats................................................................................................................... 23 4.3 Organizational Security Policies ................................................................................. 23 4.4 Assumptions ........................................................................................................... 23 5 Security Objectives ....................................................................................................... 25 5.1 Security Objectives for the TOE ................................................................................. 25 5.2 Security Objectives for the Operational Environment ..................................................... 25 5.3 Security Objectives Rationale .................................................................................... 26 5.3.1 Security Objectives Rationale: Threats ................................................................ 27 Copyright 2018 Page 4 of 47 All rights reserved. SYSGO AG Doc. ID: 00101-8000-ST Revision: 20.6 5.3.2 Security Objectives Rationale: Assumptions ......................................................... 28 6 Extended Components Definition .................................................................................... 29 7 Security Requirements................................................................................................... 30 7.1 Security Functional Requirements .............................................................................. 30 7.1.1 User Data Protection (FDP) ............................................................................... 30 7.1.2 Identification and Authentication (FIA).................................................................. 38 7.1.3 Security Management (FMT) .............................................................................. 38 7.1.4 Resource Utilization (FRU) ................................................................................ 40 7.2 Security Assurance Requirements .............................................................................. 41 7.3 Security Requirements Rationale ............................................................................... 41 7.3.1 Security Objective: OT.CONFIDENTIALITY.......................................................... 43 7.3.2 Security Objective: OT.INTEGRITY ..................................................................... 43 7.3.3 Security Objective: OT.RESOURCE_AVAILABILITY.............................................. 44 7.3.4 Security Objective: OT.API_PROTECTION .......................................................... 44 7.3.5 Security Assurance Requirements Rationale ........................................................ 44 7.3.6 Security Assurance Requirements Dependency Analysis ....................................... 44 8 TOE Summary Specification ........................................................................................... 45 9 Acknowledgment .......................................................................................................... 47 List of Figures Figu re 1: TOE and TOE Operational Environment during Operational Use ................................... 13 Figu re 2: System Integration Phase of the TOE Lifecycle .......................................................... 17 List of Tables Table 1: Applicable Documents ............................................................................................... 6 Table 2: Referenced Documents ............................................................................................. 6 Table 3: Abbreviations and Acronyms ...................................................................................... 7 Table 4: Assets ................................................................................................................... 23 Table 5: Security Objectives Rationale ................................................................................... 27 Table 6: Coverage of Security Objectives for the TOE by SFR. “X” is for where a dependency to an objective exists. .................................................................................................................. 42 Copyright 2018 Page 5 of 47 All rights reserved. SYSGO AG Doc. ID: 00101-8000-ST Revision: 20.6 1 Introduction 1.1 Purpose of this Document This is the Security Target for the PikeOS Separation Kernel. 1.2 Document References 1.2.1 Applicable Documents Ref. Document ID - Document Title Ve rsion [Com12] Common Criteria Sponsoring Organizations, Common Criteria for 3.1, revision Information Technology Security Evaluation. Version 3.1, revision 4 4 (final), September 2012, http://www.commoncriteriaportal.org/thecc.html. Table 1: Applicable Documents 1.2.2 Referenced Documents Ref. Document ID - Document Title [ANSSI15] Agence nationale de la sécurité des systèmes d'information, Référentiel général de sécurité, Processus de qualification d'un produit de sécurité - niveau standard - version 1.2, 2015, https://www.ssi.gouv.fr/uploads/2015/07/RGS_qualif_standard_version_1- 2.pdf. [Bun08] Bundesamt für Sicherheit in der Informationstechnik (BSI) and Sirrix AG security technologies, Protection Profile for High-Assurance Security Kernel: Version 1.14, June 2008, http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.sirrix.com/media/downloads/54500.pdf. [Inf07] Information
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Real-Time, Safe and Certified OS
    Real-Time, Safe and Certified OS Roman Kapl <[email protected]> drivers, customer projects, development Tomas Martinec <[email protected]> testing and certification © SYSGO AG · INTERNAL 1 Introduction • PikeOS – real-time, safety certified OS • Desktop and Server vs. • Embedded • Real-Time • Safety-Critical • Certified • Differences • Scheduling • Resource management • Features • Development © SYSGO AG · INTERNAL 2 Certification • Testing • Analysis • Lot of time • Even more paper • Required for safety-critical systems • Trains • Airplanes © SYSGO AG · INTERNAL 3 PikeOS • Embedded, real-time, certified OS • ~150 people (not just engineers) • Rail • Avionics • Space • This presentation is not about PikeOS specifically © SYSGO AG · INTERNAL 4 PikeOS technical • Microkernel • Inspired by L4 • Memory protection (MMU) • More complex than FreeRTOS • Virtualization hypervisor • X86, ARM, SPARC, PowerPC • Eclipse IDE for development © SYSGO AG · INTERNAL 5 Personalities • General • POSIX • Linux • Domain specific • ARINC653 • PikeOS native • Other • Ada, RT JAVA, AUTOSAR, ITRON, RTEMS © SYSGO AG · INTERNAL 6 PikeOS Architecture App. App. App. App. App. App. Volume Syste m Provider Partition PikeOS Para-Virtualized HW Virtualized File System (Native, POSIX, Guest OS PikeOS Native ARINC653, ...) Guest OS Linux, Android Linux, Android Device Driver User Space / Partitions Syste m PikeOS System Software ExtensionSyste m Extension PikeOS Microkernel Kernel Space / Hypervisor Architecture Platform Kernel Level Support Package Support Package Driver SoC /
    [Show full text]
  • Sistemi Operativi Real-Time Marco Cesati Lezione R13 Sistemi Operativi Real-Time – II Schema Della Lezione
    Sistemi operativi real-time Marco Cesati Lezione R13 Sistemi operativi real-time – II Schema della lezione Caratteristiche comuni VxWorks LynxOS Sistemi embedded e real-time QNX eCos Windows Linux come RTOS 15 gennaio 2013 Marco Cesati Dipartimento di Ingegneria Civile e Ingegneria Informatica Università degli Studi di Roma Tor Vergata SERT’13 R13.1 Sistemi operativi Di cosa parliamo in questa lezione? real-time Marco Cesati In questa lezione descriviamo brevemente alcuni dei più diffusi sistemi operativi real-time Schema della lezione Caratteristiche comuni VxWorks LynxOS 1 Caratteristiche comuni degli RTOS QNX 2 VxWorks eCos 3 LynxOS Windows Linux come RTOS 4 QNX Neutrino 5 eCos 6 Windows Embedded CE 7 Linux come RTOS SERT’13 R13.2 Sistemi operativi Caratteristiche comuni dei principali RTOS real-time Marco Cesati Corrispondenza agli standard: generalmente le API sono proprietarie, ma gli RTOS offrono anche compatibilità (compliancy) o conformità (conformancy) allo standard Real-Time POSIX Modularità e Scalabilità: il kernel ha una dimensione Schema della lezione Caratteristiche comuni (footprint) ridotta e le sue funzionalità sono configurabili VxWorks Dimensione del codice: spesso basati su microkernel LynxOS QNX Velocità e Efficienza: basso overhead per cambi di eCos contesto, latenza delle interruzioni e primitive di Windows sincronizzazione Linux come RTOS Porzioni di codice non interrompibile: generalmente molto corte e di durata predicibile Gestione delle interruzioni “separata”: interrupt handler corto e predicibile, ISR lunga
    [Show full text]
  • Performance Study of Real-Time Operating Systems for Internet Of
    IET Software Research Article ISSN 1751-8806 Performance study of real-time operating Received on 11th April 2017 Revised 13th December 2017 systems for internet of things devices Accepted on 13th January 2018 E-First on 16th February 2018 doi: 10.1049/iet-sen.2017.0048 www.ietdl.org Rafael Raymundo Belleza1 , Edison Pignaton de Freitas1 1Institute of Informatics, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Av. Bento Gonçalves, 9500, CP 15064, Porto Alegre CEP: 91501-970, Brazil E-mail: [email protected] Abstract: The development of constrained devices for the internet of things (IoT) presents lots of challenges to software developers who build applications on top of these devices. Many applications in this domain have severe non-functional requirements related to timing properties, which are important concerns that have to be handled. By using real-time operating systems (RTOSs), developers have greater productivity, as they provide native support for real-time properties handling. Some of the key points in the software development for IoT in these constrained devices, like task synchronisation and network communications, are already solved by this provided real-time support. However, different RTOSs offer different degrees of support to the different demanded real-time properties. Observing this aspect, this study presents a set of benchmark tests on the selected open source and proprietary RTOSs focused on the IoT. The benchmark results show that there is no clear winner, as each RTOS performs well at least on some criteria, but general conclusions can be drawn on the suitability of each of them according to their performance evaluation in the obtained results.
    [Show full text]
  • Us 2019 / 0319868 A1
    US 20190319868A1 ( 19) United States (12 ) Patent Application Publication ( 10) Pub . No. : US 2019 /0319868 A1 Svennebring et al. ( 43 ) Pub . Date : Oct. 17 , 2019 ( 54 ) LINK PERFORMANCE PREDICTION (52 ) U . S . CI. TECHNOLOGIES CPC .. .. H04L 43/ 0882 (2013 . 01 ); H04W 24 /08 ( 2013 . 01 ) (71 ) Applicant : Intel Corporation , Santa Clara , CA (57 ) ABSTRACT (US ) Various systems and methods for determining and commu nicating Link Performance Predictions (LPPs ), such as in ( 72 ) Inventors : Jonas Svennebring , Sollentuna (SE ) ; connection with management of radio communication links, Antony Vance Jeyaraj, Bengaluru ( IN ) are discussed herein . The LPPs are predictions of future network behaviors /metrics ( e . g . , bandwidth , latency , capac (21 ) Appl . No. : 16 /452 , 352 ity , coverage holes , etc . ) . The LPPs are communicated to applications and /or network infrastructure, which allows the applications/ infrastructure to make operational decisions for ( 22 ) Filed : Jun . 25 , 2019 improved signaling / link resource utilization . In embodi ments , the link performance analysis is divided into multiple layers that determine their own link performance metrics, Publication Classification which are then fused together to make an LPP. Each layer (51 ) Int . Cl. runs different algorithms, and provides respective results to H04L 12 / 26 ( 2006 .01 ) an LPP layer /engine that fuses the results together to obtain H04W 24 / 08 (2006 .01 ) the LPP . Other embodiments are described and / or claimed . 700 Spatio - Temporal History Data Tx1 : C1 TIDE _ 1, DE _ 2 . .. Txt : C2 T2 DE _ 1 , DE _ 2 , . .. win Txs : C3 122 T : DE _ 1, DE _ 2 , .. TN DE _ 1 , DE _ 2 .. TxN : CN CELL LOAD MODEL 710 Real- Time Data 744 704 Patent Application Publication Oct.
    [Show full text]
  • Embedded Operating Systems
    7 Embedded Operating Systems Claudio Scordino1, Errico Guidieri1, Bruno Morelli1, Andrea Marongiu2,3, Giuseppe Tagliavini3 and Paolo Gai1 1Evidence SRL, Italy 2Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich (ETHZ), Switzerland 3University of Bologna, Italy In this chapter, we will provide a description of existing open-source operating systems (OSs) which have been analyzed with the objective of providing a porting for the reference architecture described in Chapter 2. Among the various possibilities, the ERIKA Enterprise RTOS (Real-Time Operating System) and Linux with preemption patches have been selected. A description of the porting effort on the reference architecture has also been provided. 7.1 Introduction In the past, OSs for high-performance computing (HPC) were based on custom-tailored solutions to fully exploit all performance opportunities of supercomputers. Nowadays, instead, HPC systems are being moved away from in-house OSs to more generic OS solutions like Linux. Such a trend can be observed in the TOP500 list [1] that includes the 500 most powerful supercomputers in the world, in which Linux dominates the competition. In fact, in around 20 years, Linux has been capable of conquering all the TOP500 list from scratch (for the first time in November 2017). Each manufacturer, however, still implements specific changes to the Linux OS to better exploit specific computer hardware features. This is especially true in the case of computing nodes in which lightweight kernels are used to speed up the computation. 173 174 Embedded Operating Systems Figure 7.1 Number of Linux-based supercomputers in the TOP500 list. Linux is a full-featured OS, originally designed to be used in server or desktop environments.
    [Show full text]
  • Parallel Processing with the MPPA Manycore Processor
    Parallel Processing with the MPPA Manycore Processor Kalray MPPA® Massively Parallel Processor Array Benoît Dupont de Dinechin, CTO 14 Novembre 2018 Outline Presentation Manycore Processors Manycore Programming Symmetric Parallel Models Untimed Dataflow Models Kalray MPPA® Hardware Kalray MPPA® Software Model-Based Programming Deep Learning Inference Conclusions Page 2 ©2018 – Kalray SA All Rights Reserved KALRAY IN A NUTSHELL We design processors 4 ~80 people at the heart of new offices Grenoble, Sophia (France), intelligent systems Silicon Valley (Los Altos, USA), ~70 engineers Yokohama (Japan) A unique technology, Financial and industrial shareholders result of 10 years of development Pengpai Page 3 ©2018 – Kalray SA All Rights Reserved KALRAY: PIONEER OF MANYCORE PROCESSORS #1 Scalable Computing Power #2 Data processing in real time Completion of dozens #3 of critical tasks in parallel #4 Low power consumption #5 Programmable / Open system #6 Security & Safety Page 4 ©2018 – Kalray SA All Rights Reserved OUTSOURCED PRODUCTION (A FABLESS BUSINESS MODEL) PARTNERSHIP WITH THE WORLD LEADER IN PROCESSOR MANUFACTURING Sub-contracted production Signed framework agreement with GUC, subsidiary of TSMC (world top-3 in semiconductor manufacturing) Limited investment No expansion costs Production on the basis of purchase orders Page 5 ©2018 – Kalray SA All Rights Reserved INTELLIGENT DATA CENTER : KEY COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGES First “NVMe-oF all-in-one” certified solution * 8x more powerful than the latest products announced by our competitors**
    [Show full text]
  • A Security Architecture for Accessing Health Records on Mobile Phones
    A SECURITY ARCHITECTURE FOR ACCESSING HEALTH RECORDS ON MOBILE PHONES Alexandra Dmitrienko, Zecir Hadzic, Hans Lohr,¨ Marcel Winandy Horst Gortz¨ Institute for IT Security, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bochum, Germany Ahmad-Reza Sadeghi Fraunhofer-Institut SIT Darmstadt, Technische Universitat¨ Darmstadt, Darmstadt, Germany Keywords: Health records, Mobile computing, Smartphone, Security architecture, Trusted computing. Abstract: Using mobile phones to access healthcare data is an upcoming application scenario of increasing importance in the near future. However, important aspects to consider in this context are the high security and privacy requirements for sensitive medical data. Current mobile phones using standard operating systems and software cannot offer appropriate protection for sensitive data, although the hardware platform often offers dedicated security features. Malicious software (malware) like Trojan horses on the mobile phone could gain unautho- rized access to sensitive medical data. In this paper, we propose a complete security framework to protect medical data (such as electronic health records) and authentication credentials that are used to access e-health servers. Derived from a generic archi- tecture that can be used for PCs, we introduce a security architecture specifically for mobile phones, based on existing hardware security extensions. We describe security building blocks, including trusted hardware features, a security kernel providing isolated application environments as well as a secure graphical user in- terface, and a trusted wallet (TruWallet) for secure authentication to e-health servers. Moreover, we present a prototype implementation of the trusted wallet on a current smartphone: the Nokia N900. Based on our architecture, health care professionals can safely and securely process medical data on their mobile phones without the risk of disclosing sensitive information as compared to commodity mobile operating systems.
    [Show full text]
  • NEWS RELEASE for IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: John Wranovics M: 925.640.6402 [email protected]
    NEWS RELEASE FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: John Wranovics M: 925.640.6402 [email protected] Curtiss-Wright Showcases Latest Avionics Solutions at Avionics Expo 2019 AVIONICS EXPO – AEROSPACE TECH WEEK 2019, MOC Event Center, Munich, Germany (Booth A17) – March 12-13, 2019 – Curtiss-Wright’s Defense Solutions division today announced that it will be displaying its latest avionics products at Avionics Expo, Munich Germany, March 12- 13, 2019 (Booth A17). The products featured in Curtiss-Wright’s booth include: DO-254/DO-178 Safety-certifiable 3U and 6U OpenVPX™ single board computers Rugged airborne video management system solutions including a rugged 21'' touchscreen LCD Advance Video Display Unit (AVDU), Video Recorder, Video Switch and Converter Flight Test Instrumentation (FTI) products including the KAM-500 and Axon family of Data Acquisition Units (DAU) The Fortress™ Flight Data Recorder, and… An ultra-compact mission processor system (the Parvus® DuraCOR® 311) and networking system (Parvus DuraNET® 20-11). Live Demonstrations of Curtiss-Wright Products: In addition to a wide range of proven COTS modules and systems, Curtiss-Wright collaborated with other leading technology partners for live demonstrations of open architecture products hosted in the partners’ booths: Featured in Green Hills Software’s Booth - A64 - “Green Hills Software® INTEGRITY-178 tuMPTM for Avionics Systems” The Avionics Systems Demo features Green Hills Software’s INTEGRITY-178 tuMP DO-178B Level A Safety Certified and Future Airborne Capability Environment (FACE™) Conformant RTOS. Curtiss-Wright Corporation Page 2 INTEGRITY-178 will be demonstrated on a Curtiss-Wright’s safety-certifiable VPX3-152 3U OpenVPX NXP® Power Architecture® T2080 SBC and VPX3-716 3U OpenVPX AMD E8860 Graphics Processing Module.
    [Show full text]
  • Freescale Embedded Solutions Based on ARM Technology Guide
    Embedded Solutions Based on ARM Technology Kinetis MCUs MAC5xxx MCUs i.MX applications processors QorIQ communications processors Vybrid controller solutions freescale.com/ARM ii Freescale Embedded Solutions Based on ARM Technology Table of Contents ARM Solutions Portfolio 2 i.MX Applications Processors 18 i.MX 6 series applications processors 20 Freescale Embedded Solutions Chart 4 i.MX53 applications processors 22 i.MX28 applications processors 23 Kinetis MCUs 6 Kinetis K series MCUs 7 i.MX and QorIQ Kinetis L series MCUs 9 Processor Comparison 24 Kinetis E series MCUs 11 Kinetis V series MCUs 12 Kinetis M series MCUs 13 QorIQ Communications Kinetis W series MCUs 14 Processors 25 Kinetis EA series MCUs 15 QorIQ LS1 family 26 QorIQ LS2 family 29 MAC5xxx MCUs 16 MAC57D5xx MCUs 17 Vybrid Controller Solutions 31 Vybrid VF3xx family 33 Vybrid VF5xx family 34 Vybrid VF6xx family 35 Design Resources 36 Freescale Enablement Solutions 37 Freescale Connect Partner Enablement Solutions 51 freescale.com/ARM 1 Scalable. Innovative. Leading. Your Number One Choice for ARM Solutions Freescale is the leader in embedded control, offering the market’s broadest and best-enabled portfolio of solutions based on ARM® technology. Our end-to-end portfolio of high-performance, power-efficient MCUs and digital networking processors help realize the potential of the Internet of Things, reflecting our unique ability to deliver scalable, systems- focused processing and connectivity. Our large ARM-powered portfolio includes enablement (software and tool) bundles scalable MCU and MPU families from small from Freescale and the extensive ARM ultra-low-power Kinetis MCUs to i.MX ecosystem.
    [Show full text]
  • Evolution of the Pikeos Microkernel
    Evolution of the PikeOS Microkernel Robert Kaiser Stephan Wagner SYSGO AG, Klein-Winternheim, and SYSGO AG, Klein-Winternheim Distributed Systems Lab, University of Applied Sciences, Wiesbaden E-mail: {rob,swa}@sysgo.com Abstract as such it can host an operating system along with its world of application programs (see Figure 1). Since partitions op- The PikeOS microkernel is targeted at real-time embed- erate on separate sets of resources, they are completely iso- ded systems. Its main goal is to provide a partitioned envi- lated and there is no way for a program in one partition to ronment for multiple operating systems with different design affect another partition 2. In this way, multiple ”guest” op- goals to coexist in a single machine. It was initially mod- erating systems are able to coexist in a single machine and elled after the L4 microkernel and has gradually evolved their individual functionalities can be tailored to match the over the years of its application to the real-time, embedded requirements of their application programs. Thus, applica- systems space. This paper describes the concepts that were tions are no longer forced to unconditionally trust a huge added or removed during this evolution and it provides the monolithic kernel containing a lot of complex functionali- rationale behind these design decisions. ties that the application may or may not need. Instead, each subsystem can choose the amount of code that it wants to trust: It can trade complexity for trust. 1 Introduction In complex embedded systems, there frequently ex- ist applications with very different temporal requirements: some must guarantee timely service under all circumstances Microkernels have been receiving new attention during while others have no such constraint, but are instead ex- the recent years.
    [Show full text]
  • Rtzvisor: a Secure and Safe Real-Time Hypervisor
    electronics Article mRTZVisor: A Secure and Safe Real-Time Hypervisor José Martins †, João Alves †, Jorge Cabral ID , Adriano Tavares ID and Sandro Pinto * ID Centro Algoritmi, Universidade do Minho, 4800-058 Guimarães, Portugal; [email protected] (J.M.); [email protected] (J.A.); [email protected] (J.C.); [email protected] (A.T.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +351-253-510-180 † These authors contributed equally to this work. Received: 29 September 2017; Accepted: 24 October 2017; Published: 30 October 2017 Abstract: Virtualization has been deployed as a key enabling technology for coping with the ever growing complexity and heterogeneity of modern computing systems. However, on its own, classical virtualization is a poor match for modern endpoint embedded system requirements such as safety, security and real-time, which are our main target. Microkernel-based approaches to virtualization have been shown to bridge the gap between traditional and embedded virtualization. This notwithstanding, existent microkernel-based solutions follow a highly para-virtualized approach, which inherently requires a significant software engineering effort to adapt guest operating systems (OSes) to run as userland components. In this paper, we present mRTZVisor as a new TrustZone-assisted hypervisor that distinguishes itself from state-of-the-art TrustZone solutions by implementing a microkernel-like architecture while following an object-oriented approach. Contrarily to existing microkernel-based solutions, mRTZVisor is able to run nearly unmodified guest OSes, while, contrarily to existing TrustZone-assisted solutions, it provides a high degree of functionality and configurability, placing strong emphasis on the real-time support.
    [Show full text]
  • Pikeos Product Note
    SYSGO Product Note PikeOS 5 Certifiable RTOS with Hypervisor Functionality INTRODUCTION The Internet of Things (IoT) consists of billions of highly integrated, multi- functional smart devices in a digital network. Application software, cloud services and critical control tasks have to collaborate seamlessly. Hence, the underlying operating system must act as a catalyst and bring together general IT and embedded capabilities. That’s why SYSGO developed PikeOS. This real-time operating system offers a separation kernel-based hypervisor with multiple partitions for many other operating systems and applications. It enables customers to build smart devices for the Internet of Things according to the quality, Safety and Security standards of different industries. The concept of PikeOS combines real-time operating system (RTOS), virtualization platform and Eclipse-based integrated development environment (IDE) for embedded systems. The PikeOS real-time operating system has been developed for Safety and Security-critical applications with certification needs in the fields of Aerospace & Defense, Automotive & Transportation, Industrial Automation & Medical, Network Infrastructures and Consumer Electronics. www.sysgo.com SYSGO Product Note PikeOS 5.0 - Certified RTOS with Hypervisor Functionality TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction 3 2. Key Users 4 3. Most visible Use Cases 4 4. Key Benefits of PikeOS 4 5. Where can PikeOS help reducing total Cost of Ownership? 4 6. How can PikeOS help reducing Risks? 5 7. Guest OS Types 5 8. Standard Drivers 5 9. Optional Drivers 5 10. IDE: CODEO (also with QEMU) 5 11. Host System Environment for Linux 6 12. Host System Environment for Windows 6 13. Other Tools 6 14.
    [Show full text]