Until now, modular assurance cases in PREMIS could only be developed from the bottom up. That is, you had to develop the argumentation of all the modules, create interfaces, assign argument elements to the interfaces, and finally bind the modules. The result can be presented in an architecture diagram. This was a long and tedious […]
PREMIS, a containerized assurance case tool, will replace NOR-STA at the end of July. Containerization allows us to improve application portability, security, performance and maintainability. PREMIS will maintain the full range of NOR-STA features and the API, and will additionally offer new possibilities. Migrating from NOR-STA to PREMIS will be smooth for users and will […]
We will participate in 28th IEEE Pacific Rim International Symposium on Dependable Computing (PRDC 2023) in Singapore on 24-27 October. We will present our paper on System Assurance Reference Model (SARM). Join us at the conference to enjoy the event and learn more how reference model can improve generation and management of modular assurance case. […]
Modularity is an effective way of managing assurance case complexity, but is should be used in a systematic way to get benefits. This will be discussed by practitioners at the International Workshop on Modular Argumentation to Support Device Conformity Assessment (MASCA) which will be held on 19 September at SAFECOMP 2023 conference. The current state […]
Assurance case modules can be connected through three types of interfaces as they are defined in GSN Community Standard version 3: Away elements (citation) Support by module Support by contract In our post in May we presented a diagram comparing the types of interfaces but the presented diagram was a bit too simplified. An important […]
Assurance cases are usually presented in the form of diagrams, for example GSN or CAE. This is a convenient form of presenting the argument to others and familiarizing yourself with its content. However it is not the only way to present assurance cases. Another method is to use the textual or tabular form. We have […]
Modularisation is helpful in managing large and complex assurance cases. It also allows to distribute responsibilities and manage access rights on the level of single modules. Modularisation is required to enable reuse of arguments. NOR-STA implements modular argument metamodel defined in OMG SACM and extends it to implement three types of bindings between argument modules […]
Argevide is involved in the organization of the International Workshop on Modular Argumentation to Support Device Conformity Assessment (MASCA) which will be held on 19 September at SAFECOMP conference. With growing complexity of the systems also related assurance tasks become more complex and time-consuming. One way to tackle this challenge is to modularize the assurance […]
As the saying goes ‘it is about the journey, not the destination’. For us this also applies to assurance cases. They are dynamic objects which evolve in the system life cycle. What is important is the way how you manage the status and changes of the argument and the evidence to finally get and maintain […]
Assurance case development is not a trivial process. It involves several steps, firstly, to define the right goals and context, then to develop convincing line of reasoning and to collect valid supporting evidence. Many issues of unconvincing or bad structured argument, unsupported claims, incomplete or outdated evidence have to be resolved to produce a strong […]
NOR-STA support three assurance case model including GSN. The implementation of Core GSN as defined in GSN Community Standard version 3.0 was now complete. In NOR-STA version 7.9 released yesterday we delivered implementation of the last missing types of relations. Now you can in your argument in NOR-STA: define claims supported directly by other claims, […]
In current practice, assurance cases are being developed and assessed mostly manually. Automating these processes have a potential of saving time and money, as well as improving consistency between assurance cases and the related systems. The questions arise what can and what should be automated in argument development, evidence management, argument reviews and change management […]