@inproceedings{CoteHateburHeiseletal.2008, author = {C{\^o}t{\´e}, Isabelle and Hatebur, Denis and Heisel, Maritta and Schmidt, Holger and Wentzlaff, Ina}, title = {A Systematic Account of Problem Frames}, series = {Proceedings of the 12th European Conference on Pattern Languages of Programs (EuroPLoP '2007), Irsee, Germany, July 4-8, 2007.}, booktitle = {Proceedings of the 12th European Conference on Pattern Languages of Programs (EuroPLoP '2007), Irsee, Germany, July 4-8, 2007.}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Konstanz}, address = {Konstanz}, pages = {749 -- 767}, year = {2008}, abstract = {We give an enumeration of possible problem frames, based on domain characteristics, and comment on the usefulness of the obtained frames. In particular, we investigate problem domains and their characteristics in detail. This leads to fine-grained criteria for describing problem domains. As a result, we identify a new type of problem domain and come up with integrity conditions for developing useful problem frames. Taking a complete enumeration of possible problem frames (with at most three problem domains, of which only one is constrained) as a basis, we find 8 new problem frames, 7 of which we consider as useful in practical software development.}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{HateburHeiselSchmidt2008, author = {Hatebur, Denis and Heisel, Maritta and Schmidt, Holger}, title = {Analysis and Component-based Realization of Security Requirements}, series = {2008 Third International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security}, booktitle = {2008 Third International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security}, publisher = {IEEE}, address = {Barcelona}, isbn = {978-0-7695-3102-1}, doi = {10.1109/ARES.2008.27}, pages = {195 -- 203}, year = {2008}, abstract = {We present a process to develop secure software with an extensive pattern-based security requirements engineering phase. It supports identifying and analyzing conflicts between different security requirements. In the design phase, we proceed by selecting security software components that achieve security requirements. The process enables software developers to systematically identify, analyze, and finally realize security requirements using security software components. We illustrate our approach by a lawyer agency software example.}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{HateburHeiselSchmidt2008, author = {Hatebur, Denis and Heisel, Maritta and Schmidt, Holger}, title = {A Formal Metamodel for Problem Frames}, series = {Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems: 11th International Conference, MoDELS 2008, Toulouse, France, September 28 - October 3, 2008. Proceedings}, volume = {LNCS, 5301}, booktitle = {Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems: 11th International Conference, MoDELS 2008, Toulouse, France, September 28 - October 3, 2008. Proceedings}, editor = {Czarnecki, Krzysztof and Ober, Ileana and Bruel, Jean-Michel and Uhl, Axel and V{\"o}lter, Markus}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {Berlin, Heidelberg}, isbn = {978-3-540-87874-2}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-540-87875-9_5}, pages = {58 -- 82}, year = {2008}, abstract = {Problem frames are patterns for analyzing, structuring, and characterizing software development problems. This paper presents a formal metamodel for problem frames expressed in UML class diagrams and using the formal specification notation OCL. That metamodel clarifies the nature of the different syntactical elements of problem frames, as well as the relations between them. It provides a framework for syntactical analysis and semantic validation of newly defined problem frames, and it prepares the ground for tool support for the problem frame approach.}, language = {de} }