Which approach is BEST for applying symbolic logic to validate software correctness early in the design stage with a meaningful degree of security confidence?
An automated scanning tool focused on known vulnerabilities
A code coverage technique that measures test completeness
A peer review process that relies on developer insights
A theorem-proving strategy that identifies logical flaws
A theorem-proving strategy uses precise mathematical modeling to confirm system behavior. This approach reveals security flaws that might not be detected through conventional testing alone. Automated scanning is based on known vulnerability patterns and may not expose deeper logical issues. Code coverage techniques confirm testing breadth but do not guarantee exhaustive logic checks. Peer reviews identify errors through human oversight but lack the rigor of symbolic proofs.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What is a theorem-proving strategy in software design?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
How does theorem proving differ from automated scanning tools?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
Why is theorem proving more effective than peer reviews for early security validation?