Principles and Approaches to Ensuring the Functional Safety of Computing and Communication Systems Components

O.Ya. Bezhaeva


- In this paper, the principles and approaches to ensuring the functional safety of computing and communication systems components are formulated. The properties of defects as varieties of complex controlled systems are considered. The conceptual basis of the research is a systematic combination of proactive, active and reactive approaches to the management of defects of different nature. The consideration of defects as a variety of complex systems creates a methodological basis for the scientifically based adaptation of approaches, methods and models that have proven themselves in solving problems of complex systems management of a different nature in the field of functional safety management. As an example, the paper shows architectural models that characterize various aspects of functional safety. Architectural models form the basis for solving direct tasks of ensuring functional safety: the study of problem situations, caused by the presence of various defects in the organization of projects and in software products. Within the system approach, the conceptual foundations of ensuring the functional safety of computing and communication systems components are formulated.

Full Text:

PDF (Russian)


Schuh, G. Industrie 4.0 Maturity Index Managing the Digital Transformation of Companies / G. Schuh, R. Anderl, J. Gausemeier, M. Hompel, W. Wahlster // Acatech STUDY, 2018. – 60 p.

J. Reason, E. Hollnagel, J. Paries, “Revisiting the “Swiss Cheese” Model of Accidents”, EEC Note No. 13/06. European Organization for the Safety of Air Navigation, October 2006, 25 p.

Brooks, Frederick P., “No Silver Bullet: Essence and Accidents of Software Engineering”. Computer, Vol. 20, No. 4 (April 1987) pp. 10-19. (DOI: 10.1109/MC.1987.1663532)

Huang F, Liu B. Software defect prevention based on human error theories. Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, 2017; 30 (3): 1054-1070. (DOI:10.1016/J.CJA.2017.03.005)

Shappell SA, Weigmann DA. The Human Factors Analysis and Classification System – HFACS. Final Report, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration; 2000.

Carver, J.C. Defect prevention in requirements using human error information: An empirical study. / J.C. Carver, W. Hu, V. Anu, G. Walia, G. Bradshaw // Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality - 23rd International Working Conference, REFSQ 2017. – P. 61-76. –

Hu, Wenhua & Carver, Jeffrey & Anu, Vaibhav & Walia, Gursimran & Bradshaw, Gary. (2016). Detection of Requirement Errors and Faults via a Human Error Taxonomy: A Feasibility Study. (DOI:10.1145/2961111.2962596)

Myers G. J. Software reliability. Moscow: Mir Publishing House, 1980. - 359 p. (in Russian)

Lipaev V. V. "Reliability of software tools". M: Sinteg, 1998, 232p. (in Russian)

Lipaev V. V. "Reliability and functional safety of real-time program complexes". M: Institute of System Programming of the Russian Academy of Sciences. 2013, 176p. (in Russian)

McConnell, S. How much does a software project cost / S. McConnell. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2007. - 296 p. (in Russian)

GOST R 57100-2016. Systems and software engineering. Architecture description. 36p.

IEEE 1471-2000 - IEEE Recommended Practice for Architectural Description for Software-Intensive Systems.

Gvozdev V.E. Elements of system engineering: methodological foundations for the development of software systems based on the Vmodel of the life cycle: monograph / M.B. Guzairov, B.G. Ilyasov, O.Ya. Bezhaeva. - M.: Mechanical Engineering, 2013. - 180 p. (in Russian)

ESA PSS-05-11. Guide to software quality assurance, 1995. – 55 p.

GOST R ISO/IEC 12207-2010. National Standard of the Russian Federation Information technology. System and software engineering. Software life cycle processes. 105p


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Abava  Кибербезопасность FRUCT 2023

ISSN: 2307-8162