Intent-Driven Workflow Execution with Trusted Runtime Verification

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing intent-based programming systems face challenges in ensuring the trustworthiness and reliability of dynamically assembled software or service packages, as they lack effective mechanisms to formally assess correctness and security, especially in untrusted environments, leading to uncertainty and potential breaches.

Innovation Solution

A mechanism is introduced that includes a trusted execution container with governor components to monitor and enforce execution constraints, dynamically selecting and replacing computational components as needed, and generating an execution certificate to ensure compliance and security.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If dynamically selected and assembled computational components are used to fulfill user intent, then system flexibility and adaptability are improved, but trustworthiness and reliability of the assembled solution deteriorate

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesystem flexibilityVSAvoidtrustworthiness
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

A trusted execution environment (TEE) acts as an intermediary between the dynamic component assembly process and the final execution. The TEE verifies the integrity of assembled components and their interactions, providing formal assurance that the dynamically created solution meets trust requirements while maintaining system flexibility.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes the trust verification parameter from static (pre-defined trusted components) to dynamic (runtime verification of assembled components). By using TEEs, the system can verify integrity measurements and execution constraints at runtime, enabling trustworthiness in dynamically assembled solutions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Reliability

If formal assurance mechanisms are implemented for dynamically assembled workflows, then reliability and security are improved, but device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovesecurityVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The complexity of formal assurance mechanisms is extracted into a separate trusted execution environment. The TEE handles the complex verification of integrity measurements, component interactions, and execution constraints, while the main system retains simplicity in assembling and executing workflows.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The system creates a verified copy of the assembled workflow within the TEE for formal verification. The TEE generates execution certificates that copy and verify the integrity of the workflow assembly, providing security assurance without adding complexity to the original assembly process.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #26Copying

3Reliability

If execution constraints are continuously monitored and enforced, then compliance and reliability are improved, but productivity and execution speed deteriorate

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovecomplianceVSAvoidexecution speed
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

Execution constraints and integrity verification are performed as preliminary actions during workflow assembly and before execution begins. The TEE verifies component integrity and constrains in advance, allowing the actual execution to proceed at full speed without continuous interruption.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system replaces continuous mechanical monitoring with a trust-based model using TEEs. The TEE provides cryptographic guarantees and execution certificates that substitute for continuous runtime verification, ensuring compliance without the overhead of constant checking during execution.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Data Source

PatentUS20250225231A1Apparatus and method for intent-driven secure execution of workflows and a non-transitory computer-readable medium
Publication Date: 2025.07.10 INTEL CORP
  • US20250225231A1 patent drawing
  • US20250225231A1 patent drawing
  • US20250225231A1 patent drawing

AI summary

It is provided a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions that, when executed by one or more processing circuitries, causing the one or more processing circuitries to perform a method. The method comprises receiving a user-defined intent specifying a high-level computational goal. The method further comprises generating an execution workflow of the computational goal based on the one or more computational components corresponding to the user-defined intent. The method further comprises executing the execution workflow according to obtained execution constraints. The execution workflow is executed within an isolated execution environment, the isolated execution environment being deployed inside a trusted execution environment. The method further comprises monitoring the execution of the execution workflow within the isolated execution environment ensuring compliance with the execution constraints.