Pitfalls in Formal Reasoning about Security Protocols

Nina Moebius, K. Stenzel, W. Reif
{"title":"Pitfalls in Formal Reasoning about Security Protocols","authors":"Nina Moebius, K. Stenzel, W. Reif","doi":"10.1109/ARES.2010.36","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Formal verification can give more confidence in the security of cryptographic protocols. Application specific security properties like \"The service providerdoes not loose money\" can give even more confidence than standard propertieslike secrecy or authentication. However, it is surprisingly easy to get a meaningful property slightly wrong. The result is that an insecure protocol can be 'proven' secure. We illustrate the problem with a very small application, a copy card, that has only five different messages. The example is taken from a paper where the protocol is secure, but the proved property slightly wrong. We propose to solve the problemby incorporating more of the real-world application into the formal model.","PeriodicalId":360339,"journal":{"name":"2010 International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security","volume":"68 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2010 International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ARES.2010.36","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Formal verification can give more confidence in the security of cryptographic protocols. Application specific security properties like "The service providerdoes not loose money" can give even more confidence than standard propertieslike secrecy or authentication. However, it is surprisingly easy to get a meaningful property slightly wrong. The result is that an insecure protocol can be 'proven' secure. We illustrate the problem with a very small application, a copy card, that has only five different messages. The example is taken from a paper where the protocol is secure, but the proved property slightly wrong. We propose to solve the problemby incorporating more of the real-world application into the formal model.
安全协议形式推理中的陷阱
形式化验证可以增强对加密协议安全性的信心。特定于应用程序的安全属性,如“服务提供者不会损失资金”,可以比保密或身份验证等标准属性提供更大的信心。然而,一个有意义的属性很容易出现轻微的错误。结果是,一个不安全的协议可以被“证明”是安全的。我们用一个非常小的应用程序来说明这个问题,一个拷贝卡,它只有五个不同的消息。该示例取自一篇论文,其中协议是安全的,但证明的属性略有错误。我们建议通过将更多的实际应用纳入正式模型来解决这个问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信