2002 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Federico Crazzolara ◽  
Glynn Winskel

The strand space model for the analysis of security protocols is known to have some limitations in the patterns of nondeterminism it allows and in the ways in which strand spaces can be composed. Its successful application to a broad range of security protocols may therefore seem surprising. This paper gives a formal explanation of the wide applicability of strand spaces. We start with an extension of strand spaces which permits several operations to be defined in a compositional way, forming a process language for building up strand spaces. We then show, under reasonable conditions how to reduce the extended strand spaces to ones of a traditional kind. For security protocols we are mainly interested in their safety properties. This suggests a strand-space equivalence: two strand spaces are equivalent if and only if they have essentially the same sets of bundles. However this equivalence is not a congruence with respect to the strand-space operations. By extending the notion of bundle we show how to define the strand-space operations directly on ``bundle spaces''. This leads to a characterisation of the largest congruence within the strand-space equivalence. Finally, we relate strand spaces to event structures, a well known model for concurrency.


1999 ◽  
Vol 7 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 191-230 ◽  
Author(s):  
F. Javier Thayer Fábrega ◽  
Jonathan C. Herzog ◽  
Joshua D. Guttman

2013 ◽  
Vol 457-458 ◽  
pp. 1134-1138
Author(s):  
Bao Ju Liu ◽  
Jian Xi Wang

This paper focuses on different password guessing attack forms of attacker performed based on the strand spaces model. We extend the attacker’s strand spaces model in order to describe and analyze the guessing ability of the attacker. A protocol has been improved by the use of Hash function. The improved protocol has been proved to resist password guessing attack.


2000 ◽  
Vol 7 (18) ◽  
Author(s):  
Federico Crazzolara ◽  
Glynn Winskel

In this report we present a process language for security protocols together<br />with an operational semantics and an alternative semantics in terms of sets<br /> of events. The denotation of process is a set of events, and as each event specifies<br /> a set of pre- and postconditions, this denotation can be viewed as a Petri net.<br />This Petri-net semantics has a strong relation to both Paulson's inductive set<br />of rules [Pau98] and strand spaces [THG98c]. By means of an example we<br />illustrate how the Petri-net semantics can be used to prove properties such as<br />secrecy and authentication.


2001 ◽  
Vol 8 (13) ◽  
Author(s):  
Federico Crazzolara ◽  
Glynn Winskel

<p>The events of a security protocol and their causal dependency<br />can play an important role in the analysis of security properties.<br /> This insight underlies both strand spaces and the inductive<br />method. But neither of these approaches builds up the events of<br />a protocol in a compositional way, so that there is an informal<br />spring from the protocol to its model. By broadening the models<br />to certain kinds of Petri nets, a restricted form of contextual nets,<br />a compositional event-based semantics is given to an economical,<br />but expressive, language for describing security protocols; so the<br />events and dependency of a wide range of protocols are determined<br /> once and for all. The net semantics is formally related to a<br />transition semantics, strand spaces and inductive rules, as well as<br />trace languages and event structures, so unifying a range of <br />approaches, as well as providing conditions under which particular,<br />more limited, models are adequate for the analysis of protocols.<br />The net semantics allows the derivation of general properties and<br />proof principles which are demonstrated in establishing an <br />authentication property, following a diagrammatic style of proof.</p>


Author(s):  
Mahalingam Ramkumar

Approaches for securing digital assets of information systems can be classified as active approaches based on attack models, and passive approaches based on system-models. Passive approaches are inherently superior to active ones. However, taking full advantage of passive approaches calls for a rigorous standard for a low-complexity-high-integrity execution environment for security protocols. We sketch broad outlines of mirror network (MN) modules, as a candidate for such a standard. Their utility in assuring real-world information systems is illustrated with examples.


Author(s):  
Segundo Moises Toapanta Toapanta ◽  
Luis Enrique Mafla Gallegos ◽  
Alex Enrique Aranda Alvarado ◽  
Maximo Prado Solis

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document