A method for proving observational equivalence

被引:32
|
作者
Cortier, Veronique [1 ]
Delaune, Stephanie [2 ]
机构
[1] CNRS, LORIA, F-75700 Paris, France
[2] CNRS, INRIA, LSV, ENS, F-75700 Paris, France
关键词
SECURITY PROTOCOLS; VERIFICATION; PROOF;
D O I
10.1109/CSF.2009.9
中图分类号
TP301 [理论、方法];
学科分类号
081202 ;
摘要
Formal methods have proved their usefulness for analyzing the security of protocols. Most existing results focus on trace properties like secrecy (expressed as a reachability property) or authentication. There are however several security properties, which cannot be defined (or cannot be naturally defined) as trace properties and require the notion of observational equivalence. Typical examples are anonymity, privacy related properties or statements closer to security properties used in cryptography. In this paper, we consider the applied pi calculus and we show that for determinate processes, observational equivalence actually coincides with trace equivalence, a notion simpler to reason with. We exhibit a large class of determinate processes, called simple processes, that capture most existing protocols and cryptographic primitives. Then, for simple processes without replication nor else branch, we reduce the decidability of trace equivalence to deciding an equivalence relation introduced by M. Baudet. Altogether, this yields the first decidability result of observational equivalence for a general class of equational theories.
引用
收藏
页码:266 / +
页数:2
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Proving the equivalence of CLP programs
    Craciunescu, S
    [J]. LOGICS PROGRAMMING, PROCEEDINGS, 2002, 2401 : 287 - 301
  • [2] Proving equivalence in clinical trials
    Boers, M.
    [J]. ANNALS OF THE RHEUMATIC DISEASES, 2006, 65 : 34 - 34
  • [3] Proving language inclusion and equivalence by coinduction
    Rot, Jurriaan
    Bonsangue, Marcello
    Rutten, Jan
    [J]. INFORMATION AND COMPUTATION, 2016, 246 : 62 - 76
  • [4] Proving semantical equivalence of data specifications
    Piessens, F
    Steegmans, E
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PURE AND APPLIED ALGEBRA, 1997, 116 (1-3) : 291 - 322
  • [5] Inference rules for proving the equivalence of recursive procedures
    Godlin, Benny
    Strichman, Ofer
    [J]. ACTA INFORMATICA, 2008, 45 (06) : 403 - 439
  • [6] Proving functional equivalence for program slicing in SPARK™
    Sward, RE
    Baird, LC
    [J]. RELIABLE SOFTWARE TECHNOLOGY ADA-EUROPE 2005, PROCEEDINGS, 2005, 3555 : 105 - 114
  • [7] Proving Model Equivalence in Model Based Design
    Hocking, Ashlie B.
    Knight, John
    Aiello, M. Anthony
    Shiraishi, Shin'ichi
    [J]. 2014 IEEE INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON SOFTWARE RELIABILITY ENGINEERING WORKSHOPS (ISSREW), 2014, : 18 - 21
  • [8] Implication and evaluation techniques for proving fault equivalence
    Amyeen, ME
    Fuchs, WK
    Pomeranz, I
    Boppana, V
    [J]. 17TH IEEE VLSI TEST SYMPOSIUM, PROCEEDINGS, 1999, : 201 - 207
  • [9] Proving and Disproving Equivalence of Functional Programming Assignments
    Milovancevic, Dragana
    Kuncak, Viktor
    [J]. PROCEEDINGS OF THE ACM ON PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES-PACMPL, 2023, 7 (PLDI): : 928 - 951
  • [10] NEW TECHNIQUES FOR PROVING THE DECIDABILITY OF EQUIVALENCE PROBLEMS
    CULIK, K
    [J]. THEORETICAL COMPUTER SCIENCE, 1990, 71 (01) : 29 - 45