Unification modulo a 2-sorted Equational theory for Cipher-Decipher Block Chaining

We investigate unification problems related to the Cipher Block Chaining (CBC) mode of encryption. We first model chaining in terms of a simple, convergent, rewrite system over a signature with two disjoint sorts: list and element. By interpreting a particular symbol of this signature suitably, the rewrite system can model several practical situations of interest. An inference procedure is presented for deciding the unification problem modulo this rewrite system. The procedure is modular in the following sense: any given problem is handled by a system of `list-inferences', and the set of equations thus derived between the element-terms of the problem is then handed over to any (`black-box') procedure which is complete for solving these element-equations. An example of application of this unification procedure is given, as attack detection on a Needham-Schroeder like protocol, employing the CBC encryption mode based on the associative-commutative (AC) operator XOR. The 2-sorted convergent rewrite system is then extended into one that fully captures a block chaining encryption-decryption mode at an abstract level, using no AC-symbols; and unification modulo this extended system is also shown to be decidable.Comment: 26 page

On non-recursive trade-offs between finite-turn pushdown automata

It is shown that between one-turn pushdown automata (1-turn PDAs) and deterministic finite automata (DFAs) there will be savings concerning the size of description not bounded by any recursive function, so-called non-recursive tradeoffs. Considering the number of turns of the stack height as a consumable resource of PDAs, we can show the existence of non-recursive trade-offs between PDAs performing k+ 1 turns and k turns for k >= 1. Furthermore, non-recursive trade-offs are shown between arbitrary PDAs and PDAs which perform only a finite number of turns. Finally, several decidability questions are shown to be undecidable and not semidecidable

Effective symbolic protocol analysis via equational irreducibility conditions

We address a problem that arises in cryptographic protocol analysis when the equational properties of the cryptosystem are taken into account: in many situations it is necessary to guarantee that certain terms generated during a state exploration are in normal form with respect to the equational theory. We give a tool-independent methodology for state exploration, based on unification and narrowing, that generates states that obey these irreducibility constraints, called contextual symbolic reachability analysis, prove its soundness and completeness, and describe its implementation in the Maude-NPA protocol analysis tool. Contextual symbolic reachability analysis also introduces a new type of unification mechanism, which we call asymmetric unification, in which any solution must leave the right side of the solution irreducible. We also present experiments showing the effectiveness of our methodology.S. Escobar and S. Santiago have been partially supported by the EU (FEDER) and the Spanish MEC/MICINN under grant TIN 2010-21062-C02-02, and by Generalitat Valenciana PROMETEO2011/052. The following authors have been partially supported by NSF: S. Escobar, J. Meseguer and R. Sasse under grants CCF 09- 05584, CNS 09-04749, and CNS 09-05584; D. Kapur under grant CNS 09-05222; C. Lynch, Z. Liu, and C. Meadows under grant CNS 09-05378, and P. Narendran and S. Erbatur under grant CNS 09-05286.Erbatur, S.; Escobar Román, S.; Kapur, D.; Liu, Z.; Lynch, C.; Meadows, C.; Meseguer, J.... (2012). Effective symbolic protocol analysis via equational irreducibility conditions. En Computer Security - ESORICS 2012. Springer Verlag (Germany). 7459:73-90. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-33167-1_5S73907459IEEE 802.11 Local and Metropolitan Area Networks: Wireless LAN Medium Access Control (MAC) and Physical (PHY) Specifications (1999)Abadi, M., Cortier, V.: Deciding knowledge in security protocols under equational theories. Theor. Comput. Sci. 367(1-2), 2–32 (2006)Arapinis, M., Bursuc, S., Ryan, M.: Privacy Supporting Cloud Computing: ConfiChair, a Case Study. In: Degano, P., Guttman, J.D. (eds.) Principles of Security and Trust. LNCS, vol. 7215, pp. 89–108. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)Basin, D., Mödersheim, S., Viganò, L.: An On-the-Fly Model-Checker for Security Protocol Analysis. In: Snekkenes, E., Gollmann, D. (eds.) ESORICS 2003. LNCS, vol. 2808, pp. 253–270. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)Baudet, M., Cortier, V., Delaune, S.: YAPA: A Generic Tool for Computing Intruder Knowledge. In: Treinen, R. (ed.) RTA 2009. LNCS, vol. 5595, pp. 148–163. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Blanchet, B.: An efficient cryptographic protocol verifier based on prolog rules. In: CSFW, pp. 82–96. IEEE Computer Society (2001)Blanchet, B.: Using horn clauses for analyzing security protocols. In: Cortier, V., Kremer, S. (eds.) Formal Models and Techniques for Analyzing Security Protocols. IOS Press (2011)Blanchet, B., Abadi, M., Fournet, C.: Automated verification of selected equivalences for security protocols. J. Log. Algebr. Program. 75(1), 3–51 (2008)Ciobâcă, Ş., Delaune, S., Kremer, S.: Computing Knowledge in Security Protocols under Convergent Equational Theories. In: Schmidt, R.A. (ed.) CADE-22. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 5663, pp. 355–370. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Comon-Lundh, H., Delaune, S.: The Finite Variant Property: How to Get Rid of Some Algebraic Properties. In: Giesl, J. (ed.) RTA 2005. LNCS, vol. 3467, pp. 294–307. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Comon-Lundh, H., Delaune, S., Millen, J.: Constraint solving techniques and enriching the model with equational theories. In: Cortier, V., Kremer, S. (eds.) Formal Models and Techniques for Analyzing Security Protocols. Cryptology and Information Security Series, vol. 5, pp. 35–61. IOS Press (2011)Comon-Lundh, H., Shmatikov, V.: Intruder deductions, constraint solving and insecurity decision in presence of exclusive or. In: LICS, pp. 271–280. IEEE Computer Society (2003)Ciobâcă, Ş.: Knowledge in security protocolsDolev, D., Yao, A.C.-C.: On the security of public key protocols (extended abstract). In: FOCS, pp. 350–357 (1981)Escobar, S., Meadows, C., Meseguer, J.: A rewriting-based inference system for the NRL protocol analyzer and its meta-logical properties. Theoretical Computer Science 367(1-2), 162–202 (2006)Escobar, S., Meadows, C., Meseguer, J.: State Space Reduction in the Maude-NRL Protocol Analyzer. In: Jajodia, S., Lopez, J. (eds.) ESORICS 2008. LNCS, vol. 5283, pp. 548–562. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)Escobar, S., Meadows, C., Meseguer, J.: Maude-NPA: Cryptographic Protocol Analysis Modulo Equational Properties. In: Aldini, A., Barthe, G., Gorrieri, R. (eds.) FOSAD 2007. LNCS, vol. 5705, pp. 1–50. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Escobar, S., Meadows, C., Meseguer, J., Santiago, S.: State space reduction in the maude-nrl protocol analyzer. Information and Computation (in press, 2012)Escobar, S., Sasse, R., Meseguer, J.: Folding variant narrowing and optimal variant termination. J. Log. Algebr. Program (in press, 2012)Thayer Fabrega, F.J., Herzog, J., Guttman, J.: Strand Spaces: What Makes a Security Protocol Correct? Journal of Computer Security 7, 191–230 (1999)Jouannaud, J.-P., Kirchner, H.: Completion of a set of rules modulo a set of equations. SIAM J. Comput. 15(4), 1155–1194 (1986)Küsters, R., Truderung, T.: Using ProVerif to analyze protocols with Diffie-Hellman exponentiation. In: CSF, pp. 157–171. IEEE Computer Society (2009)Küsters, R., Truderung, T.: Reducing protocol analysis with xor to the xor-free case in the horn theory based approach. Journal of Automated Reasoning 46(3-4), 325–352 (2011)Liu, Z., Lynch, C.: Efficient General Unification for XOR with Homomorphism. In: Bjørner, N., Sofronie-Stokkermans, V. (eds.) CADE 2011. LNCS, vol. 6803, pp. 407–421. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)Lowe, G., Roscoe, B.: Using csp to detect errors in the tmn protocol. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 23, 659–669 (1997)Lucas, S.: Context-sensitive computations in functional and functional logic programs. J. Functl. and Log. Progr. 1(4), 446–453 (1998)Meseguer, J.: Conditional rewriting logic as a united model of concurrency. Theor. Comput. Sci. 96(1), 73–155 (1992)Meseguer, J., Thati, P.: Symbolic reachability analysis using narrowing and its application to verification of cryptographic protocols. Higher-Order and Symbolic Computation 20(1-2), 123–160 (2007)Mödersheim, S.: Models and methods for the automated analysis of security protocols. PhD thesis, ETH Zurich (2007)Mödersheim, S., Viganò, L., Basin, D.A.: Constraint differentiation: Search-space reduction for the constraint-based analysis of security protocols. Journal of Computer Security 18(4), 575–618 (2010)Tatebayashi, M., Matsuzaki, N., Newman Jr., D.B.: Key Distribution Protocol for Digital Mobile Communication Systems. In: Brassard, G. (ed.) CRYPTO 1989. LNCS, vol. 435, pp. 324–334. Springer, Heidelberg (1990)TeReSe (ed.): Term Rewriting Systems. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2003)Viry, P.: Equational rules for rewriting logic. Theor. Comput. Sci. 285(2), 487–517 (2002)Zhang, H., Remy, J.-L.: Contextual Rewriting. In: Jouannaud, J.-P. (ed.) RTA 1985. LNCS, vol. 202, pp. 46–62. Springer, Heidelberg (1985

Compiling and securing cryptographic protocols

Protocol narrations are widely used in security as semi-formal notations to specify conversations between roles. We define a translation from a protocol narration to the sequences of operations to be performed by each role. Unlike previous works, we reduce this compilation process to well-known decision problems in formal protocol analysis. This allows one to define a natural notion of prudent translation and to reuse many known results from the literature in order to cover more crypto-primitives. In particular this work is the first one to show how to compile protocols parameterised by the properties of the available operations.Comment: A short version was submitted to IP

A study on unification and disunification modulo

Dissertação (mestrado)—Universidade de Brasília, Instituto de Ciências Exatas, Departamento de Ciência da Computação, 2020.Estuda-se a comparação entre unificação assimétrica e desunificação módulo teorias equa- cionais em relação às suas complexidades, como desenvolvida por Ravishankar, Narendran e Gero. A unificação assimétrica é um tipo de unificação equacional em que as soluções devem fornecer o lado direito dos problemas apresentados na forma normal. E a desunifi- cação é resolver problemas com equações e “disequações” em relação à uma teoria equaci- onal dada. As soluções para os problemas de desunificação são substituições que tornam os dois termos de cada equação iguais, mas os dois termos de cada “disequação” diferen- tes. Unificação e desunificação equacional foram comparadas por os autores mencionados com relação as suas complexidades de tempo para duas teorias equacionais: a primeira associativa (A), comutativa (C), com unidade (U) e nilpotente (N), como (ACUN) e a segunda com tais propriedades, mas adicionando um homomorfismo (h), como (ACUNh), mostrando que desunificação pode ser resolvida em tempo polinomial enquanto unificação assimétrica é NP-difícil para ambas as teorias equacionais. Além disso, foi estudada a abordagem introduzidas por Zhiqiang Liu, em sua dissertação de doutorado, para converter osunificadores módulo ACUN em assimétricos, com símbolos de função não interpretados, usando as regras de inferência. Para a teoria associativa comutativa com homomorfismo (ACh), estudou-se a prova de que unificação módulo ACh é indecidível, assim como o algoritmo de semi-decisão, recentemente introduzido por Ajay Kumar Eeralla e Christopher Lynch, que apresenta um conjunto de regras de inferência para resolver o problema com limitações.Comparisons between asymmetric unification and disunification modulo AC concerning their complexities, as developed by Ravishankar, Narendran and Gero are studied. Asym- metric unification is a type of equational unification problem in which the solutions must give as right-hand sides of the input problem, normal forms regarding some rewriting sys- tem. And disunification problems require solving equations and "disequations" for a given equational theory. Solutions to the disunification problems are substitutions that make the two terms of each equation equal, but the two terms of each “disequation” different. These authors compared the complexity of the unification and disunification problems for two equational theories. The properties of the first equational theory are associativity (A), commutativity (C), the existence of unity (U), and nilpotence (N), abbreviated as ACUN. And, the second equational theory has the same properties but adds a homomorphism (h), for short, ACUNh. For such equational theories, details of the proof that disunification can be solved in polynomial time while the asymmetric unification is NP-hard have been studied. Besides, the approach for converting ACUN unifiers to asymmetric ones, with uninterpreted function symbols using the inference rules introduced by Zhiqiang Liu, in his Ph.D. dissertation, was studied. Narendran’s proof of the undecidability of the unifi- cation problem modulo the associative commutative theory with homomorphism ACh is studied. Also, the semi-decision algorithm, recently introduced by Ajay Kumar Eeralla and Christopher Lynch, is studied, which presents a set of inference rules for solving a bounded version of ACh unification

An Optimizing Protocol Transformation for Constructor Finite Variant Theories in Maude-NPA

[EN] Maude-NPA is an analysis tool for cryptographic security protocols that takes into account the algebraic properties of the cryptosystem. Maude-NPA can reason about a wide range of cryptographic properties. However, some algebraic properties, and protocols using them, have been beyond Maude-NPA capabilities, either because the cryptographic properties cannot be expressed using its equational unification features or because the state space is unmanageable. In this paper, we provide a protocol transformation that can safely get rid of cryptographic properties under some conditions. The time and space difference between verifying the protocol with all the crypto properties and verifying the protocol with a minimal set of the crypto properties is remarkable. We also provide, for the first time, an encoding of the theory of bilinear pairing into Maude-NPA that goes beyond the encoding of bilinear pairing available in the Tamarin toolPartially supported by the EU (FEDER) and the Spanish MCIU under grant RTI2018-094403-B-C32, by the Spanish Generalitat Valenciana under grant PROMETEO/2019/098, and by the US Air Force Office of Scientific Research under award number FA9550-17-1-0286. Julia Sapiña has been supported by the Generalitat Valenciana APOSTD/2019/127 grantAparicio-Sánchez, D.; Escobar Román, S.; Gutiérrez Gil, R.; Sapiña-Sanchis, J. (2020). An Optimizing Protocol Transformation for Constructor Finite Variant Theories in Maude-NPA. Springer Nature. 230-250. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-59013-0_12S230250Maude-NPA manual v3.1. http://maude.cs.illinois.edu/w/index.php/Maude_Tools:_Maude-NPAThe Tamarin-Prover Manual, 4 June 2019. https://tamarin-prover.github.io/manual/tex/tamarin-manual.pdfAl-Riyami, S.S., Paterson, K.G.: Tripartite authenticated key agreement protocols from pairings. In: Paterson, K.G. (ed.) Cryptography and Coding 2003. LNCS, vol. 2898, pp. 332–359. Springer, Heidelberg (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-40974-8_27Baader, F., Snyder, W.: Unification theory. In: Robinson, J.A., Voronkov, A. (eds.) Handbook of Automated Reasoning, vol. 1, pp. 447–533. Elsevier Science (2001)Baelde, D., Delaune, S., Gazeau, I., Kremer, S.: Symbolic verification of privacy-type properties for security protocols with XOR. In: 30th IEEE Computer Security Foundations Symposium, CSF 2017, pp. 234–248. IEEE Computer Society (2017)Blanchet, B.: Modeling and verifying security protocols with the applied pi calculus and ProVerif. Found. Trends Privacy Secur. 1(1–2), 1–135 (2016)Clavel, M., et al.: Maude manual (version 3.0). Technical report, SRI International, Computer Science Laboratory (2020). http://maude.cs.uiuc.eduComon-Lundh, H., Delaune, S.: The finite variant property: how to get rid of some algebraic properties. In: Giesl, J. (ed.) RTA 2005. LNCS, vol. 3467, pp. 294–307. Springer, Heidelberg (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-32033-3_22Cremers, C.J.F.: The scyther tool: verification, falsification, and analysis of security protocols. In: Gupta, A., Malik, S. (eds.) CAV 2008. LNCS, vol. 5123, pp. 414–418. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-70545-1_38Dreier, J., Duménil, C., Kremer, S., Sasse, R.: Beyond subterm-convergent equational theories in automated verification of stateful protocols. In: Maffei, M., Ryan, M. (eds.) POST 2017. LNCS, vol. 10204, pp. 117–140. Springer, Heidelberg (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-54455-6_6Escobar, S., Hendrix, J., Meadows, C., Meseguer, J.: Diffie-Hellman cryptographic reasoning in the Maude-NRL protocol analyzer. In: Proceedings of 2nd International Workshop on Security and Rewriting Techniques (SecReT 2007) (2007)Escobar, S., Meadows, C., Meseguer, J.: A rewriting-based inference system for the NRL protocol analyzer and its meta-logical properties. Theor. Comput. Sci. 367(1–2), 162–202 (2006)Escobar, S., Meadows, C., Meseguer, J.: Maude-NPA: cryptographic protocol analysis modulo equational properties. In: Aldini, A., Barthe, G., Gorrieri, R. (eds.) FOSAD 2007-2009. LNCS, vol. 5705, pp. 1–50. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03829-7_1Escobar, S., et al.: Protocol analysis in Maude-NPA using unification modulo homomorphic encryption. In: Proceedings of PPDP 2011, pp. 65–76. ACM (2011)Escobar, S., Meadows, C.A., Meseguer, J., Santiago, S.: State space reduction in the Maude-NRL protocol analyzer. Inf. Comput. 238, 157–186 (2014)Escobar, S., Sasse, R., Meseguer, J.: Folding variant narrowing and optimal variant termination. J. Log. Algebr. Program. 81(7–8), 898–928 (2012)Fabrega, F.J.T., Herzog, J.C., Guttman, J.D.: Strand spaces: why is a security protocol correct? In: Proceedings of IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, pp. 160–171 (1998)Guttman, J.D.: Security goals and protocol transformations. In: Mödersheim, S., Palamidessi, C. (eds.) TOSCA 2011. LNCS, vol. 6993, pp. 130–147. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-27375-9_8Joux, A.: A one round protocol for tripartite Diffie-Hellman. In: Bosma, W. (ed.) ANTS 2000. LNCS, vol. 1838, pp. 385–393. Springer, Heidelberg (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/10722028_23Kim, Y., Perrig, A., Tsudik, G.: Communication-efficient group key agreement. In: Dupuy, M., Paradinas, P. (eds.) SEC 2001. IIFIP, vol. 65, pp. 229–244. Springer, Boston, MA (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-46998-7_16Küsters, R., Truderung, T.: Using ProVerif to analyze protocols with Diffie-Hellman exponentiation. In: IEEE Computer Security Foundations, pp. 157–171 (2009)Küsters, R., Truderung, T.: Reducing protocol analysis with XOR to the XOR-free case in the horn theory based approach. J. Autom. Reason. 46(3–4), 325–352 (2011)Meadows, C.: The NRL protocol analyzer: an overview. J. Logic Program. 26(2), 113–131 (1996)Meier, S., Cremers, C., Basin, D.: Strong invariants for the efficient construction of machine-checked protocol security proofs. In: 2010 23rd IEEE Computer Security Foundations Symposium, pp. 231–245 (2010)Meseguer, J.: Conditional rewriting logic as a united model of concurrency. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 96(1), 73–155 (1992)Meseguer, J.: Variant-based satisfiability in initial algebras. Sci. Comput. Program. 154, 3–41 (2018)Meseguer, J.: Generalized rewrite theories, coherence completion, and symbolic methods. J. Log. Algebr. Meth. Program. 110, 100483 (2020)Mödersheim, S., Viganò, L.: The open-source fixed-point model checker for symbolic analysis of security protocols. In: Aldini, A., Barthe, G., Gorrieri, R. (eds.) FOSAD 2007-2009. LNCS, vol. 5705, pp. 166–194. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03829-7_6Sasse, R., Escobar, S., Meadows, C., Meseguer, J.: Protocol analysis modulo combination of theories: a case study in Maude-NPA. In: Cuellar, J., Lopez, J., Barthe, G., Pretschner, A. (eds.) STM 2010. LNCS, vol. 6710, pp. 163–178. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22444-7_11Schmidt, B., Sasse, R., Cremers, C., Basin, D.A.: Automated verification of group key agreement protocols. In: 2014 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, SP 2014, pp. 179–194. IEEE Computer Society (2014)Skeirik, S., Meseguer, J.: Metalevel algorithms for variant satisfiability. J. Log. Algebraic Methods Program. 96, 81–110 (2018)TeReSe: Term Rewriting Systems. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2003)Yang, F., Escobar, S., Meadows, C.A., Meseguer, J., Narendran, P.: Theories of homomorphic encryption, unification, and the finite variant property. In: Proceedings of PPDP 2014, pp. 123–133. ACM (2014

Advanced Features in Protocol Verification: Theory, Properties, and Efficiency in Maude-NPA

The area of formal analysis of cryptographic protocols has been an active one since the mid 80’s. The idea is to verify communication protocols that use encryption to guarantee secrecy and that use authentication of data to ensure security. Formal methods are used in protocol analysis to provide formal proofs of security, and to uncover bugs and security flaws that in some cases had remained unknown long after the original protocol publication, such as the case of the well known Needham-Schroeder Public Key (NSPK) protocol. In this thesis we tackle problems regarding the three main pillars of protocol verification: modelling capabilities, verifiable properties, and efficiency. This thesis is devoted to investigate advanced features in the analysis of cryptographic protocols tailored to the Maude-NPA tool. This tool is a model-checker for cryptographic protocol analysis that allows for the incorporation of different equational theories and operates in the unbounded session model without the use of data or control abstraction. An important contribution of this thesis is relative to theoretical aspects of protocol verification in Maude-NPA. First, we define a forwards operational semantics, using rewriting logic as the theoretical framework and the Maude programming language as tool support. This is the first time that a forwards rewriting-based semantics is given for Maude-NPA. Second, we also study the problem that arises in cryptographic protocol analysis when it is necessary to guarantee that certain terms generated during a state exploration are in normal form with respect to the protocol equational theory. We also study techniques to extend Maude-NPA capabilities to support the verification of a wider class of protocols and security properties. First, we present a framework to specify and verify sequential protocol compositions in which one or more child protocols make use of information obtained from running a parent protocol. Second, we present a theoretical framework to specify and verify protocol indistinguishability in Maude-NPA. This kind of properties aim to verify that an attacker cannot distinguish between two versions of a protocol: for example, one using one secret and one using another, as it happens in electronic voting protocols. Finally, this thesis contributes to improve the efficiency of protocol verification in Maude-NPA. We define several techniques which drastically reduce the state space, and can often yield a finite state space, so that whether the desired security property holds or not can in fact be decided automatically, in spite of the general undecidability of such problems.Santiago Pinazo, S. (2015). Advanced Features in Protocol Verification: Theory, Properties, and Efficiency in Maude-NPA [Tesis doctoral no publicada]. Universitat Politècnica de València. https://doi.org/10.4995/Thesis/10251/4852

Asymmetric Unification: A New Unification Paradigm for Cryptographic Protocol Analysis

The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-38574-2_16We present a new paradigm for unification arising out of a technique commonly used in cryptographic protocol analysis tools that employ unification modulo equational theories. This paradigm relies on: (i) a decomposition of an equational theory into (R,E) where R is confluent, terminating, and coherent modulo E, and (ii) on reducing unification problems to a set of problems s=?ts=?t under the constraint that t remains R/E-irreducible. We call this method asymmetric unification. We first present a general-purpose generic asymmetric unification algorithm. and then outline an approach for converting special-purpose conventional unification algorithms to asymmetric ones, demonstrating it for exclusive-or with uninterpreted function symbols. We demonstrate how asymmetric unification can improve performanceby running the algorithm on a set of benchmark problems. We also give results on the complexity and decidability of asymmetric unification.S. Escobar and S. Santiago were partially supported by EU (FEDER) and the Spanish MEC/MICINN under grant TIN 2010-21062-C02-02, and by Generalitat Valenciana PROMETEO2011/052. The following authors were partially supported by NSF: S. Escobar, J. Meseguer, and R. Sasse under CNS 09-04749 and CCF 09- 05584; D. Kapur under CNS 09-05222; C. Lynch, Z. Liu, and C. Meadows under CNS 09-05378, and P. Narendran and S. Erbatur under CNS 09-05286. Part of the S. Erbatur’s work was supported while with the Department of Computer Science, University at Albany, and part of R. Sasse’s work was supported while with the Department of Computer Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.Erbatur, S.; Escobar Román, S.; Kapur, D.; Liu, Z.; Lynch, CA.; Meadows, C.; Meseguer, J.... (2013). Asymmetric Unification: A New Unification Paradigm for Cryptographic Protocol Analysis. En Automated Deduction – CADE-24. Springer. 231-248. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-38574-2_16S231248IEEE 802.11 Local and Metropolitan Area Networks: Wireless LAN Medium Access Control (MAC) and Physical (PHY) Specifications (1999)Basin, D., Mödersheim, S., Viganò, L.: An on-the-fly model-checker for security protocol analysis. In: Snekkenes, E., Gollmann, D. (eds.) ESORICS 2003. LNCS, vol. 2808, pp. 253–270. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)Blanchet, B.: An efficient cryptographic protocol verifier based on Prolog rules. In: CSFW, pp. 82–96. IEEE Computer Society (2001)Bürckert, H.-J., Herold, A., Schmidt-Schauß, M.: On equational theories, unification, and (un)decidability. Journal of Symbolic Computation 8(1/2), 3–49 (1989)Comon-Lundh, H., Delaune, S.: The finite variant property: How to get rid of some algebraic properties. In: Giesl, J. (ed.) RTA 2005. LNCS, vol. 3467, pp. 294–307. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Durán, F., Meseguer, J.: A Maude coherence checker tool for conditional order-sorted rewrite theories. In: Ölveczky, P.C. (ed.) WRLA 2010. LNCS, vol. 6381, pp. 86–103. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)Erbatur, S., Escobar, S., Kapur, D., Liu, Z., Lynch, C., Meadows, C., Meseguer, J., Narendran, P., Santiago, S., Sasse, R.: Effective symbolic protocol analysis via equational irreducibility conditions. In: Foresti, S., Yung, M., Martinelli, F. (eds.) ESORICS 2012. LNCS, vol. 7459, pp. 73–90. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)Erbatur, S., Escobar, S., Kapur, D., Liu, Z., Lynch, C., Meadows, C., Meseguer, J., Narendran, P., Sasse, R.: Asymmetric unification: A new unification paradigm for cryptographic protocol analysis. In: UNIF 2011 (2011), https://sites.google.com/a/cs.uni.wroc.pl/unif-2011/programEscobar, S., Sasse, R., Meseguer, J.: Folding variant narrowing and optimal variant termination. J. Log. Algebr. Program. 81(7-8), 898–928 (2012)Harju, T., Karhumäki, J., Krob, D.: Remarks on generalized post correspondence problem. In: Puech, C., Reischuk, R. (eds.) STACS 1996. LNCS, vol. 1046, pp. 39–48. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)Hopcroft, J.E., Motwani, R., Ullman, J.D.: Introduction to automata theory, languages, and computation - international edition, 2nd edn. Addison-Wesley (2003)Jouannaud, J.-P., Kirchner, H.: Completion of a set of rules modulo a set of equations. SIAM J. Comput. 15(4), 1155–1194 (1986)Liu, Z., Lynch, C.: Efficient general unification for XOR with homomorphism. In: Bjørner, N., Sofronie-Stokkermans, V. (eds.) CADE 2011. LNCS, vol. 6803, pp. 407–421. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)Liu, Z.: Dealing Efficiently with Exclusive OR, Abelian Groups and Homomorphism in Cryptographic Protocol Analysis. PhD thesis, Clarkson University (2012), http://people.clarkson.edu/~clynch/papers/Dissertation_of_Zhiqiang_Liu.pdfLowe, G., Roscoe, A.W.R.: Using CSP to detect errors in the TMN protocol. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 23, 659–669 (1997)Meseguer, J.: Conditional rewriting logic as a united model of concurrency. Theor. Comput. Sci. 96(1), 73–155 (1992)Schmidt, B., Meier, S., Cremers, C.J.F., Basin, D.A.: Automated analysis of Diffie-Hellman protocols and advanced security properties. In: Proc. CSF 2012, pp. 78–94. IEEE (2012)Tatebayashi, M., Matsuzaki, N., Newman Jr., D.B.: Key distribution protocol for digital mobile communication systems. In: Brassard, G. (ed.) CRYPTO 1989. LNCS, vol. 435, pp. 324–334. Springer, Heidelberg (1990)TeReSe, editor. Term Rewriting Systems. Cambridge University Press (2003)Viry, P.: Equational rules for rewriting logic. Theor. Comp. Sci. 285(2), 487–517 (2002