Comparing BDD and SAT based techniques for model checking Chaum's Dining Cryptographers Protocol

We analyse different versions of the Dining Cryptographers protocol by means of automatic verification via model checking. Specifically we model the protocol in terms of a network of communicating automata and verify that the protocol meets the anonymity requirements specified. Two different model checking techniques (ordered binary decision diagrams and SAT-based bounded model checking) are evaluated and compared to verify the protocols

Rich Counter-Examples for Temporal-Epistemic Logic Model Checking

Model checking verifies that a model of a system satisfies a given property, and otherwise produces a counter-example explaining the violation. The verified properties are formally expressed in temporal logics. Some temporal logics, such as CTL, are branching: they allow to express facts about the whole computation tree of the model, rather than on each single linear computation. This branching aspect is even more critical when dealing with multi-modal logics, i.e. logics expressing facts about systems with several transition relations. A prominent example is CTLK, a logic that reasons about temporal and epistemic properties of multi-agent systems. In general, model checkers produce linear counter-examples for failed properties, composed of a single computation path of the model. But some branching properties are only poorly and partially explained by a linear counter-example. This paper proposes richer counter-example structures called tree-like annotated counter-examples (TLACEs), for properties in Action-Restricted CTL (ARCTL), an extension of CTL quantifying paths restricted in terms of actions labeling transitions of the model. These counter-examples have a branching structure that supports more complete description of property violations. Elements of these counter-examples are annotated with parts of the property to give a better understanding of their structure. Visualization and browsing of these richer counter-examples become a critical issue, as the number of branches and states can grow exponentially for deeply-nested properties. This paper formally defines the structure of TLACEs, characterizes adequate counter-examples w.r.t. models and failed properties, and gives a generation algorithm for ARCTL properties. It also illustrates the approach with examples in CTLK, using a reduction of CTLK to ARCTL. The proposed approach has been implemented, first by extending the NuSMV model checker to generate and export branching counter-examples, secondly by providing an interactive graphical interface to visualize and browse them.Comment: In Proceedings IWIGP 2012, arXiv:1202.422

MCMAS-SLK: A Model Checker for the Verification of Strategy Logic Specifications

We introduce MCMAS-SLK, a BDD-based model checker for the verification of systems against specifications expressed in a novel, epistemic variant of strategy logic. We give syntax and semantics of the specification language and introduce a labelling algorithm for epistemic and strategy logic modalities. We provide details of the checker which can also be used for synthesising agents' strategies so that a specification is satisfied by the system. We evaluate the efficiency of the implementation by discussing the results obtained for the dining cryptographers protocol and a variant of the cake-cutting problem

Abstract Model Counting: A Novel Approach for Quantification of Information Leaks

acmid: 2590328 keywords: model checking, quantitative information flow, satisfiability modulo theories, symbolic execution location: Kyoto, Japan numpages: 10acmid: 2590328 keywords: model checking, quantitative information flow, satisfiability modulo theories, symbolic execution location: Kyoto, Japan numpages: 10acmid: 2590328 keywords: model checking, quantitative information flow, satisfiability modulo theories, symbolic execution location: Kyoto, Japan numpages: 10We present a novel method for Quantitative Information Flow analysis. We show how the problem of computing information leakage can be viewed as an extension of the Satisfiability Modulo Theories (SMT) problem. This view enables us to develop a framework for QIF analysis based on the framework DPLL(T) used in SMT solvers. We then show that the methodology of Symbolic Execution (SE) also fits our framework. Based on these ideas, we build two QIF analysis tools: the first one employs CBMC, a bounded model checker for ANSI C, and the second one is built on top of Symbolic PathFinder, a Symbolic Executor for Java. We use these tools to quantify leaks in industrial code such as C programs from the Linux kernel, a Java tax program from the European project HATS, and anonymity protocol

Anonymity and Information Hiding in Multiagent Systems

We provide a framework for reasoning about information-hiding requirements in multiagent systems and for reasoning about anonymity in particular. Our framework employs the modal logic of knowledge within the context of the runs and systems framework, much in the spirit of our earlier work on secrecy [Halpern and O'Neill 2002]. We give several definitions of anonymity with respect to agents, actions, and observers in multiagent systems, and we relate our definitions of anonymity to other definitions of information hiding, such as secrecy. We also give probabilistic definitions of anonymity that are able to quantify an observer s uncertainty about the state of the system. Finally, we relate our definitions of anonymity to other formalizations of anonymity and information hiding, including definitions of anonymity in the process algebra CSP and definitions of information hiding using function views.Comment: Replacement. 36 pages. Full version of CSFW '03 paper, submitted to JCS. Made substantial changes to Section 6; added references throughou

How to Work with Honest but Curious Judges? (Preliminary Report)

The three-judges protocol, recently advocated by Mclver and Morgan as an example of stepwise refinement of security protocols, studies how to securely compute the majority function to reach a final verdict without revealing each individual judge's decision. We extend their protocol in two different ways for an arbitrary number of 2n+1 judges. The first generalisation is inherently centralised, in the sense that it requires a judge as a leader who collects information from others, computes the majority function, and announces the final result. A different approach can be obtained by slightly modifying the well-known dining cryptographers protocol, however it reveals the number of votes rather than the final verdict. We define a notion of conditional anonymity in order to analyse these two solutions. Both of them have been checked in the model checker MCMAS