Abstract
Modeling is a popular way of representing the behavior of a system. A very useful type of model in computing is an abstract state machine which describes transitions over first order structures. The general purpose model-based testing tool SpecExplorer (used within Microsoft, also available externally) uses such a model, written in AsmL or Spec#, to perform a search that checks that all reachable states of the model are safe, and also to check conformance of an arbitrary .NET implementation to the model. Spec Explorer provides a variety of ways to cut down the state space of the model, for instance by finitizing parameter domains or by providing predicate abstraction. It has already found subtle bugs in production software.
First order structures and abstract state machines over them are also a useful way to think about cryptographic protocols, since models formulated in these terms arise by natural abstraction from computational cryptography.
In this paper we explain this abstraction process, ‘experiments as structures’, and argue for its faithfulness. We show how the Dolev–Yao intruder model fits into SpecExplorer. In a word, the actions of the Dolev–Yao intruder are the ‘controllable’ actions of the testing framework, whereas the actions of protocol participants are the ‘observable’ actions of the model. The unsafe states are the states violating say Lowe’s security guarantees. Under this view, the general purpose software testing tool quickly finds known attacks, such as Lowe’s attack on the Needham–Schroeder protocol.
An erratum to this chapter can be found at http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/11580850_20 .
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Adão, P., Bana, G., Scedrov, A.: Computational and information theoretic soundness and completeness of formal encryption. In: 18th IEEE Computer Security Foundations Workshop – CSFW 2005 (2005)
Abadi, M., Jürjens, J.: Formal eavesdropping and its computational interpretation. In: Kobayashi, N., Pierce, B.C. (eds.) TACS 2001. LNCS, vol. 2215, p. 82. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)
Abadi, M., Rogaway, P.: Reconciling two views of cryptography (The computational soundness of formal encryption). Journal of Cryptology 15(2), 103–127 (2002)
Bana, G.: Soundness and Completeness of Formal Logics of Symmetric Encryption. PhD thesis, University of Pennsylvania (2004)
Bellare, M., Desai, A., Pointcheval, D., Rogaway, P.: Relations among notions of security for public–key encryption schemes. In: Krawczyk, H. (ed.) CRYPTO 1998. LNCS, vol. 1462, p. 26. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)
Blass, A., Gurevich, Y.: Background, reserve, and gandy machines. In: Clote, P.G., Schwichtenberg, H. (eds.) CSL 2000. LNCS, vol. 1862, p. 1. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)
Blass, A., Gurevich, Y.: Algortihms: A quest for absolute definitions. Bulletin of the European Association for Theoretical Computer Science 81, 195–225 (2003)
Blass, A., Gurevich, Y.: Ordinary interactive small–step algorithms I. Technical Report MSR-TR-2004-16, Microsoft Research (2004)
Blass, A., Gurevich, Y.: Ordinary interactive small–step algorithms II. Technical Report MSR-TR-2004-88, Microsoft Research (2004)
Gurevich, Y.: Sequential abstract state machines capture sequential algorithms. ACM Transactions on Computational Logic 1(1), 77–111 (2000)
Gurevich, Y.: Interactive algorithms 2005. Technical Report MSR-TR-2005-73, Microsoft Research (2005)
Horvitz, O., Gligor, V.: Weak key authenticity and the computational completeness of formal encryption. In: Boneh, D. (ed.) CRYPTO 2003. LNCS, vol. 2729, pp. 530–547. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)
Micciancio, D., Warinschi, B.: Completeness theorems for the Abadi-Rogaway language of encrypted expressions. Journal of Computer Security 12(1), 99–130 (2004)
Micciancio, D., Warinschi, B.: Soundness of formal encryption in the presence of active adversaries. In: Naor, M. (ed.) TCC 2004. LNCS, vol. 2951, pp. 133–151. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)
Rosenzweig, D., Runje, D.: Some things algorithms cannot do. Technical Report MSR-TR-2005-52, Microsoft Research (2005)
Rosenzweig, D., Runje, D., Slani, N.: Privacy, abstract encryption and protocols: an ASM model – Part I. In: Börger, E., Gargantini, A., Riccobene, E. (eds.) ASM 2003. LNCS, vol. 2589, pp. 372–390. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)
The AsmL webpage, http://research.microsoft.com/asml/
Rosenzweig, D., Runje, D., Slani, N.: Privacy, abstract encryption and protocols: an ASM model – Part I. In: Börger, E., Gargantini, A., Riccobene, E. (eds.) ASM 2003. LNCS, vol. 2589, pp. 372–390. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)
The SpecExplorer webpage, http://research.microsoft.com/specexplorer/
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2005 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Rosenzweig, D., Runje, D., Schulte, W. (2005). Model–Based Testing of Cryptographic Protocols. In: De Nicola, R., Sangiorgi, D. (eds) Trustworthy Global Computing. TGC 2005. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 3705. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/11580850_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/11580850_4
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-30007-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-31483-7
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)