1 / 20

ProNoBiS Activities in Verona

ProNoBiS Activities in Verona. Roberto Segala University of Verona with Augusto Parma and Andrea Turrini. List of Activities. Comparative semantics Alternating and non-alternating models Simulation and bisimulation relations Logical characterizations Extensions of HM logic

jadzia
Download Presentation

ProNoBiS Activities in Verona

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. ProNoBiSActivities in Verona Roberto Segala University of Verona with Augusto Parma and Andrea Turrini Roberto Segala University of Verona

  2. List of Activities • Comparative semantics • Alternating and non-alternating models • Simulation and bisimulation relations • Logical characterizations • Extensions of HM logic • Non-discrete measures • Stochastic Transition Systems • Verification of crypto protocols • Task-based PIOAs • Oblivious transfer • Aproximate simulations • Authentication, matching conversations Roberto Segala University of Verona

  3. Probabilistic Automata (NA) NA = (Q , q0 , E , H , D) Transition relation DÍ Q´ (EÈH) ´ Disc(Q) Internal (hidden) actions External actions:EÇH = Æ Initial state:q0Î Q States Roberto Segala University of Verona

  4. Alternating vs. non-alternating NA A SA u u u flip flip flip flip flip flip p2 p3 p2 p3 .2 .8 .7 .3 .2 .8 .7 .3 .2 .8 .7 .3 h t h t h t h t h t h t beep beep beep beep beep beep pb pb 1 1 1 1 Roberto Segala University of Verona

  5. Relations between models • Embeddings (E ) • SA as an instance of Aand of NA • A as an instance of NA • Embeddings as structure restrictions • Transformations (T ) • Folkloristic ways to represent the same object within the three models Roberto Segala University of Verona

  6. Strong Bisimulation of NA Strong bisimulation between A1 and A2 Relation R Q x Q, Q=Q1ÈQ2, such that " q,s, a, $¢ q  a + R R q0 s0 a s ¢ a a 1 s1 q1 q2 [LS89]  R¢ b b b 1  1 1 q3 q4 s3 C Q/R . (C ) = ¢ (C ) Roberto Segala University of Verona

  7. Bisimulation Literature In literature there are also • Strong bisimulation of Hansson on SA • Relates only nondeterministic states • Strong bisimulation of Philippou on A • Relates all states • Probabilistic states are a technicality • Weak bisimulation of Philippou on A • Relates all states • Probabilistic states are meaningful • Uses conditional probabilities on self loop Roberto Segala University of Verona

  8. Taxonomy Nondeterministic typologyN • Based on T ransformations • Check bisimilarity of images in NA T A1 T (A1) SA A ~N ? T ~? NA A2 T (A2 ) Roberto Segala University of Verona

  9. Taxonomy Mixed typologyM • Based on E mbeddings • Check bisimilarity of images in NA E A1 E (A1) SA A ~M? E ~? NA A2 E (A2 ) Roberto Segala University of Verona

  10. Taxonomy and Literature[Segala, Turrini] Roberto Segala University of Verona

  11. Logical Characterizations[Parma, Segala] • Logic: true | Øf| fÙf | àaf | [f]p • Semantics: m satisfies a formula • àaf : for each q in support of m there is a transition (q,a,m¢) such that m¢|= f • [f]p : m({q|q|=f}) ³ p • Observation: àpaf corresponds to àa[f]p Roberto Segala University of Verona

  12. Stochastic Transition Systems[Cattani, Segala, Kwiatkowska, Norman] ST = (Q , q0 , E , H , FQ, FA, D) Transition relation DÍ Q´ (EÈH) ´ P(Q,FQ) s-field on actions s-field on states Internal (hidden) actions External actions:EÇH = Æ Initial state:q0Î Q States Roberto Segala University of Verona

  13. STS: Problems • Not all schedulers lead to measurability • Let X Í [0,1] be non measurable • Choose x uniformly in [0,1] • Schedule a only if x Î X • What is the probability of àa? • Define measurable schedulers • From FEXEC to FA´Q • Then we obtain Markov Kernels • Markow kernels preserved by projection • Important for modular reasoning • How about bisimulation? Roberto Segala University of Verona

  14. UC-Security [Canetti] Simulator Ideal functionality $ ? Environment " Adversary Real protocol " Roberto Segala University of Verona

  15. UC-Security with PIOAs [Canetti, Cheung, Kaynar, Liskov, Lynch, Pereira, Segala] Adversary Simulator Ideal functionality $ " ? Environment " Adversary Real protocol " Roberto Segala University of Verona

  16. Oblivious Transfer [Canetti, Cheung, Kaynar, Liskov, Lynch, Pereira, Segala] Hard core predicate Ideal functionality Simulator Adversary Hard core predicate Protocol Adversary Random bit Protocol Adversary Random bit Real protocol Adversary Roberto Segala University of Verona

  17. Aproximate Simulations[Segala, Turrini] Given {Ak} and {Bk} consider {Rk}. R QAkx QAk For each cÎN, pÎPoly, exists kÎN, for each k>k, e>0, m1, m2 If • m1 reached in at most p(k) steps • m1 L(Rk,e) m2 • m1¾ñm1’ Then • m2¾ñm2’ • m1’ L(Rk,e+k-c) m2’ + • m1 L(R,e) m2 • m1= (1-e)m1’+em1’’ • m2= (1-e)m2’+em2’’ • m1’ L(R) m2’ Roberto Segala University of Verona

  18. Implications on executions Let {Rk} be an aprox sim from {Ak} to {Bk} For each cÎN, pÎPoly, exists kÎN, for each k>k, m1 If • m1 is reachable in Ak in p(k) steps Then exists m2 • m2 reachable in Bk in p(k) steps • m1 L(R,p(k)k-c) m2 Roberto Segala University of Verona

  19. Application to AuthenticationMatching Conversation • Specification: • Actual protocol • States keep history • Adversary does almost everything • All invalid transitions removed • Implementation • Actual protocol • States keep history • Adversary is a PPT algorithm • Simulation • Identity on states • Properties • All executions of specification satisfy matching conversations • Failure of simulation imply breaking a signature protocol Roberto Segala University of Verona

  20. Open problems • Logics • Complete the picuture with simulations • Stochastic Transition Systems • Understand bisimulation • Get soundness results • Understand restrictions to the model • Verification • Refine the methods • Test on more complex case studies • Compare with soundness proofs for symbolic methods Roberto Segala University of Verona

More Related