The complexity of browsers has steadily increased over the years, driven by the continuous introduction and update of Web platform components, such as novel Web APIs and security mechanisms. Their specifications are manually reviewed by experts to identify potential security issues. However, this process has proved to be error-prone due to the extensiveness of modern browser specifications and the interplay between new and existing Web platform components. To tackle this problem, we developed WebSpec, the first formal security framework for the analysis of browser security mechanisms, which enables both the automatic discovery of logical flaws and the development of machine-checked security proofs. WebSpec, in particular, includes a comprehensive semantic model of the browser in the Coq proof assistant, a formalization in this model of ten Web security invariants, and a toolchain turning the Coq model and the Web invariants into SMT-lib formulas to enable model checking with the Z3 theorem prover. If a violation is found, the toolchain automatically generates executable tests corresponding to the discovered attack trace, which is validated across major browsers.We showcase the effectiveness of WebSpec by discovering two new logical flaws caused by the interaction of different browser mechanisms and by identifying three previously discovered logical flaws in the current Web platform, as well as five in old versions. Finally, we show how WebSpec can aid the verification of our proposed changes to amend the reported inconsistencies affecting the current Web platform.

Firewalls are essential for managing and protecting computer networks. They permit specifying which packets are allowed to enter a network, and also how these packets are modified by IP address translation and port redirection. Configuring a firewall is notoriously hard, and one of the reasons is that it requires using low level, hard to interpret, configuration languages. Equally difficult are policy maintenance and refactoring, as well as porting a configuration from one firewall system to another. To address these issues we introduce a pipeline that assists system administrators in checking if: (i) the intended security policy is actually implemented by a configuration; (ii) two configurations are equivalent; (iii) updates have the desired effect on the firewall behavior; (iv) there are useless or redundant rules; additionally, an administrator can (v) transcompile a configuration into an equivalent one in a different language; and (vi) maintain a configuration using a generic, declarative language that can be compiled into different target languages. The pipeline is based on IFCL, an intermediate firewall language equipped with a formal semantics, and it is implemented in an open source tool called FWS. In particular, the first stage decompiles real firewall configurations for iptables, ipfw, pf and (a subset of) Cisco IOS into IFCL. The second one transforms an IFCL configuration into a logical predicate and uses the Z3 solver to synthesize an abstract specification that succinctly represents the firewall behavior. System administrators can use FWS to analyze the firewall by posing SQL-like queries, and update the configuration to meet the desired security requirements. Finally, the last stage allows for maintaining a configuration by acting directly on its abstract specification and then compiling it to the chosen target language. Tests on real firewall configurations show that FWS can be fruitfully used in real-world scenarios.

Session management is a fundamental component of web applications: despite the apparent simplicity, correctly implementing web sessions is extremely tricky, as witnessed by the large number of existing attacks. This motivated the design of formal methods to rigorously reason about web session security which, however, are not supported at present by suitable automated verification techniques. In this paper we introduce the first security type system that enforces session security on a core model of web applications, focusing in particular on server-side code. We showcase the expressiveness of our type system by analyzing the session management logic of HotCRP, Moodle, and phpMyAdmin, unveiling novel security flaws that have been acknowledged by software developers.

Configuring and maintaining a firewall configuration is notoriously hard. Policies are written in low-level, platform-specific languages where firewall rules are inspected and enforced along non trivial control flow paths. Further difficulties arise from Network Address Translation (NAT), since filters must be implemented with addresses translations in mind. In this work, we study the problem of decompiling a real firewall configuration into an abstract specification. This abstract version throws the low-level details away by exposing the meaning of the configuration, i.e., the allowed connections with possible address translations. The generated specification makes it easier for system administrators to check if: (i) the intended security policy is actually implemented; (ii) two configurations are equivalent; (iii) updates have the desired effect on the firewall behavior. The peculiarity of our approach is that is independent of the specific target firewall system and language. This independence is obtained through a generic intermediate language that provides the typical features of real configuration languages and that separates the specification of the rulesets, determining the destiny of packets, from the specification of the platform-dependent steps needed to elaborate packets. We present a tool that decompiles real firewall configurations from different systems into this intermediate language and uses the Z3 solver to synthesize the abstract specification that succinctly represents the firewall behavior and the NAT. Tests on real configurations show that the tool is effective: it synthesizes complex policies in a matter of minutes and, and it answers to specific queries in just a few seconds. The tool can also point out policy differences before and after configuration updates in a simple, tabular form.

Abstract—Enforcing protection at the browser side has recently become a popular approach for securing web authentication. Though interesting, existing attempts in the literature only address specific classes of attacks, and thus fall short of providing robust foundations to reason on web authentication security. In this paper we provide such foundations, by introducing a novel notion of web session integrity, which allows us to capture many existing attacks and spot some new ones. We then propose FF+, a security-enhanced model of a web browser that provides a full-fledged and provably sound enforcement of web session integrity. We leverage our theory to develop SESSINT, a prototype extension for Google Chrome implementing the security mechanisms formalized in FF+. SESSINT provides a level of security very close to FF+, while keeping an eye at usability and user experience. I.