The implementation of security protocols often combines different languages. This practice, however, poses a challenge to traditional verification techniques, which typically assume a single-language environment and, therefore, are in-sufficient to handle challenges presented by the interplay of different languages. To address this issue, we establish principles for combining multiple programming languages operating on different atomic types using a symbolic execution semantics. This facilitates the (parallel) composition of labeled transition systems, improving the analysis of complex systems by streamlining communication between diverse programming languages. By treating the Dolev-Yao (DY) model as a symbolic abstraction, our approach eliminates the need for translation between different base types, such as bitstrings and DY terms. Our technique provides a foundation for securing interactions in multi-language environments, enhancing program verification and system analysis in complex, interconnected systems.

This work addresses the verification gap between formal protocol specifications and their real-world implementations by monitoring compliance with formal specifications.

Universal Composability (UC) is the gold standard for cryptographic security, but mechanizing proofs of UC is notoriously difficult. A recently-discovered connection between UC and Robust Compilation (RC)-a novel theory of secure compilation-provides a means to verify UC proofs using tools that mechanize equality results. Unfortunately, the existing methods apply only to perfect UC security, and real-world protocols relying on cryptography are only computationally secure. This paper addresses this gap by lifting the connection between UC and RC to the computational setting, extending techniques from the RC setting to apply to computational UC security. Moreover, it further generalizes the UC-RC connection beyond computational security to arbitrary equalities, providing a framework to subsume the existing perfect case, and to instantiate future theories with more complex notions of security. This connection allows the use of tools for proofs of computational indistinguishability to properly mechanize proofs of computational UC security. We demonstrate this power by using CRYPTOVERIF to mechanize a proof that parts of the Wireguard protocol are computationally UC secure. Finally, all proofs of the framework itself are verified in Isabelle/HOL.

This article discusses the relationship between two frameworks: universal composability ( \(\mathsf{UC}\) ) and robust compilation ( RC ). In cryptography, \(\mathsf{UC}\) is a framework for the specification and analysis of cryptographic protocols with a strong compositionality guarantee: \(\mathsf{UC}\) protocols remain secure even when composed with other protocols. In programming language security, RC is a novel framework for determining secure compilation by proving whether compiled programs are as secure as their source-level counterparts no matter what target-level code they interact with. Presently, these disciplines are studied in isolation, though we argue that there is a deep connection between them and exploring this connection will benefit both research fields. This article formally proves the connection between \(\mathsf{UC}\) and RC and then it explores the benefits of this connection (focussing on perfect, rather than computational \(\mathsf{UC}\) ). For this, this article first identifies which conditions must programming languages fulfil in order to possibly attain \(\mathsf{UC}\) -like composition. Then, it proves \(\mathsf{UC}\) of both an existing and a new commitment protocol as a corollary of the related compilers attaining RC . Finally, it mechanises these proofs in DEEPSEC, obtaining symbolic guarantees that the protocol is indeed \(\mathsf{UC}\) . Our connection lays the groundwork towards a better and deeper understanding of both \(\mathsf{UC}\) and RC , and the benefits we showcase from this connection provide evidence of scalable mechanised proofs for \(\mathsf{UC}\) .

We introduce CryptoBap, a platform to verify weak secrecy and authentication for the (ARMv8 and RISC-V) machine code of cryptographic protocols. We achieve this by first transpiling the binary of protocols into an intermediate representation and then performing a crypto-aware symbolic execution to automatically extract a model of the protocol that represents all its execution paths. Our symbolic execution resolves indirect jumps and supports bounded loops using the loop-summarization technique, which we fully automate. The extracted model is then translated into models amenable to automated verification via ProVerif and CryptoVerif using a third-party toolchain. We prove the soundness of the proposed approach and used CryptoBap to verify multiple case studies ranging from toy examples to real-world protocols, TinySSH, an implementation of SSH, and WireGuard, a modern VPN protocol.

The integrity of the content a user is exposed to when browsing the web relies on a plethora of non-web technologies and an infrastructure of interdependent hosts, communication technologies, and trust relations. Incidents like the Chinese Great Cannon or the MyEtherWallet attack make it painfully clear: the security of end users hinges on the security of the surrounding infrastructure: routing, DNS, content delivery, and the PKI. There are many competing, but isolated proposals to increase security, from the network up to the application layer. So far, researchers have focused on analyzing attacks and defenses on specific layers. We still lack an evaluation of how, given the status quo of the web, these proposals can be combined, how effective they are, and at what cost the increase of security comes. In this work, we propose a graph-based analysis based on Stackelberg planning that considers a rich attacker model and a multitude of proposals from IPsec to DNSSEC and SRI. Our threat model considers the security of billions of users against attackers ranging from small hacker groups to nation-state actors. Analyzing the infrastructure of the Top 5k Alexa domains, we discover that the security mechanisms currently deployed are ineffective and that some infrastructure providers have a comparable threat potential to nations. We find a considerable increase of security (up to 13% protected web visits) is possible at a relatively modest cost, due to the effectiveness of mitigations at the application and transport layer, which dominate expensive infrastructure enhancements such as DNSSEC and IPsec.

Stackelberg planning is a recent framework where a leader and a follower each choose a plan in the same planning task, the leader's objective being to maximize plan cost for the follower. This formulation naturally captures security-related (leader=defender, follower=attacker) as well as robustness-related (leader=adversarial event, follower=agent) scenarios. Solving Stackelberg planning tasks requires solving many related planning tasks at the follower level (in the worst case, one for every possible leader plan). Here we introduce new methods to tackle this source of complexity, through sharing information across follower tasks. Our evaluation shows that these methods can significantly reduce both the time needed to solve follower tasks and the number of follower tasks that need to be solved in the first place.

Campus Companies and network operators perform risk assessment to inform policy-making, guide infrastructure investments or to comply with security standards such as ISO 27001. Due to the size and complexity of these networks, risk assessment techniques such as attack graphs or trees describe the attacker with a finite set of rules. This characterization of the attacker can easily miss attack vectors or overstate them, potentially leading to incorrect risk estimation. In this work, we propose the first methodology to justify a rule-based attacker model. Conceptually, we add another layer of abstraction on top of the symbolic model of cryptography, which reasons about protocols and abstracts cryptographic primitives. This new layer reasons about Internet-scale networks and abstracts protocols.We show, in general, how the soundness and completeness of a rule-based model can be ensured by verifying trace properties, linking soundness to safety properties and completeness to liveness properties. We then demonstrate the approach for a recently proposed threat model that quantifies the confidentiality of email communication on the Internet, including DNS, DNSSEC, and SMTP. Using off-the-shelf protocol verification tools, we discover two flaws in their threat model. After fixing them, we show that it provides symbolic soundness.

A promising paradigm in protocol design is to hold parties accountable for misbehavior, instead of postulating that they are trustworthy. Recent approaches in defining this property, called accountability, characterized malicious behavior as a deviation from the protocol that causes a violation of the desired security property, but did so under the assumption that all deviating parties are controlled by a single, centralized adversary. In this work, we investigate the setting where multiple parties can deviate with or without coordination in a variant of the applied-π calculus.We first demonstrate that, under realistic assumptions, it is impossible to determine all misbehaving parties; however, we show that accountability can be relaxed to exclude causal dependencies that arise from the behavior of deviating parties, and not from the protocol as specified. We map out the design space for the relaxation, point out protocol classes separating these notions and define conditions under which we can guarantee fairness and completeness. Most importantly, we discover under which circumstances it is correct to consider accountability in the single-adversary setting, where this property can be verified with off-the-shelf protocol verification tools.

Little can be achieved in the design of security protocols without trusting at least some participants. This trust should be justified or, at the very least, subject to examination. One way to strengthen trustworthiness is to hold parties accountable for their actions, as this provides a strong incentive to refrain from malicious behavior. This has led to an increased interest in accountability in the design of security protocols. In this work, we combine the accountability definition of Künnemann, Esiyok, and Backes [21] with the notion of case tests to extend its applicability to protocols with unbounded sets of participants. We propose a general construction of verdict functions and a set of verification conditions that achieve soundness and completeness. Expressing the verification conditions in terms of trace properties allows us to extend TAMARIN - a protocol verification tool - with the ability to analyze and verify accountability properties in a highly automated way. In contrast to prior work, our approach is significantly more flexible and applicable to a wider range of protocols.

Being the most widely used and comprehensive standard for hardware security modules, cryptographic tokens and smart cards, PKCS#11 has been the subject of academic study for years. PKCS#11 provides a key store that is separate from the application, so that, ideally, an application never sees a key in the clear. Again and again, researchers have pointed out the need for an import/export mechanism that ensures the integrity of the permissions associated to a key. With version 2.40, for the first time, the standard included authenticated deterministic encryption schemes. The interface to this operation is insecure, however, so that an application can get the key in the clear, subverting the purpose of using a hardware security module. This work proposes a formal model for the secure use of authenticated deterministic encryption in PKCS#11, including concrete API changes to allow for secure policies to be implemented. Owing to the authenticated encryption mechanism, the policy we propose provides more functionality than any policy proposed so far and can be implemented without access to a random number generator. Our results cover modes of operation that rely on unique initialisation vectors (IVs), like GCM or CCM, but also modes that generate synthetic IVs. We furthermore provide a proof for the deduction soundness of our modelling of deterministic encryption in Böhl et.al.'s composable deduction soundness framework.

Accountability is a recent paradigm in security protocol design which aims to eliminate traditional trust assumptions on parties and hold them accountable for their misbehavior. It is meant to establish trust in the first place and to recognize and react if this trust is violated. In this work, we discuss a protocol-agnostic definition of accountability: a protocol provides accountability (w.r.t. some security property) if it can identify all misbehaving parties, where misbehavior is defined as a deviation from the protocol that causes a security violation. We provide a mechanized method for the verification of accountability and demonstrate its use for verification and attack finding on various examples from the accountability and causality literature, including Certificate Transparency and Kroll^{\prime}s Accountable Algorithms protocol. We reach a high degree of automation by expressing accountability in terms of a set of trace properties and show their soundness and completeness.

Inspired by work on Stackelberg security games, we introduce Stackelberg planning, where a leader player in a classical planning task chooses a minimum-cost action sequence aimed at maximizing the plan cost of a follower player in the same task. Such Stackelberg planning can provide useful analyses not only in planning-based security applications like network penetration testing, but also to measure robustness against perturbances in more traditional planning applications (e. g. with a leader sabotaging road network connections in transportation-type domains). To identify all equilibria---exhibiting the leader’s own-cost-vs.-follower-cost trade-off---we design leader-follower search, a state space search at the leader level which calls in each state an optimal planner at the follower level. We devise simple heuristic guidance, branch-and-bound style pruning, and partial-order reduction techniques for this setting. We run experiments on Stackelberg variants of IPC and pentesting benchmarks. In several domains, Stackelberg planning is quite feasible in practice.

Security in the Internet has historically been added post-hoc, leaving services like email, which, after all, is used by 3.7 billion users, vulnerable to large-scale surveillance. For email alone, there is a multitude of proposals to mitigate known vulnerabilities, ranging from the introduction of completely new protocols to modifications of the communication paths used by big providers. Deciding which measures to deploy requires a deep understanding of the induced benefits, the cost and the resulting effects. This paper proposes the first automated methodology for making formal deployment assessments. Our planning algorithm analyses the impact and cost-efficiency of different known mitigation strategies against an attacker in a formal threat model. This novel formalisation of an infrastructure attacker includes routing, name resolution and application level weaknesses. We apply the methodology to a large-scale scan of the Internet, and assess how protocols like IPsec, DNSSEC, DANE, SMTP STS, SMTP over TLS and other mitigation techniques like server relocation can be combined to improve the confidentiality of email users in 45 combinations of attacker and defender countries and nine cost scenarios. This is the first deployment analysis for mitigation techniques at this scale.

In this paper, we provide the first methodology for reasoning about livenessproperties of cryptographic protocols in a machine-assisted manner withoutimposing any artificial, finite bounds on the protocols and execution models. To this end, we design an extension of the SAPiC process calculus so that itsupports key concepts for stating and reasoning about liveness properties, along with a corresponding translation into the formalism of multiset rewritingthat the state-of-the-art theorem prover Tamarin relies upon. We prove thatthis translation is sound and complete and can thereby automatically generatesound Tamarin specifications and automate the protocol analysis. Second, we applied our methodology to two widely investigated fair exchangeprotocols - ASW and GJM - and to the Secure Conversation Protocol standardfor industrial control systems, deployed by major players such as Siemens, SAPand ABB. For the fair exchange protocols, we not only re-discovered knownattacks, but also uncovered novel attacks that previous analyses based onfinite models and a restricted number of sessions did not detect. We suggestfixed versions of these protocols for which we prove both fairness andtimeliness, yielding the first automated proofs for fair exchange protocolsthat rely on a general model without restricting the number of sessions andmessage size. For the Secure Conversation Protocol, we prove several strongsecurity properties that are vital for the safety of industrial systems, inparticular that all messages (e.g., commands) are eventually delivered inorder.

Automatically analyzing information flow within Android applications that rely on cryptographic operations with their computational security guarantees imposes formidable challenges that existing approaches for understanding an app's behavior struggle to meet. These approaches do not distinguish cryptographic and non-cryptographic operations, and hence do not account for cryptographic protections: f(m) is considered sensitive for a sensitive message m irrespective of potential secrecy properties offered by a cryptographic operation f. These approaches consequently provide a safe approximation of the app's behavior, but they mistakenly classify a large fraction of apps as potentially insecure and consequently yield overly pessimistic results. In this paper, we show how cryptographic operations can be faithfully included into existing approaches for automated app analysis. To this end, we first show how cryptographic operations can be expressed as symbolic abstractions within the comprehensive Dalvik bytecode language. These abstractions are accessible to automated analysis and can be conveniently added to existing app analysis tools using minor changes in their semantics. Second, we show that our abstractions are faithful by providing the first computational soundness result for Dalvik bytecode, i.e., the absence of attacks against our symbolically abstracted program entails the absence of any attacks against a suitable cryptographic program realization. We cast our computational soundness result in the CoSP framework, which makes the result modular and composable.

Security APIs, key servers and protocols that need to keep the status of transactions, require to maintain a global, non-monotonic state, e.g., in the form of a database or register. However, most existing automated verification tools do not support the analysis of such stateful security protocols – sometimes because of fundamental reasons, such as the encoding of the protocol as Horn clauses, which are inherently monotonic. A notable exception is the recent tamarin prover which allows specifying protocols as multiset rewrite (msr) rules, a formalism expressive enough to encode state. As multiset rewriting is a “low-level” specification language with no direct support for concurrent message passing, encoding protocols correctly is a difficult and error-prone process. We propose a process calculus which is a variant of the applied pi calculus with constructs for manipulation of a global state by processes running in parallel. We show that this language can be translated to msr rules whilst preserving all security properties expressible in a dedicated first-order logic for security properties. The translation has been implemented in a prototype tool which uses the tamarin prover as a backend. We apply the tool to several case studies among which a simplified fragment of PKCS#11, the Yubikey security token, and an optimistic contract signing protocol.

Security APIs, key servers and protocols that need to keep the status of transactions, require to maintain a global, non-monotonic state, e.g., in the form of a database or register. However, existing automated verification tools do not support the analysis of such stateful security protocols - sometimes because of fundamental reasons, such as the encoding of the protocol as Horn clauses, which are inherently monotonic. An exception is the recent tamarin prover which allows specifying protocols as multiset rewrite (MSR) rules, a formalism expressive enough to encode state. As multiset rewriting is a "low-level" specification language with no direct support for concurrent message passing, encoding protocols correctly is a difficult and error-prone process. We propose a process calculus which is a variant of the applied pi calculus with constructs for manipulation of a global state by processes running in parallel. We show that this language can be translated to MSR rules whilst preserving all security properties expressible in a dedicated first-order logic for security properties. The translation has been implemented in a prototype tool which useqs the tamarin prover as a backend. We apply the tool to several case studies among which a simplified fragment of PKCS#11, the Yubikey security token, and an optimistic contract signing protocol.