Fortunat Rajaona

dblp:323/4722 · also Solofomampionona Fortunat Rajaona · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
7ranked-venue papers
2as first author
7since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0003-4902-9800ORCID · verified

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Security and privacy · 4 · 1 first-author · 4 since 2021Theory of computation · 2 · 1 first-author · 2 since 2021Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 since 2021
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Post-Compromise Security with Application-Level Key-Controls - with a comprehensive study of the 5G AKMA protocol
abstract
International audience
Ioana Boureanu, Cristina Onete, Stephan Wesemeyer, Léo Robert, Rhys Miller, Pascal Lafourcade 0001, Fortunat Rajaona
AsiaCCS7
2025 A Systematic Study of Practical & Formal Privacy in the 5G AKMA Procedure
abstract
We systematically scrutinise all the facets of privacy in the 5G delegated-authentication procedure called AKMA (Authentication and Key Management for Applications based on 3GPP credentials in the 5G Systems). We define, in general terms, a privacy-threat model and privacy requirements for this protocol. Using these definitions, we find numerous privacy failings in the AKMA protocol. We propose a patch, called AKMAp, which imposes minimal changes on AKMA, yet it attains all our privacy requirements. We also formalise and analyse all of this in terms of formal privacy-verification in the Dolev-Yao model; to this end, we use the Tamarin prover to systematically carried out our formal analyses of AKMA and AKMAp.
Ioana Boureanu, Stephan Wesemeyer, Fortunat Rajaona, Steve A. Schneider, Helen Treharne
EuroS&P3
2025 An SMT-Based Approach to the Verification of Knowledge-Based Programs
abstract
We give a general-purpose programming language in which programs can reason about their own knowledge. To specify what these intelligent programs know, we define a “program epistemic” logic, akin to a dynamic epistemic logic for programs. Our logic properties are complex, including programs introspecting into future state of affairs, i.e., reasoning now about facts that hold only after they and other threads will execute. To model aspects anchored in privacy, our logic is interpreted over partial observability of variables, thus capturing that each thread can “see” only a part of the global space of variables. We verify program-epistemic properties on such AI-centred programs. To this end, we give a sound translation of the validity of our program-epistemic logic into first-order validity, using a new weakest-precondition semantics and a book-keeping of variable assignment. We implement our translation and fully automate our verification method for well-established examples using SMT solvers.
Francesco Belardinelli, Ioana Boureanu, Vadim Malvone, Fortunat Rajaona
Formal Aspects Comput.4
2024 Epistemic Model Checking for Privacy
abstract
We define an epistemic logic or logic of knowledge, PL, and a formalism to undertake privacy-centric reasoning in security protocols, over a Dolev-Yao model. We are able to automatically verify all the privacy requirements that are commonplace in security-protocol verification (i.e., strong secrecy, anonymity, various types of unlinkablity including weak unlinkability), as well as privacy notions that are less studied (i.e., privacy regarding lists' membership). Our methodology does not vary with the property: it is uniform no matter the kind of privacy requirement specified and/or verified. We operate in the setting of a bounded number of protocol-sessions. We also implement Phoebe – a proof-of-concept model checker for this methodology. We use Phoebe to check all the aforementioned properties, and we also show-case it on the “benchmark” anonymity and unlinkability requirements of several well-known protocols.
Fortunat Rajaona, Ioana Boureanu, Ramaswamy Ramanujam, Stephan Wesemeyer
CSF1
2023 Automatically Verifying Expressive Epistemic Properties of Programs
abstract
We propose a new approach to the verification of epistemic properties of programmes. First, we introduce the new ``program-epistemic'' logic L_PK, which is strictly richer and more general than similar formalisms appearing in the literature. To solve the verification problem in an efficient way, we introduce a translation from our language L_PK into first-order logic. Then, we show and prove correct a reduction from the model checking problem for program-epistemic formulas to the satisfiability of their first-order translation. Both our logic and our translation can handle richer specification w.r.t. the state of the art, allowing us to express the knowledge of agents about facts pertaining to programs (i.e., agents' knowledge before a program is executed as well as after is has been executed). Furthermore, we implement our translation in Haskell in a general way (i.e., independently of the programs in the logical statements), and we use existing SMT-solvers to check satisfaction of L_PK formulas on a benchmark example in the AI/agency field.
Francesco Belardinelli, Ioana Boureanu, Vadim Malvone, Fortunat Rajaona
AAAI4
2023 Program Semantics and Verification Technique for AI-Centred Programs
Fortunat Rajaona, Ioana Boureanu, Vadim Malvone, Francesco Belardinelli
FM1
2023 Fine-Grained Trackability in Protocol Executions
Ksenia Budykho, Ioana Boureanu, Stephan Wesemeyer, Matt Lewis, Yogaratnam Rahulan, Fortunat Rajaona, Steve A. Schneider
NDSS7