AMD Secure Encrypted Virtualization technologies enable confidential computing by protecting virtual machines from highly privileged software such as hypervisors. In this work, we develop the first, comprehensive symbolic model of the software interface of the latest SEV iteration called SEV Secure Nested Paging (SEV-SNP). Our model covers remote attestation, key derivation, page swap and live migration. We analyze the security of the software interface of SEV-SNP and formally prove that most critical secrecy, authentication, attestation and freshness properties do indeed hold in the model. Furthermore, we find that the platform-agnostic nature of messages exchanged between SNP guests and the AMD Secure Processor firmware presents a potential weakness in the design. We show how this weakness leads to formal attacks on multiple security properties, including the partial compromise of attestation report integrity, and discuss possible impacts and mitigations.

We propose conditional observational equivalence — a variant of observational equivalence that is more flexible since it can be made dependent on arbitrary safety trace properties. We extend an existing method for verifying observational equivalence in the multiset rewriting setting with the ability to handle conditions. Our extension can automatically verify conditional observational equivalence for a simple class of conditions that depend only on the structure of the execution. By using conditional observational equivalence, we give the first method for verifying off-line guessing resistance in the multiset rewriting setting and apply it to analyze and verify the properties of EAP-EKE, a password-authenticated key exchange (PAKE) protocol.

Augmented Reality (AR) headsets, which allow for a realistic integration between the physical environment and virtual objects, are rapidly coming to customer and enterprise markets. This is largely because they enable a broad range of multi-user applications in which all participants experience the same augmentation of their natural surrounding. However, despite their increasing expansion, there currently exist no implemented methods for secure ad-hoc device pairing of multiple AR headsets. Given the importance of multi-user experiences for future applications of this technology, in this paper we propose two distinct ways to establish secure ad-hoc connections that rely only on typical user interactions in AR: gazing and tapping either at the location of a shared point on the wall or towards the user with whom one wants to connect. To show the feasibility and deployability of the proposed system to existing technology, we build a prototype of Tap-Pair, a system for ad-hoc pairing of AR headsets that is based on Password Authenticated Key Exchange protocols, requires only user interactions that are common in AR, and can be extended to more than two users. The experimental evaluation of the Tap-Pair prototype in a series of measurements at three different locations confirms the feasibility of our proposal, showing that the system built with currently available augmented reality headsets indeed achieves successful pairing in more than 90% of attempts, while keeping the probability of the attacker's success lower than 1e-3.

Augmented Reality (AR) devices continuously scan their environment in order to naturally overlay virtual objects onto user's view of the physical world. In contrast to Virtual Reality, where one's environment is fully replaced with a virtual one, one of AR's "killer features" is co-located collaboration, in which multiple users interact with the same combination of virtual and real objects. Microsoft recently released HoloLens, the first consumer-ready augmented reality headset that needs no outside markers to achieve precise inside-out spatial mapping, which allows centimeter-scale hologram positioning.

Protocol authentication properties are generally trace-based, meaning that authentication holds for the protocol if authentication holds for individual traces (runs of the protocol and adversary). Computational secrecy conditions, on the other hand, often are not trace based: the ability to computa tionally distinguish a system that transmits a secret from one that does not is measured by overall success on the set of all traces of each system. Non-trace-based properties present a challenge for inductive or compositional methods: induction is a natural way of reasoning about traces of a system, but it does not appear directly applicable to non-trace properties. We therefore investigate the semantic connection between trace properties that could be established by induction and non-trace-based security requirements. Specifically, we prove that a certain trace property implies computational secrecy and authentication properties, assuming the encryption scheme provides chosen ciphertext security and ciphertext integrity. We also prove a similar theorem for computational secrecy assuming Decisional Diffie–Hellman and a chosen plaintext secure encryption scheme.

We develop a compositional method for proving cryptographically sound security properties of key exchange protocols, based on a symbolic logic that is interpreted over conventional runs of a protocol against a probabilistic polynomial-time attacker. Since reasoning about an unbounded number of runs of a protocol involves induction-like arguments about properties preserved by each run, we formulate a specification of secure key exchange that is closed under general composition with steps that use the key We present formal proof rules based on this game-based condition, and prove that the proof rules are sound over a computational semantics. The proof system is used to establish security of a standard protocol in the computational model

The IEEE 802.11i wireless networking protocol provides mutual authentication between a network access point and user devices prior to user connectivity. The protocol consists of several parts, including an 802.1X authentication phase using TLS over EAP, the 4-Way Handshake to establish a fresh session key, and an optional Group Key Handshake for group communications. Motivated by previous vulnerabilities in related wireless protocols and changes in 802.11i to provide better security, we carry out a formal proof of correctness using a Protocol Composition Logic previously used for other protocols. The proof is modular, comprising a separate proof for each protocol section and providing insight into the networking environment in which each section can be reliably used. Further, the proof holds for a variety of failure recovery strategies and other implementation and configuration options. Since SSL/TLS is widely used apart from 802.11i, the security proof for SSL/TLS has independent interest.

We develop a general method for reasoning about contract-signing protocols using a specialized protocol logic. The method is applied to prove properties of the Asokan-Shoup-Waidner and the Garay-Jacobson-MacKenzie protocols. Our method offers certain advantages over previous analysis techniques. First, it is compositional: the security guarantees are proved by combining the independent proofs for the three sub-protocols of which each protocol is comprised. Second, the formal proofs are carried out in a "template" form, which gives us a reusable proof that may be instantiated for the ASW and GJM protocols, as well as for other protocols with the same arrangement of messages. Third, the proofs follow the design intuition. In particular, in proving game-theoretic properties like fairness, we demonstrate that the specific strategy that the protocol designer had in mind works, instead of showing that one exists. Finally, our results hold even when an unbounded number of sessions are executed in parallel.

Many authentication and key exchange protocols are built using an accepted set of standard concepts such as Diffie–Hellman key exchange, nonces to avoid replay, certificates from an accepted authority, and encrypted or signed messages. We propose a general framework for deriving security protocols from simple components, using composition, refinements, and transformations. As a case study, we examine the structure of a family of key exchange protocols that includes Station-To-Station (STS), ISO-9798-3, Just Fast Keying (JFK), IKE and related protocols, deriving all members of the family from two basic protocols. In order to associate formal proofs with protocol derivations, we extend our previous security protocol logic with preconditions, temporal assertions, composition rules, and several other improvements. Using the logic, which we prove is sound with respect to the standard symbolic model of protocol execution and attack (the “Dolev–Yao model”), the security properties of the standard signature based Challenge-Response protocol and the Diffie–Hellman key exchange protocol are established. The ISO-9798-3 protocol is then proved correct by composing the correctness proofs of these two simple protocols. Although our current formal logic is not sufficient to modularly prove security for all of our current protocol derivations, the derivation system provides a framework for further improvements.

Many authentication and key exchange protocols are built using an accepted set of standard concepts such as Diffie-Hellman key exchange, nonces to avoid replay, certificates from an accepted authority, and encrypted or signed messages. We introduce a basic framework for deriving security protocols from such simple components. As a case study, we examine the structure of a family of key exchange protocols that includes station-to-station (STS), ISO-9798-3, just fast keying (JFK), IKE and related protocols, deriving all members of the family from two basic protocols using a small set of refinements and protocol transformations. As initial steps toward associating logical derivations with protocol derivations, we extend a previous security protocol logic with preconditions and temporal assertions. Using this logic, we prove the security properties of the standard signature based challenge-response protocol and the Diffie-Hellman key exchange protocol. The ISO-9798-3 protocol is then proved correct by composing the correctness proofs of these two simple protocols.

This paper continues the program initiated in [5], towards a derivation system for security protocols. The general idea is that complex protocols can be formally derived, starting from basic security components, using a sequence of refinements and transformations, just like logical proofs are derived starting from axioms, using proof rules and transformations. The claim is that in practice, many protocols are already derived in such a way, but informally. Capturing this practice in a suitable formalism turns out to be a considerable task. The present paper proposes rules for composing security protocols from given security components. In general, security protocols are, of course, not compositional: information revealed by one may interfere with the security of the other. However, annotating protocol steps by pre- and post-conditions, allows secure sequential composition. Establishing that protocol components satisfy each other’s invariants allows more general forms of composition, ensuring that the individually secure sub-protocols will not interact insecurely in the composite protocol. The applicability of the method is demonstrated on modular derivations of two standard protocols, together with their simple security properties.