Ron van der Meyden

Ron van der Meyden

The paper develops a logical understanding of processes for signature of legal contracts, motivated by applications to legal recognition of smart contracts on blockchain platforms. A number of axioms and rules of inference are developed that can be used to justify a ``meeting of the minds'' precondition for contract formation from the fact that certain content has been signed. In addition to an ``offer and acceptance'' process, the paper considers ``signature in counterparts'', a legal process that permits a contract between two or more parties to be brought into force by having the parties independently (possibly, remotely) sign different copies of the contract, rather than placing their signatures on a common copy at a physical meeting. It is argued that a satisfactory account of signature in counterparts benefits from a logic with syntactic self-reference. The axioms used are supported by a formal semantics, and a number of further properties of the logic are investigated. In particular, it is shown that the logic implies that when a contract has been signed, the parties do not just agree, but are in mutual agreement (a common-knowledge-like notion) about the terms of the contract.

Joseph Y. Halpern, Ron van der Meyden, Riccardo Pucella

While there have been many attempts, going back to BAN logic, to base reasoning about security protocols on epistemic notions, they have not been all that successful. Arguably, this has been due to the particular logics chosen. We present a simple logic based on the well-understood modal operators of knowledge, time, and probability, and show that it is able to handle issues that have often been swept under the rug by other approaches, while being flexible enough to capture all the higher- level security notions that appear in BAN logic. Moreover, while still assuming that the knowledge operator allows for unbounded computation, it can handle the fact that a computationally bounded agent cannot decrypt messages in a natural way, by distinguishing strings and message terms. We demonstrate that our logic can capture BAN logic notions by providing a translation of the BAN operators into our logic, capturing belief by a form of probabilistic knowledge.

Oliver Woizekowski, Ron van der Meyden

The literature on information flow security with respect to transitive policies has been concentrated largely on the case of policies with two security domains, High and Low, because of a presumption that more general policies can be reduced to this two-domain case. The details of the reduction have not been the subject of careful study, however. Many works in the literature use a reduction based on a quantification over "Low-down" partitionings of domains into those below and those not below a given domain in the information flow order. A few use "High-up" partitionings of domains into those above and those not above a given domain. Our paper argues that more general "cut" partitionings are also appropriate, and studies the relationships between the resulting multi-domain notions of security when the basic notion for the two-domain case to which we reduce is either Nondeducibility on Inputs or Generalized Noninterference. The Low-down reduction is shown to be weaker than the others, and while the High-up reduction is sometimes equivalent to the cut reduction, both it and the Low-down reduction may have an undesirable property of non-monotonicity with respect to a natural ordering on policies. These results suggest that the cut-based partitioning yields a more robust general approach for reduction to the two-domain case.

Sebastian Eggert, Ron van der Meyden

The paper studies dynamic information flow security policies in an automaton-based model. Two semantic interpretations of such policies are developed, both of which generalize the notion of TA-security [van der Meyden ESORICS 2007] for static intransitive noninterference policies. One of the interpretations focuses on information flows permitted by policy edges, the other focuses on prohibitions implied by absence of policy edges. In general, the two interpretations differ, but necessary and sufficient conditions are identified for the two interpretations to be equivalent. Sound and complete proof techniques are developed for both interpretations. Two applications of the theory are presented. The first is a general result showing that access control mechanisms are able to enforce a dynamic information flow policy. The second is a simple capability system motivated by the Flume operating system.

Stephen Chong, Ron van der Meyden

We demonstrate, by a number of examples, that information-flow security properties can be proved from abstract architectural descriptions, that describe only the causal structure of a system and local properties of trusted components. We specify these architectural descriptions of systems by generalizing intransitive noninterference policies to admit the ability to filter information passed between communicating domains. A notion of refinement of such system architectures is developed that supports top-down development of architectural specifications and proofs by abstraction of information security properties. We also show that, in a concrete setting where the causal structure is enforced by access control, a static check of the access control setting plus local verification of the trusted components is sufficient to prove that a generalized intransitive noninterference policy is satisfied.

Franck Cassez, Ron van der Meyden, Chenyi Zhang

The paper considers the complexity of verifying that a finite state system satisfies a number of definitions of information flow security. The systems model considered is one in which agents operate synchronously with awareness of the global clock. This enables timing based attacks to be captured, whereas previous work on this topic has dealt primarily with asynchronous systems. Versions of the notions of nondeducibility on inputs, nondeducibility on strategies, and an unwinding based notion are formulated for this model. All three notions are shown to be decidable, and their computational complexity is characterised.

Sebastian Eggert, Ron van der Meyden, Henning Schnoor et al.

The paper considers several definitions of information flow security for intransitive policies from the point of view of the complexity of verifying whether a finite-state system is secure. The results are as follows. Checking (i) P-security (Goguen and Meseguer), (ii) IP-security (Haigh and Young), and (iii) TA-security (van der Meyden) are all in PTIME, while checking TO-security (van der Meyden) is undecidable, as is checking ITO-security (van der Meyden). The most important ingredients in the proofs of the PTIME upper bounds are new characterizations of the respective security notions, which also lead to new unwinding proof techniques that are shown to be sound and complete for these notions of security, and enable the algorithms to return simple counter-examples demonstrating insecurity. Our results for IP-security improve a previous doubly exponential bound of Hadj-Alouane et al.