A Calculus of Trustworthy Ad Hoc Networks

  • Massimo Merro
  • Eleonora Sibilio
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5983)


We propose a process calculus for mobile ad hoc networks which embodies a behaviour-based multilevel decentralised trust model. Our trust model supports both direct trust, by monitoring nodes behaviour, and indirect trust, by collecting recommendations and spreading reputations. The operational semantics of the calculus is given in terms of a labelled transition system, where actions are executed at a certain security level. We define a labelled bisimilarity parameterised on security levels. Our bisimilarity is a congruence and an efficient proof method for an appropriate variant of barbed congruence, a standard contextually-defined program equivalence. Communications are proved safe with respect to the security levels of the involved parties. In particular, we ensure safety despite compromise: compromised nodes cannot affect the rest of the network. A non interference result expressed in terms of information flow is also proved.


Node Mobility Security Level Operational Semantic Malicious Node Trust Management 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Blaze, M., Feigenbaum, J., Lacy, J.: Decentralized Trust Management. In: Symposium on Security and Privacy, pp. 164–173. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (1996)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Grandison, T.W.A.: Trust Management for Internet Applications. PhD thesis, Department of Computing, University of London (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bell, D.E., LaPadula, L.J.: Secure Computer System: Unified Exposition and Multics Interpretation. Technical Report MTR-2997, MITRE Corporation (1975)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mezzetti, N., Sangiorgi, D.: Towards a Calculus For Wireless Systems. Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science 158, 331–353 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Nanz, S., Hankin, C.: A Framework for Security Analysis of Mobile Wireless Networks. Theoretical Computer Science 367(1-2), 203–227 (2006)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Singh, A., Ramakrishnan, C.R., Smolka, S.A.: A Process Calculus for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks. In: Lea, D., Zavattaro, G. (eds.) COORDINATION 2008. LNCS, vol. 5052, pp. 296–314. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Merro, M.: An Observational Theory for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks (full paper). Information and Computation 207(2), 194–208 (2009)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Godskesen, J.: A Calculus for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks. In: Murphy, A.L., Vitek, J. (eds.) COORDINATION 2007. LNCS, vol. 4467, pp. 132–150. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ghassemi, F., Fokkink, W., Movaghar, A.: Equational Reasoning on Ad Hoc Networks. In: Sirjani, M. (ed.) FSEN 2009. LNCS, vol. 5961, pp. 113–128. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Godskesen, J.C., Nanz, S.: Mobility Models and Behavioural Equivalence for Wireless Networks. In: Field, J., Vasconcelos, V.T. (eds.) COORDINATION 2009. LNCS, vol. 5521, pp. 106–122. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Huang, D., Medhi, D.: A Secure Group Key Management Scheme for Hierarchical Mobile Ad Hoc Networks. Ad Hoc Networks 6(4), 560–577 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Milner, R., Sangiorgi, D.: Barbed Bisimulation. In: Kuich, W. (ed.) ICALP 1992. LNCS, vol. 623, pp. 685–695. Springer, Heidelberg (1992)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Milner, R.: Communication and Concurrency. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1989)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Shehab, M., Bertino, E., Ghafoor, A.: Efficient Hierarchical Key Generation and Key Diffusion for Sensor Networks. In: SECON, pp. 76–84. IEEE Communications Society, Los Alamitos (2005)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Di Pietro, R., Mancini, L.V., Law, Y.W., Etalle, S., Havinga, P.J.M.: LKHW: A Directed Diffusion-Based Secure Multicast Scheme for Wireless Sensor Networks. In: ICPP Workshops 2003, pp. 397–413. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2003)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bhargavan, K., Obradovic, D., Gunter, C.A.: Formal Verification of Standards for Distance Vector Routing Protocols. Journal of the ACM 49(4), 538–576 (2002)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Crafa, S., Rossi, S.: Controlling Information Release in the π-calculus. Information and Computation 205(8), 1235–1273 (2007)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Goguen, J.A., Meseguer, J.: Security Policies and Security Models. In: IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, pp. 11–20 (1982)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Focardi, R., Gorrieri, R.: A Classification of Security Properties for Process Algebras. Journal of Computer Security 3(1), 5–33 (1995)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Reitman, R., Andrews, G.: An Axiomatic Approach to Information Flow in Programs. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems 2(1), 56–76 (1980)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Smith, G., Volpano, D.: Secure Information Flow in a Multi-threaded Imperative Language. In: Proc. 25th POPL, pp. 355–364. ACM Press, New York (1998)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Heintz, N., Riecke, J.G.: The SLam Calculus: Programming with Secrecy and Integrity. In: Proc. 25th POPL, pp. 365–377. ACM Press, New York (1998)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bodei, C., Degano, P., Nielson, F., Nielson, H.R.: Static Analysis for the pi-Calculus with Applications to Security. Information and Computation 168(1), 68–92 (2001)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Boudol, G., Castellani, I.: Noninterference for Concurrent Programs and Thread Systems. Theoretical Computer Science 281(1-2), 109–130 (2002)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Komarova, M., Riguidel, M.: Adjustable Trust Model for Access Control. In: Rong, C., Jaatun, M.G., Sandnes, F.E., Yang, L.T., Ma, J. (eds.) ATC 2008. LNCS, vol. 5060, pp. 429–443. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hennessy, M.: The Security pi-calculus and Non-Interference. Journal of Logic and Algebraic Programming 63(1), 3–34 (2005)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Merro, M., Sibilio, E.: A Timed Calculus for Wireless Systems. In: Arbab, F., Sirjani, M. (eds.) FSEN 2009. LNCS, vol. 5961, pp. 228–243. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Carbone, M., Nielsen, M., Sassone, V.: A Calculus for Trust Management. In: Lodaya, K., Mahajan, M. (eds.) FSTTCS 2004. LNCS, vol. 3328, pp. 161–173. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Martinelli, F.: Towards an Integrated Formal Analysis for Security and Trust. In: Steffen, M., Zavattaro, G. (eds.) FMOODS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3535, pp. 115–130. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Massimo Merro
    • 1
  • Eleonora Sibilio
    • 1
  1. 1.Dipartimento di InformaticaUniversità degli Studi di VeronaItaly

Personalised recommendations