Security Analysis in Probabilistic Distributed Protocols via Bounded Reachability

  • Silvia S. Pelozo
  • Pedro R. D’Argenio
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8191)


We present a framework to analyze security properties in distributed protocols. The framework is constructed on top of the so called (strongly) distributed schedulers where secrecy is also considered. Secrecy is presented as an equivalence class on actions to those components that do not have access to such secrets; however these actions can be distinguished by those with appropriate clearance. We also present an algorithm to solve bounded reachability analysis on this kind of models. The algorithm appropriately encodes the nondeterministic model by interpreting the decisions of the schedulers as parameters. The problem is then reduced to a polynomial optimization problem.


Model Check Goal State Security Analysis Probabilistic Choice Model Check Problem 
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.
    Andrés, M.: Quantitative Analysis of Information Leakage in Probabilistic and Nondeterministic Systems. Ph.D. thesis, Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen (2011)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Andrés, M.E., Palamidessi, C., van Rossum, P., Sokolova, A.: Information hiding in probabilistic concurrent systems. Theor. Comput. Sci. 412(28), 3072–3089 (2011)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bhargava, M., Palamidessi, C.: Probabilistic anonymity. In: Abadi, M., de Alfaro, L. (eds.) CONCUR 2005. LNCS, vol. 3653, pp. 171–185. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bianco, A., de Alfaro, L.: Model checking of probabilistic and nondeterministic systems. In: Thiagarajan, P.S. (ed.) FSTTCS 1995. LNCS, vol. 1026, pp. 499–513. Springer, Heidelberg (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Calin, G., Crouzen, P., D’Argenio, P.R., Hahn, E., Zhang, L.: Time-bounded reachability in distributed input/output interactive probabilistic chains. In: van de Pol, J., Weber, M. (eds.) SPIN 2010. LNCS, vol. 6349, pp. 193–211. Springer, Heidelberg (2010); extended version: AVACS Technical Report No. 64 (June 2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Canetti, R., Cheung, L., Kaynar, D., Liskov, M., Lynch, N., Pereira, O., Segala, R.: Analyzing security protocols using time-bounded Task-PIOAs. Discrete Event Dynamic Systems 18, 111–159 (2008)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chatzikokolakis, K., Palamidessi, C.: Making random choices invisible to the scheduler. Information and Computation 208(6), 694–715 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chaum, D.: The dining cryptographers problem: Unconditional sender and recipient untraceability. Journal of Cryptology 1, 65–75 (1988)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cheung, L., Lynch, N., Segala, R., Vaandrager, F.: Switched PIOA: Parallel composition via distributed scheduling. Theor. Comput. Sci. 365(1-2), 83–108 (2006)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Coste, N., Hermanns, H., Lantreibecq, E., Serwe, W.: Towards performance prediction of compositional models in industrial GALS designs. In: Bouajjani, A., Maler, O. (eds.) CAV 2009. LNCS, vol. 5643, pp. 204–218. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Georgievska, S., Andova, S.: Retaining the probabilities in probabilistic testing theory. In: Ong, L. (ed.) FOSSACS 2010. LNCS, vol. 6014, pp. 79–93. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Giro, S.: On the automatic verification of distributed probabilistic automata with partial information. Ph.D. thesis, Universidad Nacional de Córdoba (2010)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Giro, S., D’Argenio, P.R.: Quantitative model checking revisited: Neither decidable nor approximable. In: Raskin, J.-F., Thiagarajan, P.S. (eds.) FORMATS 2007. LNCS, vol. 4763, pp. 179–194. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Giro, S., D’Argenio, P.R.: On the expressive power of schedulers in distributed probabilistic systems. Electron. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci. 253(3), 45–71 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Reiter, M.K., Rubin, A.D.: Crowds: Anonymity for web transactions. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. Secur. 1(1), 66–92 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Smith, G.: On the foundations of quantitative information flow. In: de Alfaro, L. (ed.) FOSSACS 2009. LNCS, vol. 5504, pp. 288–302. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wang, Y.: Real-time behaviour of asynchronous agents. In: Baeten, J.C.M., Klop, J.W. (eds.) CONCUR 1990. LNCS, vol. 458, pp. 502–520. Springer, Heidelberg (1990)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Silvia S. Pelozo
    • 1
  • Pedro R. D’Argenio
    • 1
  1. 1.CONICET - FaMAFUniversidad Nacional de CórdobaArgentina

Personalised recommendations