text‹Agents. We allow any number of certification authorities, cardholders merchants, and payment gateways.› datatype
agent = CA nat | Cardholder nat | Merchant nat | PG nat | Spy
(*Concrete syntax: messages appear as \<open>\<lbrace>A,B,NA\<rbrace>\<close>, etc...*) syntax "_MTuple" :: "['a, args] ==> 'a * 'b" (‹(‹indent=2 notation=‹mixfix message tuple›\›\})›)
syntax_consts "_MTuple"⇌ MPair translations "{x, y, z}"⇌"{x, {y, z}}" "{x, y}"⇌"CONST MPair x y"
definition nat_of_agent :: "agent ==> nat"where "nat_of_agent == case_agent (curry prod_encode 0) (curry prod_encode 1) (curry prod_encode 2) (curry prod_encode 3) (prod_encode (4,0))" 🍋‹maps each agent to a unique natural number, for specifications›
text‹The function is indeed injective› lemma inj_nat_of_agent: "inj nat_of_agent" by (simp add: nat_of_agent_def inj_on_def curry_def prod_encode_eq split: agent.split)
definition (*Keys useful to decrypt elements of a message set*)
keysFor :: "msg set ==> key set" where"keysFor H = invKey ` {K. ∃X. Crypt K X ∈ H}"
subsubsection‹Inductive definition of all "parts" of a message.›
inductive_set
parts :: "msg set ==> msg set" for H :: "msg set" where
Inj [intro]: "X ∈ H ==> X ∈ parts H"
| Fst: "{X,Y}∈ parts H ==> X ∈ parts H"
| Snd: "{X,Y}∈ parts H ==> Y ∈ parts H"
| Body: "Crypt K X ∈ parts H ==> X ∈ parts H"
lemma Crypt_imp_invKey_keysFor: "Crypt K X ∈ H ==> invKey K ∈ keysFor H" by (unfold keysFor_def, blast)
subsection‹Inductive relation "parts"›
lemma MPair_parts: "[| {X,Y}∈ parts H; [| X ∈ parts H; Y ∈ parts H |] ==> P |] ==> P" by (blast dest: parts.Fst parts.Snd)
declare MPair_parts [elim!] parts.Body [dest!] text‹NB These two rules are UNSAFE in the formal sense, as they discard the compound message. They work well on THIS FILE. ‹MPair_parts› i
The Crypt rule is normally kept UNSAFE to avoid breaking up certificates.›
lemma parts_increasing: "H ⊆ parts(H)" by blast
lemmas parts_insertI = subset_insertI [THEN parts_mono, THEN subsetD]
lemma parts_emptyE [elim!]: "X∈ parts{} ==> P" by simp
(*WARNING: loops if H = {Y}, therefore must not be repeated!*) lemma parts_singleton: "X∈ parts H ==> ∃Y∈H. X∈ parts {Y}" by (erule parts.induct, fast+)
lemma parts_insert: "parts (insert X H) = parts {X} ∪ parts H" apply (subst insert_is_Un [of _ H]) apply (simp only: parts_Un) done
(*TWO inserts to avoid looping. This rewrite is better than nothing. Not suitable for Addsimps: its behaviour can be strange.*) lemma parts_insert2: "parts (insert X (insert Y H)) = parts {X} ∪ parts {Y} ∪ parts H" apply (simp add: Un_assoc) apply (simp add: parts_insert [symmetric]) done
(*Added to simplify arguments to parts, analz and synth.*)
text‹This allows ‹blast› to simplify occurrences of 🍋‹parts(G∪H)›in the assumption.› declare parts_Un [THEN equalityD1, THEN subsetD, THEN UnE, elim!]
lemma parts_insert_subset: "insert X (parts H) ⊆ parts(insert X H)" by (blast intro: parts_mono [THEN [2] rev_subsetD])
subsubsection‹Idempotence and transitivity›
lemma parts_partsD [dest!]: "X∈ parts (parts H) ==> X∈ parts H" by (erule parts.induct, blast+)
lemma parts_idem [simp]: "parts (parts H) = parts H" by blast
lemma parts_trans: "[| X∈ parts G; G ⊆ parts H |] ==> X∈ parts H" by (drule parts_mono, blast)
(*Cut*) lemma parts_cut: "[| Y∈ parts (insert X G); X∈ parts H |] ==> Y∈ parts (G ∪ H)" by (erule parts_trans, auto)
lemma parts_cut_eq [simp]: "X∈ parts H ==> parts (insert X H) = parts H" by (force dest!: parts_cut intro: parts_insertI)
subsubsection‹Rewrite rules for pulling out atomic messages›
(*In any message, there is an upper bound N on its greatest nonce.*) lemma msg_Nonce_supply: "∃N. ∀n. N≤n ⟶ Nonce n ∉ parts {msg}" apply (induct_tac "msg") apply (simp_all (no_asm_simp) add: exI parts_insert2) (*MPair case: blast_tac works out the necessary sum itself!*) prefer 2 apply (blast elim!: add_leE) (*Nonce case*) apply (rename_tac nat) apply (rule_tac x = "N + Suc nat"in exI) apply (auto elim!: add_leE) done
(* Ditto, for numbers.*) lemma msg_Number_supply: "∃N. ∀n. N≤n ⟶ Number n ∉ parts {msg}" apply (induct_tac "msg") apply (simp_all (no_asm_simp) add: exI parts_insert2) prefer 2 apply (blast elim!: add_leE) apply (rename_tac nat) apply (rule_tac x = "N + Suc nat"in exI, auto) done
subsection‹Inductive relation "analz"›
text‹Inductive definition of "analz" -- what can be broken down from a set of messages, including keys. A form of downward closure. Pairs can be taken apart; messages decrypted with known keys.›
inductive_set
analz :: "msg set => msg set" for H :: "msg set" where
Inj [intro,simp] : "X ∈ H ==> X ∈ analz H"
| Fst: "{X,Y}∈ analz H ==> X ∈ analz H"
| Snd: "{X,Y}∈ analz H ==> Y ∈ analz H"
| Decrypt [dest]: "[|Crypt K X ∈ analz H; Key(invKey K) ∈ analz H|] ==> X ∈ analz H"
text‹Making it safe speeds up proofs› lemma MPair_analz [elim!]: "[| {X,Y}∈ analz H; [| X ∈ analz H; Y ∈ analz H |] ==> P |] ==> P" by (blast dest: analz.Fst analz.Snd)
lemma analz_increasing: "H ⊆ analz(H)" by blast
lemma analz_subset_parts: "analz H ⊆ parts H" apply (rule subsetI) apply (erule analz.induct, blast+) done
(*Converse fails: we can analz more from the union than from the separate parts, as a key in one might decrypt a message in the other*) lemma analz_Un: "analz(G) ∪ analz(H) ⊆ analz(G ∪ H)" by (intro Un_least analz_mono Un_upper1 Un_upper2)
lemma analz_insert: "insert X (analz H) ⊆ analz(insert X H)" by (blast intro: analz_mono [THEN [2] rev_subsetD])
subsubsection‹Rewrite rules for pulling out atomic messages›
lemma lemma1: "Key (invKey K) ∈ analz H ==> analz (insert (Crypt K X) H) ⊆ insert (Crypt K X) (analz (insert X H))" apply (rule subsetI) apply (erule_tac x = x in analz.induct, auto) done
lemma lemma2: "Key (invKey K) ∈ analz H ==> insert (Crypt K X) (analz (insert X H)) ⊆ analz (insert (Crypt K X) H)" apply auto apply (erule_tac x = x in analz.induct, auto) apply (blast intro: analz_insertI analz.Decrypt) done
lemma analz_insert_Decrypt: "Key (invKey K) ∈ analz H ==> analz (insert (Crypt K X) H) = insert (Crypt K X) (analz (insert X H))" by (intro equalityI lemma1 lemma2)
(*Case analysis: either the message is secure, or it is not! Effective, but can cause subgoals to blow up! Use with if_split; apparently split_tac does not cope with patterns such as "analz (insert (Crypt K X) H)" *) lemma analz_Crypt_if [simp]: "analz (insert (Crypt K X) H) = (if (Key (invKey K) ∈ analz H) then insert (Crypt K X) (analz (insert X H)) else insert (Crypt K X) (analz H))" by (simp add: analz_insert_Crypt analz_insert_Decrypt)
(*This rule supposes "for the sake of argument" that we have the key.*) lemma analz_insert_Crypt_subset: "analz (insert (Crypt K X) H) ⊆ insert (Crypt K X) (analz (insert X H))" apply (rule subsetI) apply (erule analz.induct, auto) done
lemma analz_trans: "[| X∈ analz G; G ⊆ analz H |] ==> X∈ analz H" by (drule analz_mono, blast)
(*Cut; Lemma 2 of Lowe*) lemma analz_cut: "[| Y∈ analz (insert X H); X∈ analz H |] ==> Y∈ analz H" by (erule analz_trans, blast)
(*Cut can be proved easily by induction on "Y: analz (insert X H) ==> X: analz H ⟶ Y: analz H" *)
(*This rewrite rule helps in the simplification of messages that involve the forwarding of unknown components (X). Without it, removing occurrences of X can be very complicated. *) lemma analz_insert_eq: "X∈ analz H ==> analz (insert X H) = analz H" by (blast intro: analz_cut analz_insertI)
lemma analz_cong: "[| analz G = analz G'; analz H = analz H' |] ==> analz (G ∪ H) = analz (G' ∪ H')" by (intro equalityI analz_subset_cong, simp_all)
lemma analz_insert_cong: "analz H = analz H' ==> analz(insert X H) = analz(insert X H')" by (force simp only: insert_def intro!: analz_cong)
(*If there are no pairs or encryptions then analz does nothing*) lemma analz_trivial: "[| ∀X Y. {X,Y}∉ H; ∀X K. Crypt K X ∉ H |] ==> analz H = H" apply safe apply (erule analz.induct, blast+) done
subsection‹Inductive relation "synth"›
text‹Inductive definition of "synth" -- what can be built up from a set of messages. A form of upward closure. Pairs can be built, messages encrypted with known keys. Agent names are public domain. Numbers can be guessed, but Nonces cannot be.›
inductive_set
synth :: "msg set ==> msg set" for H :: "msg set" where
Inj [intro]: "X ∈ H ==> X ∈ synth H"
| Agent [intro]: "Agent agt ∈ synth H"
| Number [intro]: "Number n ∈ synth H"
| Hash [intro]: "X ∈ synth H ==> Hash X ∈ synth H"
| MPair [intro]: "[|X ∈ synth H; Y ∈ synth H|] ==> {X,Y}∈ synth H"
| Crypt [intro]: "[|X ∈ synth H; Key(K) ∈ H|] ==> Crypt K X ∈ synth H"
(*NO Agent_synth, as any Agent name can be synthesized. Ditto for Number*) inductive_cases Nonce_synth [elim!]: "Nonce n ∈ synth H" inductive_cases Key_synth [elim!]: "Key K ∈ synth H" inductive_cases Hash_synth [elim!]: "Hash X ∈ synth H" inductive_cases MPair_synth [elim!]: "{X,Y}∈ synth H" inductive_cases Crypt_synth [elim!]: "Crypt K X ∈ synth H" inductive_cases Pan_synth [elim!]: "Pan A ∈ synth H"
lemma synth_increasing: "H ⊆ synth(H)" by blast
subsubsection‹Unions›
(*Converse fails: we can synth more from the union than from the separate parts, building a compound message using elements of each.*) lemma synth_Un: "synth(G) ∪ synth(H) ⊆ synth(G ∪ H)" by (intro Un_least synth_mono Un_upper1 Un_upper2)
lemma synth_insert: "insert X (synth H) ⊆ synth(insert X H)" by (blast intro: synth_mono [THEN [2] rev_subsetD])
subsubsection‹For reasoning about the Fake rule in traces›
lemma parts_insert_subset_Un: "X∈ G ==> parts(insert X H) ⊆ parts G ∪ parts H" by (rule subset_trans [OF parts_mono parts_Un_subset2], blast)
(*More specifically for Fake. Very occasionally we could do with a version of the form parts{X} \<subseteq> synth (analz H) \<union> parts H *) lemma Fake_parts_insert: "X ∈ synth (analz H) ==> parts (insert X H) ⊆ synth (analz H) ∪ parts H" apply (drule parts_insert_subset_Un) apply (simp (no_asm_use)) apply blast done
lemma Fake_parts_insert_in_Un: "[|Z ∈ parts (insert X H); X ∈ synth (analz H)|] ==> Z ∈ synth (analz H) ∪ parts H" by (blast dest: Fake_parts_insert [THEN subsetD, dest])
(*H is sometimes (Key ` KK \<union> spies evs), so can't put G=H*) lemma Fake_analz_insert: "X∈ synth (analz G) ==> analz (insert X H) ⊆ synth (analz G) ∪ analz (G ∪ H)" apply (rule subsetI) apply (subgoal_tac "x ∈ analz (synth (analz G) ∪ H) ") prefer 2 apply (blast intro: analz_mono [THEN [2] rev_subsetD] analz_mono [THEN synth_mono, THEN [2] rev_subsetD]) apply (simp (no_asm_use)) apply blast done
lemma analz_conj_parts [simp]: "(X ∈ analz H ∧ X ∈ parts H) = (X ∈ analz H)" by (blast intro: analz_subset_parts [THEN subsetD])
lemma analz_disj_parts [simp]: "(X ∈ analz H | X ∈ parts H) = (X ∈ parts H)" by (blast intro: analz_subset_parts [THEN subsetD])
(*Without this equation, other rules for synth and analz would yield redundant cases*) lemma MPair_synth_analz [iff]: "({X,Y}∈ synth (analz H)) = (X ∈ synth (analz H) ∧ Y ∈ synth (analz H))" by blast
lemma Crypt_synth_analz: "[| Key K ∈ analz H; Key (invKey K) ∈ analz H |] ==> (Crypt K X ∈ synth (analz H)) = (X ∈ synth (analz H))" by blast
(*We do NOT want Crypt... messages broken up in protocols!!*) declare parts.Body [rule del]
text‹Rewrites to push in Key and Crypt messages, so that other messages can be pulled out using the ‹analz_insert› r
lemmas pushKeys =
insert_commute [of "Key K""Agent C"]
insert_commute [of "Key K""Nonce N"]
insert_commute [of "Key K""Number N"]
insert_commute [of "Key K""Pan PAN"]
insert_commute [of "Key K""Hash X"]
insert_commute [of "Key K""MPair X Y"]
insert_commute [of "Key K""Crypt X K'"] for K C N PAN X Y K'
lemmas pushCrypts =
insert_commute [of "Crypt X K""Agent C"]
insert_commute [of "Crypt X K""Nonce N"]
insert_commute [of "Crypt X K""Number N"]
insert_commute [of "Crypt X K""Pan PAN"]
insert_commute [of "Crypt X K""Hash X'"]
insert_commute [of "Crypt X K""MPair X' Y"] for X K C N PAN X' Y
text‹Cannot be added with ‹[simp]›-- messages should not always be re-ordered.› lemmas pushes = pushKeys pushCrypts
subsection‹Tactics useful for many protocol proofs› (*<*)
ML ‹ (*Analysis of Fake cases. Also works for messages that forward unknown parts, but this application is no longer necessary if analz_insert_eq is used. DEPENDS UPON "X" REFERRING TO THE FRADULENT MESSAGE *)
fun impOfSubs th = th RSN (2, @{thm rev_subsetD})
(*Apply rules to break down assumptions of the form Y ∈ parts(insert X H) and Y ∈ analz(insert X H) *) fun Fake_insert_tac ctxt =
dresolve_tac ctxt [impOfSubs @{thm Fake_analz_insert},
impOfSubs @{thm Fake_parts_insert}] THEN'
eresolve_tac ctxt [asm_rl, @{thm synth.Inj}];
fun Fake_insert_simp_tac ctxt i =
REPEAT (Fake_insert_tac ctxt i) THEN asm_full_simp_tac ctxt i;
fun atomic_spy_analz_tac ctxt =
SELECT_GOAL
(Fake_insert_simp_tac ctxt 1 THEN
IF_UNSOLVED
(Blast.depth_tac (ctxt addIs [@{thm analz_insertI},
impOfSubs @{thm analz_subset_parts}]) 4 1));
fun spy_analz_tac ctxt i =
DETERM
(SELECT_GOAL
(EVERY
[ (*push in occurrences of X...*)
(REPEAT o CHANGED)
(Rule_Insts.res_inst_tac ctxt [((("x", 1), Position.none), "X")] []
(@{thm insert_commute} RS ssubst) 1), (*...allowing further simplifications*)
simp_tac ctxt 1,
REPEAT (FIRSTGOAL (resolve_tac ctxt [allI,impI,notI,conjI,iffI])),
DEPTH_SOLVE (atomic_spy_analz_tac ctxt 1)]) i); › (*>*)
(*By default only o_apply is built-in. But in the presence of eta-expansion this means that some terms displayed as (f o g) will be rewritten, and others will not!*) declare o_def [simp]
lemma Crypt_notin_image_Key [simp]: "Crypt K X ∉ Key ` A" by auto
lemma Hash_notin_image_Key [simp] :"Hash X ∉ Key ` A" by auto
Die Informationen auf dieser Webseite wurden
nach bestem Wissen sorgfältig zusammengestellt. Es wird jedoch weder Vollständigkeit, noch Richtigkeit,
noch Qualität der bereit gestellten Informationen zugesichert.
Bemerkung:
Die farbliche Syntaxdarstellung und die Messung sind noch experimentell.