Quantitative Analysis of a Probabilistic Non-repudiation Protocol through Model Checking

Authors:
Indranil Saha;Debapriyay Mukhopadhyay
Affiliations:
Computer Science Department, University of California, Los Angeles, USA 90095;Rebaca Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Block EP & GP, Sector V, Kolkata, India 91
Venue:
ICISS '09 Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Information Systems Security
Year:
2009

Citing 6
Cited 0

Security Analysis of a Probabilistic Non-repudiation Protocol

PAPM-PROBMIV '02 Proceedings of the Second Joint International Workshop on Process Algebra and Probabilistic Methods, Performance Modeling and Verification
Observations on Non-repudiation

ASIACRYPT '96 Proceedings of the International Conference on the Theory and Applications of Cryptology and Information Security: Advances in Cryptology
A Game-Based Verification of Non-repudiation and Fair Exchange Protocols

CONCUR '01 Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Concurrency Theory
Automatic Analysis of a Non-Repudiation Protocol

Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science (ENTCS)
On Quantitative Analysis of Probabilistic Protocols

Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science (ENTCS)
PRISM: a tool for automatic verification of probabilistic systems

TACAS'06 Proceedings of the 12th international conference on Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

In the probabilistic non-repudiation protocol without a trusted third party as presented in [5], the recipient of a service can cheat the originator of the service with some probability. This probability indicates the degree of fairness of the protocol and is referred as *** -fairness. In this paper, we analyze the protocol quantitatively through probabilistic model checking. The *** -fairness is quantitatively measured by modeling the protocol in PRISM model checker and verifying appropriate property specified in PCTL. Moreover, our analysis gives proper insight to choose proper values for different parameters associated with the protocol in such a way that certain degree of fairness can be achieved and therefore answers the reverse question, given the degree of fairness *** , how should one choose the protocol parameters to ensure fairness.