text‹Spy has access to his own key for spoof messages, but Server is secure› specification (bad)
Spy_in_bad [iff]: "Spy ∈ bad"
Server_not_bad [iff]: "Server ∉ bad" by (rule exI [of _ "{Spy}"], simp)
primrec knows :: "agent ==> event list ==> msg set" where
knows_Nil: "knows A [] = initState A"
| knows_Cons: "knows A (ev # evs) = (if A = Spy then (case ev of Says A' B X ==> insert X (knows Spy evs) | Gets A' X ==> knows Spy evs | Notes A' X ==> if A' ∈ bad then insert X (knows Spy evs) else knows Spy evs) else (case ev of Says A' B X ==> if A'=A then insert X (knows A evs) else knows A evs | Gets A' X ==> if A'=A then insert X (knows A evs) else knows A evs | Notes A' X ==> if A'=A then insert X (knows A evs) else knows A evs))" (* CaseA=SpyontheGetsevent enforcesthefactthatifamessageisreceivedthenitmusthavebeensent, thereforetheoopscasemustuseNotes
*)
text‹The constant "spies" is retained for compatibility's sake›
text‹Set of items that might be visible to somebody: complement of the set of fresh items› primrec used :: "event list ==> msg set" where
used_Nil: "used [] = (UN B. parts (initState B))"
| used_Cons: "used (ev # evs) = (case ev of Says A B X ==> parts {X} ∪ used evs | Gets A X ==> used evs | Notes A X ==> parts {X} ∪ used evs)"
― ‹The case for term‹Gets› seems anomalous, but term‹Gets› always
follows term‹Says› in real protocols. Seems difficult to change.
See ‹Gets_correct› in theory ‹Guard/Extensions.thy›.›
lemma Notes_imp_used: "Notes A X ∈ set evs ==> X ∈ used evs" by (induct evs) (auto split: event.split)
lemma Says_imp_used: "Says A B X ∈ set evs ==> X ∈ used evs" by (induct evs) (auto split: event.split)
subsection‹Function term‹knows››
(*Simplifying parts(insertX(knowsSpyevs))=parts{X}\<union>parts(knowsSpyevs).
This version won't loop with the simplifier.*) lemmas parts_insert_knows_A = parts_insert [of _ "knows A evs"] for A evs
lemma knows_Spy_Says [simp]: "knows Spy (Says A B X # evs) = insert X (knows Spy evs)" by simp
text‹Letting the Spy see "bad" agents' notes avoids redundant case-splits
on whether term‹A=Spy› and whether term‹A∈bad›› lemma knows_Spy_Notes [simp]: "knows Spy (Notes A X # evs) = (if A∈bad then insert X (knows Spy evs) else knows Spy evs)" by simp
lemma knows_Spy_Gets [simp]: "knows Spy (Gets A X # evs) = knows Spy evs" by simp
lemma knows_Spy_subset_knows_Spy_Says: "knows Spy evs ⊆ knows Spy (Says A B X # evs)" by (simp add: subset_insertI)
lemma knows_Spy_subset_knows_Spy_Notes: "knows Spy evs ⊆ knows Spy (Notes A X # evs)" by force
lemma knows_Spy_subset_knows_Spy_Gets: "knows Spy evs ⊆ knows Spy (Gets A X # evs)" by (simp add: subset_insertI)
text‹Spy sees what is sent on the traffic› lemma Says_imp_knows_Spy: "Says A B X ∈ set evs ==> X ∈ knows Spy evs" by (induct evs) (auto split: event.split)
lemma Notes_imp_knows_Spy [rule_format]: "Notes A X ∈ set evs ==> A ∈ bad ==> X ∈ knows Spy evs" by (induct evs) (auto split: event.split)
text‹Elimination rules: derive contradictions from old Says events containing
items known to be fresh› lemmas Says_imp_parts_knows_Spy =
Says_imp_knows_Spy [THEN parts.Inj, elim_format]
text‹Compatibility for the old "spies" function› lemmas spies_partsEs = knows_Spy_partsEs lemmas Says_imp_spies = Says_imp_knows_Spy lemmas parts_insert_spies = parts_insert_knows_A [of _ Spy]
subsection‹Knowledge of Agents›
lemma knows_subset_knows_Says: "knows A evs ⊆ knows A (Says A' B X # evs)" by (simp add: subset_insertI)
lemma knows_subset_knows_Notes: "knows A evs ⊆ knows A (Notes A' X # evs)" by (simp add: subset_insertI)
lemma knows_subset_knows_Gets: "knows A evs ⊆ knows A (Gets A' X # evs)" by (simp add: subset_insertI)
text‹Agents know what they say› lemma Says_imp_knows [rule_format]: "Says A B X ∈ set evs ==> X ∈ knows A evs" by (induct evs) (force split: event.split)+
text‹Agents know what they note› lemma Notes_imp_knows [rule_format]: "Notes A X ∈ set evs ==> X ∈ knows A evs" by (induct evs) (force split: event.split)+
text‹Agents know what they receive› lemma Gets_imp_knows_agents [rule_format]: "A ≠ Spy ==> Gets A X ∈ set evs ==> X ∈ knows A evs" by (induct evs) (force split: event.split)+
text‹What agents DIFFERENT FROM Spy know
was either said, or noted, or got, or known initially› lemma knows_imp_Says_Gets_Notes_initState: "[X ∈ knows A evs; A ≠ Spy]==> ∃B. Says A B X ∈ set evs ∨ Gets A X ∈ set evs ∨ Notes A X ∈ set evs ∨ X ∈ initState A" by(induct evs) (auto split: event.split_asm if_split_asm)
text‹What the Spy knows -- for the time being --
was either said or noted, or known initially› lemma knows_Spy_imp_Says_Notes_initState: "X ∈ knows Spy evs ==> ∃A B. Says A B X ∈ set evs ∨ Notes A X ∈ set evs ∨ X ∈ initState Spy" by(induct evs) (auto split: event.split_asm if_split_asm)
lemma parts_knows_Spy_subset_used: "parts (knows Spy evs) ⊆ used evs" by (induct evs) (auto simp: parts_insert_knows_A split: event.split_asm if_split_asm)
lemma initState_into_used: "X ∈ parts (initState B) ==> X ∈ used evs" by (induct evs) (auto simp: parts_insert_knows_A split: event.split)
text‹New simprules to replace the primitive ones for @{term used} and @{term knows}›
lemma used_Says [simp]: "used (Says A B X # evs) = parts{X} ∪ used evs" by simp
lemma used_Notes [simp]: "used (Notes A X # evs) = parts{X} ∪ used evs" by simp
lemma used_Gets [simp]: "used (Gets A X # evs) = used evs" by simp
lemma used_nil_subset: "used [] ⊆ used evs" using initState_into_used by auto
text‹NOTE REMOVAL: the laws above are cleaner, as they don't involve "case"› declare knows_Cons [simp del]
used_Nil [simp del] used_Cons [simp del]
text‹For proving theorems of the form term‹X ∉ analz (knows Spy evs) ⟶ P›
New events added by induction to "evs" are discarded. Provided
this information isn't needed, the proof will be much shorter, since
it will omit complicated reasoning about term‹analz›.›
lemmas analz_mono_contra =
knows_Spy_subset_knows_Spy_Says [THEN analz_mono, THEN contra_subsetD]
knows_Spy_subset_knows_Spy_Notes [THEN analz_mono, THEN contra_subsetD]
knows_Spy_subset_knows_Spy_Gets [THEN analz_mono, THEN contra_subsetD]
lemma knows_subset_knows_Cons: "knows A evs ⊆ knows A (e # evs)" by (cases e, auto simp: knows_Cons)
lemma initState_subset_knows: "initState A ⊆ knows A evs" by (induct evs) (use knows_subset_knows_Cons in fastforce)+
text‹For proving ‹new_keys_not_used›› lemma keysFor_parts_insert: "[K ∈ keysFor (parts (insert X G)); X ∈ synth (analz H)] ==> K ∈ keysFor (parts (G ∪ H)) | Key (invKey K) ∈ parts H" by (force
dest!: parts_insert_subset_Un [THEN keysFor_mono, THEN [2] rev_subsetD]
analz_subset_parts [THEN keysFor_mono, THEN [2] rev_subsetD]
intro: analz_subset_parts [THEN subsetD] parts_mono [THEN [2] rev_subsetD])
lemmas analz_impI = impI [where P = "Y ∉ analz (knows Spy evs)"] for Y evs
ML ‹
analz_mono_contra_tac ctxt =
resolve_tac ctxt @{thms analz_impI} THEN'
REPEAT1 o (dresolve_tac ctxt @{thms analz_mono_contra})
THEN' (mp_tac ctxt) ›
method_setup analz_mono_contra = ‹
Scan.succeed (fn ctxt => SIMPLE_METHOD (REPEAT_FIRST (analz_mono_contra_tac ctxt)))› "for proving theorems of the form X ∉ analz (knows Spy evs) ⟶ P"
text‹Useful for case analysis on whether a hash is a spoof or not› lemmas syan_impI = impI [where P = "Y ∉ synth (analz (knows Spy evs))"] for Y evs
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.