[9749] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Proving security protocols
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Roop Mukherjee)
Thu Nov 1 11:20:22 2001
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2001 10:00:46 -0500 (EST)
From: Roop Mukherjee <bmukherj@styx.uwaterloo.ca>
To: <cryptography@wasabisystems.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0111010948540.12781-100000@styx.uwaterloo.ca>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
I have being trying to read about formally proving security protocols. I
have seen the work of Needham, Paulson et. al., Meadows among others.
I was wondering if anyone here has seen a comparison between these
approaches to evaluate things like ease of use and effectiveness. I mean
something with a little more detail than the related work section of most
of these papers.
Is one of these approaches considered as "best-practice" or is more
commonly used than the other?
Can someone offer some criticism of the practice formal verification in
general ?
Thanks,
-- Roop
________________________________________
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@wasabisystems.com
