A.A. everyone.

Mr. MM: I was talking to Shahbaz yesterday and we talked about what research area I’m planning to pursue. I told him that I’ve been working with different sorts of things (web search etc) because I needed some publications. Now that I have some publications, I need to pick a single area and start working on that.

I have decided to pursue only Isabelle and the original goal of verification of security protocols. Of course, this is currently open to discussion but I talked to Mr. T yesterday too and he said he was very interested in the Needham Shroeder protocol verification given in Isabelle tutorial. I think I can cope with this protocol verification now and it would be better if I can get some hands-on experience.

Here’s what I think I’ll do. I’ll start with the protocol case study in the tutorial: NS protocol. Then, if that goes well, I’ll start with the verification of Kerberos V4 that’s available in AFP. That should be a complex enough case study and after that, we can hopefully start with some sort of verification of our own. Of course, in that I’ll need some expertise in the protocol side from one of you guys.

The reason for posting this here: First, the blog was getting too much like a news board and much less like a research blog. Secondly, I would like to take comments from you guys regarding (a) your interest in this research area of security protocol verification and (b) how you can contribute in this.

I plan on starting on NS protocol as soon as I finish writing the UML Spec paper inshallah. So, comments are expected and indeed welcome.

3 Responses to " Future Directions (and some extra stuff) "
 
alam78
July 22nd, 2007

That’s nice.

Actually, i will certainly favor this kind of goal oriented work. In this context, i would like to be part of any team working in this direction.

Molgarazata — a PhD student, is working on SECTET verification. She told me that she will update me on protocol specification. We can take his work and verify that also in Isabelle also.

Best,
MM Alam

 
shazkhan
July 22nd, 2007

I also appreciate focused work but I feel sorry for folksosonamy! I was starting to like it. I would hate to see some big shot company publishing in this direction in a few months.

 
TaMLeEk
July 22nd, 2007

thats true m interested in this Needhams protocol verification for being inappropriate for authentication… n m waiting for u to finish the stuff i dont think that ll take much time…

One more thing that i want to emphasis on, is that we are in need of some tutorial sessions in all related feilds… i think we all group members has different level of understandings about the fields. Its true that suppose i wont need to have much mathamatical background for verifications tasks as you would need but still there must be some common criteria of understanding…
For this purpose i wanted to have some tutorial sessions from every person on the group so that it take us to a common understanding point… it needs to be discussed that who should teach which course…

i would suggest that we would need some research oriented sessions as well as some tutorial sessions but that would need lots of negotiations…. i think we can discuss them in tomorrows meeting….

Thanks…

Leave a Reply


(Required)

(Required)