Owl: Compositional Verification of Security Protocols via an Information-Flow Type System
Joshua Gancher, Sydney Gibson, Pratap Singh, Samvid Dharanikota, Bryan Parno
Abstract
Computationally sound protocol verification tools promise to deliver full-strength cryptographic proofs for security protocols. Unfortunately, current tools lack either modularity or automation. We propose a new approach based on a novel use of information flow and refinement types for sound cryptographic proofs. Our framework, Owl, allows type-based modular descriptions of security protocols, wherein disjoint subprotocols can be programmed and automatically proved secure separately.We give a formal security proof for Owl via a core language which supports symmetric and asymmetric primitives, Diffie-Hellman operations, and hashing via random oracles. We also implement a type checker for Owl and a prototype extraction mechanism to Rust, and evaluate both on 14 case studies, including (simplified forms of) SSH key exchange and Kerberos.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Cited by top-tier papers8
- A Generic Methodology for the Modular Verification of Security Protocol ImplementationsLinard Arquint, Malte Schwerhoff, Vaibhav Mehta, Peter MüllerCCS 2023 · 6 citations
- Leveraging Cryptographic Simulator Synthesis for Formally Verifying the FOO E-Voting ProtocolDavid Baelde, Adrien Koutsos, Justine SauvageUSENIX Security 2026 · 2 citations
- The Secrets Must Not Flow: Scaling Security Verification to Large CodebasesLinard Arquint, Samarth Kishor, Jason R. Koenig, Joey Dodds et al.S&P 2026 · 1 citation
- Cryptis: Cryptographic Reasoning in Separation LogicArthur Azevedo de Amorim, Amal Ahmed, Marco GaboardiPOPL 2026 · 1 citation
- Secure Protocol Composition under Dynamic Corruption: Scaling Up Symbolic Analysis for Real-World Security PropertiesCas Cremers, Erik Pallas, Aleksi PeltonenUSENIX Security 2026
Builds on8
- A Comprehensive Symbolic Analysis of TLS 1.3Cas Cremers, Marko Horvat, Jonathan Hoyland, Sam Scott et al.CCS 2017 · 247 citations
- Verified Models and Reference Implementations for the TLS 1.3 Standard CandidateKarthikeyan Bhargavan, Bruno Blanchet, Nadim KobeissiS&P 2017 · 233 citations
- SoK: Computer-Aided CryptographyManuel Barbosa, Gilles Barthe, Karthik Bhargavan, Bruno Blanchet et al.S&P 2021 · 169 citations
- Automated Analysis and Verification of TLS 1.3: 0-RTT, Resumption and Delayed AuthenticationCas Cremers, Marko Horvat, Sam Scott, Thyla van der MerweS&P 2016 · 128 citations
- An Interactive Prover for Protocol Verification in the Computational ModelDavid Baelde, Stéphanie Delaune, Charlie Jacomme, Adrien Koutsos et al.S&P 2021 · 44 citations
Related papers
- OwlC: Compiling Security Protocols to Verified, Secure, High-Performance LibrariesPratap Singh, Joshua Gancher, Bryan ParnoUSENIX Security 2025
- Formal Security and Functional Verification of Cryptographic Protocol Implementations in RustKarthikeyan Bhargavan, Lasse Letager Hansen, Franziskus Kiefer, Jonas Schneider-Bensch et al.CCS 2025 · 1 citation
- Sound Verification of Security Protocols: From Design to Interoperable ImplementationsLinard Arquint, Felix A. Wolf, Joseph Lallemand, Ralf Sasse et al.S&P 2023
- Block Ciphers in Idealized Models: Automated Proofs and New Security ResultsMiguel Ambrona, Pooya Farshim, Patrick HarasserCCS 2024
- Verifiable Security Policies for Distributed SystemsFelix A. Wolf, Peter MüllerCCS 2024 · 1 citation
