Abadi and Needham's variant of Otway-Rees
authorpaulson
Thu, 10 Oct 1996 18:40:34 +0200
changeset 2090 307ebbbec862
parent 2089 e2ec077ac90d
child 2091 644104f85d14
Abadi and Needham's variant of Otway-Rees
src/HOL/Auth/OtwayRees_AN.ML
src/HOL/Auth/OtwayRees_AN.thy
--- /dev/null	Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000
+++ b/src/HOL/Auth/OtwayRees_AN.ML	Thu Oct 10 18:40:34 1996 +0200
@@ -0,0 +1,536 @@
+(*  Title:      HOL/Auth/OtwayRees
+    ID:         $Id$
+    Author:     Lawrence C Paulson, Cambridge University Computer Laboratory
+    Copyright   1996  University of Cambridge
+
+Inductive relation "otway" for the Otway-Rees protocol.
+
+Simplified version with minimal encryption but explicit messages
+
+From page 11 of
+  Abadi and Needham.  Prudent Engineering Practice for Cryptographic Protocols.
+  IEEE Trans. SE 22 (1), 1996
+*)
+
+open OtwayRees_AN;
+
+proof_timing:=true;
+HOL_quantifiers := false;
+
+
+(*Weak liveness: there are traces that reach the end*)
+goal thy 
+ "!!A B. [| A ~= B; A ~= Server; B ~= Server |]   \
+\        ==> EX K. EX NA. EX evs: otway lost.          \
+\             Says B A (Crypt {|Nonce NA, Agent A, Agent B, Key K|} (shrK A)) \
+\             : set_of_list evs";
+by (REPEAT (resolve_tac [exI,bexI] 1));
+by (rtac (otway.Nil RS otway.OR1 RS otway.OR2 RS otway.OR3 RS otway.OR4) 2);
+by (ALLGOALS (simp_tac (!simpset setsolver safe_solver)));
+by (REPEAT_FIRST (resolve_tac [refl, conjI]));
+by (REPEAT_FIRST (fast_tac (!claset addss (!simpset setsolver safe_solver))));
+result();
+
+
+(**** Inductive proofs about otway ****)
+
+goal thy "!!evs. lost' <= lost ==> otway lost' <= otway lost";
+by (rtac subsetI 1);
+by (etac otway.induct 1);
+by (REPEAT_FIRST
+    (best_tac (!claset addIs (impOfSubs (sees_mono RS analz_mono RS synth_mono)
+                              :: otway.intrs))));
+qed "otway_mono";
+
+(*Nobody sends themselves messages*)
+goal thy "!!evs. evs : otway lost ==> ALL A X. Says A A X ~: set_of_list evs";
+by (etac otway.induct 1);
+by (Auto_tac());
+qed_spec_mp "not_Says_to_self";
+Addsimps [not_Says_to_self];
+AddSEs   [not_Says_to_self RSN (2, rev_notE)];
+
+
+(** For reasoning about the encrypted portion of messages **)
+
+goal thy "!!evs. Says S B {|X, X'|} : set_of_list evs ==> \
+\                X : analz (sees lost Spy evs)";
+by (fast_tac (!claset addSDs [Says_imp_sees_Spy RS analz.Inj]) 1);
+qed "OR4_analz_sees_Spy";
+
+goal thy "!!evs. Says B' A (Crypt {|N,Agent A,B,K|} K') : set_of_list evs ==> \
+\                K : parts (sees lost Spy evs)";
+by (fast_tac (!claset addSEs partsEs
+                      addSDs [Says_imp_sees_Spy RS parts.Inj]) 1);
+qed "Reveal_parts_sees_Spy";
+
+(*OR2_analz... and OR4_analz... let us treat those cases using the same 
+  argument as for the Fake case.  This is possible for most, but not all,
+  proofs: Fake does not invent new nonces (as in OR2), and of course Fake
+  messages originate from the Spy. *)
+
+bind_thm ("OR4_parts_sees_Spy",
+          OR4_analz_sees_Spy RS (impOfSubs analz_subset_parts));
+
+(*We instantiate the variable to "lost".  Leaving it as a Var makes proofs
+  harder to complete, since simplification does less for us.*)
+val parts_Fake_tac = 
+    forw_inst_tac [("lost","lost")] OR4_parts_sees_Spy 6 THEN
+    forw_inst_tac [("lost","lost")] Reveal_parts_sees_Spy 7;
+
+(*For proving the easier theorems about X ~: parts (sees lost Spy evs) *)
+fun parts_induct_tac i = SELECT_GOAL
+    (DETERM (etac otway.induct 1 THEN parts_Fake_tac THEN
+	     (*Fake message*)
+	     TRY (best_tac (!claset addDs [impOfSubs analz_subset_parts,
+					   impOfSubs Fake_parts_insert]
+                                    addss (!simpset)) 2)) THEN
+     (*Base case*)
+     fast_tac (!claset addss (!simpset)) 1 THEN
+     ALLGOALS Asm_simp_tac) i;
+
+(** Theorems of the form X ~: parts (sees lost Spy evs) imply that NOBODY
+    sends messages containing X! **)
+
+(*Spy never sees another agent's shared key! (unless it's lost at start)*)
+goal thy 
+ "!!evs. [| evs : otway lost;  A ~: lost |]    \
+\        ==> Key (shrK A) ~: parts (sees lost Spy evs)";
+by (parts_induct_tac 1);
+by (Auto_tac());
+qed "Spy_not_see_shrK";
+
+bind_thm ("Spy_not_analz_shrK",
+          [analz_subset_parts, Spy_not_see_shrK] MRS contra_subsetD);
+
+Addsimps [Spy_not_see_shrK, Spy_not_analz_shrK];
+
+(*We go to some trouble to preserve R in the 3rd and 4th subgoals
+  As usual fast_tac cannot be used because it uses the equalities too soon*)
+val major::prems = 
+goal thy  "[| Key (shrK A) : parts (sees lost Spy evs);       \
+\             evs : otway lost;                                 \
+\             A:lost ==> R                                  \
+\           |] ==> R";
+by (rtac ccontr 1);
+by (rtac ([major, Spy_not_see_shrK] MRS rev_notE) 1);
+by (swap_res_tac prems 2);
+by (ALLGOALS (fast_tac (!claset addIs prems)));
+qed "Spy_see_shrK_E";
+
+bind_thm ("Spy_analz_shrK_E", 
+          analz_subset_parts RS subsetD RS Spy_see_shrK_E);
+
+AddSEs [Spy_see_shrK_E, Spy_analz_shrK_E];
+
+
+(*** Future keys can't be seen or used! ***)
+
+(*Nobody can have SEEN keys that will be generated in the future.
+  This has to be proved anew for each protocol description,
+  but should go by similar reasoning every time.  Hardest case is the
+  standard Fake rule.  
+      The Union over C is essential for the induction! *)
+goal thy "!!evs. evs : otway lost ==> \
+\                length evs <= length evs' --> \
+\                          Key (newK evs') ~: (UN C. parts (sees lost C evs))";
+by (parts_induct_tac 1);
+by (REPEAT_FIRST (best_tac (!claset addDs [impOfSubs analz_subset_parts,
+                                           impOfSubs parts_insert_subset_Un,
+                                           Suc_leD]
+                                    addss (!simpset))));
+val lemma = result();
+
+(*Variant needed for the main theorem below*)
+goal thy 
+ "!!evs. [| evs : otway lost;  length evs <= length evs' |]    \
+\        ==> Key (newK evs') ~: parts (sees lost C evs)";
+by (fast_tac (!claset addDs [lemma]) 1);
+qed "new_keys_not_seen";
+Addsimps [new_keys_not_seen];
+
+(*Another variant: old messages must contain old keys!*)
+goal thy 
+ "!!evs. [| Says A B X : set_of_list evs;  \
+\           Key (newK evt) : parts {X};    \
+\           evs : otway lost                 \
+\        |] ==> length evt < length evs";
+by (rtac ccontr 1);
+by (dtac leI 1);
+by (fast_tac (!claset addSDs [new_keys_not_seen, Says_imp_sees_Spy]
+                      addIs  [impOfSubs parts_mono]) 1);
+qed "Says_imp_old_keys";
+
+
+(*** Future nonces can't be seen or used! [proofs resemble those above] ***)
+
+goal thy "!!evs. evs : otway lost ==> \
+\                length evs <= length evt --> \
+\                Nonce (newN evt) ~: (UN C. parts (sees lost C evs))";
+by (etac otway.induct 1);
+(*auto_tac does not work here, as it performs safe_tac first*)
+by (ALLGOALS (asm_simp_tac (!simpset addsimps [parts_insert2]
+                                     addcongs [disj_cong])));
+by (REPEAT_FIRST (fast_tac (!claset 
+                              addSEs partsEs
+                              addSDs  [Says_imp_sees_Spy RS parts.Inj]
+                              addDs  [impOfSubs analz_subset_parts,
+                                      impOfSubs parts_insert_subset_Un,
+                                      Suc_leD]
+                              addss (!simpset))));
+val lemma = result();
+
+(*Variant needed for the main theorem below*)
+goal thy 
+ "!!evs. [| evs : otway lost;  length evs <= length evs' |]    \
+\        ==> Nonce (newN evs') ~: parts (sees lost C evs)";
+by (fast_tac (!claset addDs [lemma]) 1);
+qed "new_nonces_not_seen";
+Addsimps [new_nonces_not_seen];
+
+(*Another variant: old messages must contain old nonces!*)
+goal thy 
+ "!!evs. [| Says A B X : set_of_list evs;  \
+\           Nonce (newN evt) : parts {X};    \
+\           evs : otway lost                 \
+\        |] ==> length evt < length evs";
+by (rtac ccontr 1);
+by (dtac leI 1);
+by (fast_tac (!claset addSDs [new_nonces_not_seen, Says_imp_sees_Spy]
+                      addIs  [impOfSubs parts_mono]) 1);
+qed "Says_imp_old_nonces";
+
+
+(*Nobody can have USED keys that will be generated in the future.
+  ...very like new_keys_not_seen*)
+goal thy "!!evs. evs : otway lost ==> \
+\                length evs <= length evs' --> \
+\                newK evs' ~: keysFor (UN C. parts (sees lost C evs))";
+by (parts_induct_tac 1);
+(*OR1 and OR3*)
+by (EVERY (map (fast_tac (!claset addDs [Suc_leD] addss (!simpset))) [4,2]));
+(*Fake, OR2, OR4: these messages send unknown (X) components*)
+by (EVERY 
+    (map
+     (best_tac
+      (!claset addDs [impOfSubs (analz_subset_parts RS keysFor_mono),
+                      impOfSubs (parts_insert_subset_Un RS keysFor_mono),
+                      Suc_leD]
+               addEs [new_keys_not_seen RS not_parts_not_analz RSN(2,rev_notE)]
+               addss (!simpset)))
+     [3,2,1]));
+(*Reveal: dummy message*)
+by (best_tac (!claset addEs  [new_keys_not_seen RSN(2,rev_notE)]
+                      addIs  [less_SucI, impOfSubs keysFor_mono]
+                      addss (!simpset addsimps [le_def])) 1);
+val lemma = result();
+
+goal thy 
+ "!!evs. [| evs : otway lost;  length evs <= length evs' |]    \
+\        ==> newK evs' ~: keysFor (parts (sees lost C evs))";
+by (fast_tac (!claset addSDs [lemma] addss (!simpset)) 1);
+qed "new_keys_not_used";
+
+bind_thm ("new_keys_not_analzd",
+          [analz_subset_parts RS keysFor_mono,
+           new_keys_not_used] MRS contra_subsetD);
+
+Addsimps [new_keys_not_used, new_keys_not_analzd];
+
+
+
+(*** Proofs involving analz ***)
+
+(*Describes the form of Key K when the following message is sent.  The use of
+  "parts" strengthens the induction hyp for proving the Fake case.  The
+  assumption A ~: lost prevents its being a Faked message.  (Based
+  on NS_Shared/Says_S_message_form) *)
+goal thy
+ "!!evs. evs: otway lost ==>                                           \
+\        Crypt {|N, Agent A, B, Key K|} (shrK A) : parts (sees lost Spy evs)  \
+\        --> A ~: lost --> (EX evt: otway lost. K = newK evt)";
+by (parts_induct_tac 1);
+by (Auto_tac());
+qed_spec_mp "Reveal_message_lemma";
+
+(*EITHER describes the form of Key K when the following message is sent, 
+  OR     reduces it to the Fake case.*)
+
+goal thy 
+ "!!evs. [| Says B' A (Crypt {|N, Agent A, B, Key K|} (shrK A)) \
+\            : set_of_list evs;                                 \
+\           evs : otway lost |]                                 \
+\        ==> (EX evt: otway lost. K = newK evt)                 \
+\          | Key K : analz (sees lost Spy evs)";
+br (Reveal_message_lemma RS disjCI) 1;
+ba 1;
+by (fast_tac (!claset addSDs [Says_imp_sees_Spy RS analz.Inj]
+                      addDs [impOfSubs analz_subset_parts]) 1);
+by (fast_tac (!claset addSDs [Says_Crypt_lost]) 1);
+qed "Reveal_message_form";
+
+
+(*For proofs involving analz.  We again instantiate the variable to "lost".*)
+val analz_Fake_tac = 
+    dres_inst_tac [("lost","lost")] OR4_analz_sees_Spy 6 THEN
+    forw_inst_tac [("lost","lost")] Reveal_message_form 7;
+
+
+(****
+ The following is to prove theorems of the form
+
+          Key K : analz (insert (Key (newK evt)) (sees lost Spy evs)) ==>
+          Key K : analz (sees lost Spy evs)
+
+ A more general formula must be proved inductively.
+
+****)
+
+
+(*NOT useful in this form, but it says that session keys are not used
+  to encrypt messages containing other keys, in the actual protocol.
+  We require that agents should behave like this subsequently also.*)
+goal thy 
+ "!!evs. evs : otway lost ==> \
+\        (Crypt X (newK evt)) : parts (sees lost Spy evs) & \
+\        Key K : parts {X} --> Key K : parts (sees lost Spy evs)";
+by (etac otway.induct 1);
+by parts_Fake_tac;
+by (ALLGOALS Asm_simp_tac);
+(*Deals with Faked messages*)
+by (best_tac (!claset addSEs partsEs
+                      addDs [impOfSubs parts_insert_subset_Un]
+                      addss (!simpset)) 2);
+(*Base case and Reveal*)
+by (Auto_tac());
+result();
+
+
+(** Session keys are not used to encrypt other session keys **)
+
+(*The equality makes the induction hypothesis easier to apply*)
+goal thy  
+ "!!evs. evs : otway lost ==> \
+\  ALL K E. (Key K : analz (Key``(newK``E) Un (sees lost Spy evs))) = \
+\           (K : newK``E | Key K : analz (sees lost Spy evs))";
+by (etac otway.induct 1);
+by analz_Fake_tac;
+by (REPEAT_FIRST (ares_tac [allI, analz_image_newK_lemma]));
+by (REPEAT ((eresolve_tac [bexE, disjE] ORELSE' hyp_subst_tac) 7));
+by (ALLGOALS (*Takes 28 secs*)
+    (asm_simp_tac 
+     (!simpset addsimps ([insert_Key_singleton, insert_Key_image, pushKey_newK]
+                         @ pushes)
+               setloop split_tac [expand_if])));
+(** LEVEL 5 **)
+(*Reveal case 2, OR4, OR2, Fake*) 
+by (EVERY (map spy_analz_tac [6, 4, 2]));
+(*Reveal case 1, OR3, Base*)
+by (REPEAT (fast_tac (!claset addIs [image_eqI] addss (!simpset)) 1));
+qed_spec_mp "analz_image_newK";
+
+
+goal thy
+ "!!evs. evs : otway lost ==>                               \
+\        Key K : analz (insert (Key (newK evt)) (sees lost Spy evs)) = \
+\        (K = newK evt | Key K : analz (sees lost Spy evs))";
+by (asm_simp_tac (HOL_ss addsimps [pushKey_newK, analz_image_newK, 
+                                   insert_Key_singleton]) 1);
+by (Fast_tac 1);
+qed "analz_insert_Key_newK";
+
+
+(*** The Key K uniquely identifies the Server's  message. **)
+
+fun ex_strip_tac i = REPEAT (ares_tac [exI, conjI] i) THEN assume_tac (i+1);
+
+goal thy 
+ "!!evs. evs : otway lost ==>                      \
+\      EX A' B' NA' NB'. ALL A B NA NB.                    \
+\       Says Server B \
+\         {|Crypt {|NA, Agent A, Agent B, K|} (shrK A),                    \
+\           Crypt {|NB, Agent A, Agent B, K|} (shrK B)|} : set_of_list evs  \
+\       --> A=A' & B=B' & NA=NA' & NB=NB'";
+by (etac otway.induct 1);
+by (ALLGOALS (asm_simp_tac (!simpset addsimps [all_conj_distrib])));
+by (Step_tac 1);
+(*Remaining cases: OR3 and OR4*)
+by (ex_strip_tac 2);
+by (Fast_tac 2);
+by (expand_case_tac "K = ?y" 1);
+by (REPEAT (ares_tac [refl,exI,impI,conjI] 2));
+(*...we assume X is a very new message, and handle this case by contradiction*)
+by (fast_tac (!claset addEs [Says_imp_old_keys RS less_irrefl]
+                      delrules [conjI]    (*prevent split-up into 4 subgoals*)
+                      addss (!simpset addsimps [parts_insertI])) 1);
+val lemma = result();
+
+
+goal thy 
+"!!evs. [| Says Server B                                           \
+\            {|Crypt {|NA, Agent A, Agent B, K|} (shrK A),         \
+\              Crypt {|NB, Agent A, Agent B, K|} (shrK B)|}        \
+\           : set_of_list evs;                                     \
+\          Says Server B'                                          \
+\            {|Crypt {|NA', Agent A', Agent B', K|} (shrK A'),     \
+\              Crypt {|NB', Agent A', Agent B', K|} (shrK B')|}    \
+\           : set_of_list evs;                                     \
+\          evs : otway lost |]                                     \
+\       ==> A=A' & B=B' & NA=NA' & NB=NB'";
+by (dtac lemma 1);
+by (REPEAT (etac exE 1));
+(*Duplicate the assumption*)
+by (forw_inst_tac [("psi", "ALL C.?P(C)")] asm_rl 1);
+by (fast_tac (!claset addSDs [spec]) 1);
+qed "unique_session_keys";
+
+
+
+(**** Authenticity properties relating to NA ****)
+
+(*If the encrypted message appears then it originated with the Server!*)
+goal thy 
+ "!!evs. [| A ~: lost;  evs : otway lost |]                 \
+\ ==> Crypt {|NA, Agent A, Agent B, Key K|} (shrK A)        \
+\      : parts (sees lost Spy evs)                          \
+\     --> (EX NB. Says Server B                                     \
+\                  {|Crypt {|NA, Agent A, Agent B, Key K|} (shrK A),     \
+\                    Crypt {|NB, Agent A, Agent B, Key K|} (shrK B)|}    \
+\                  : set_of_list evs)";
+by (parts_induct_tac 1);
+by (ALLGOALS (asm_simp_tac (!simpset addsimps [ex_disj_distrib])));
+(*OR3*)
+by (Fast_tac 1);
+qed_spec_mp "NA_Crypt_imp_Server_msg";
+
+
+(*Corollary: if A receives B's OR4 message and the nonce NA agrees
+  then the key really did come from the Server!  CANNOT prove this of the
+  bad form of this protocol, even though we can prove
+  Spy_not_see_encrypted_key*)
+goal thy 
+ "!!evs. [| Says B' A (Crypt {|NA, Agent A, Agent B, Key K|} (shrK A))  \
+\            : set_of_list evs;                                         \
+\           A ~: lost;  evs : otway lost |]                             \
+\        ==> EX NB. Says Server B                                       \
+\                    {|Crypt {|NA, Agent A, Agent B, Key K|} (shrK A),  \
+\                      Crypt {|NB, Agent A, Agent B, Key K|} (shrK B)|} \
+\                   : set_of_list evs";
+by (fast_tac (!claset addSIs [NA_Crypt_imp_Server_msg]
+                      addEs  partsEs
+                      addDs  [Says_imp_sees_Spy RS parts.Inj]) 1);
+qed "A_trust_OR4";
+
+
+(*Describes the form of K and NA when the Server sends this message.*)
+goal thy 
+ "!!evs. [| Says Server B \
+\           {|Crypt {|NA, Agent A, Agent B, K|} (shrK A),                    \
+\             Crypt {|NB, Agent A, Agent B, K|} (shrK B)|} : set_of_list evs; \
+\           evs : otway lost |]                                        \
+\        ==> (EX evt: otway lost. K = Key(newK evt)) &                  \
+\            (EX i. NA = Nonce i) &                  \
+\            (EX j. NB = Nonce j)";
+by (etac rev_mp 1);
+by (etac otway.induct 1);
+by (ALLGOALS (fast_tac (!claset addss (!simpset))));
+qed "Says_Server_message_form";
+
+
+(** Crucial secrecy property: Spy does not see the keys sent in msg OR3
+    Does not in itself guarantee security: an attack could violate 
+    the premises, e.g. by having A=Spy **)
+
+goal thy 
+ "!!evs. [| A ~: lost;  B ~: lost;  evs : otway lost;  evt : otway lost |] \
+\        ==> Says Server B                                                 \
+\             {|Crypt {|NA, Agent A, Agent B, Key K|} (shrK A),            \
+\               Crypt {|NB, Agent A, Agent B, Key K|} (shrK B)|}           \
+\            : set_of_list evs -->                                         \
+\            Says A Spy {|NA, Key K|} ~: set_of_list evs -->               \
+\            Key K ~: analz (sees lost Spy evs)";
+by (etac otway.induct 1);
+by analz_Fake_tac;
+by (REPEAT_FIRST (eresolve_tac [asm_rl, bexE, disjE] ORELSE' hyp_subst_tac));
+by (ALLGOALS
+    (asm_full_simp_tac 
+     (!simpset addsimps ([analz_subset_parts RS contra_subsetD,
+                          analz_insert_Key_newK] @ pushes)
+               setloop split_tac [expand_if])));
+(** LEVEL 4 **)
+(*OR3*)
+by (fast_tac (!claset addSIs [parts_insertI]
+                      addEs [Says_imp_old_keys RS less_irrefl]
+                      addss (!simpset addsimps [parts_insert2])) 2);
+(*Reveal case 2, OR4, Fake*) 
+by (REPEAT_FIRST (resolve_tac [conjI, impI] ORELSE' spy_analz_tac));
+(*Reveal case 1*) (** LEVEL 6 **)
+by (excluded_middle_tac "Aa : lost" 1);
+(*But this contradicts Key K ~: analz (sees lost Spy evsa) *)
+by (dtac (Says_imp_sees_Spy RS analz.Inj) 2);
+by (fast_tac (!claset addSDs [analz.Decrypt] addss (!simpset)) 2);
+(*So now we have  Aa ~: lost *)
+by (dtac A_trust_OR4 1);
+by (REPEAT (assume_tac 1));
+by (fast_tac (!claset addDs [unique_session_keys] addss (!simpset)) 1);
+val lemma = result() RS mp RS mp RSN(2,rev_notE);
+
+goal thy 
+ "!!evs. [| Says Server B \
+\           {|Crypt {|NA, Agent A, Agent B, K|} (shrK A),                    \
+\             Crypt {|NB, Agent A, Agent B, K|} (shrK B)|} : set_of_list evs; \
+\           Says A Spy {|NA, K|} ~: set_of_list evs;                     \
+\           A ~: lost;  B ~: lost;  evs : otway lost |]                  \
+\        ==> K ~: analz (sees lost Spy evs)";
+by (forward_tac [Says_Server_message_form] 1 THEN assume_tac 1);
+by (fast_tac (!claset addSEs [lemma]) 1);
+qed "Spy_not_see_encrypted_key";
+
+
+goal thy 
+ "!!evs. [| C ~: {A,B,Server};                                           \
+\           Says Server B \
+\           {|Crypt {|NA, Agent A, Agent B, K|} (shrK A),                    \
+\             Crypt {|NB, Agent A, Agent B, K|} (shrK B)|} : set_of_list evs; \
+\           Says A Spy {|NA, K|} ~: set_of_list evs;                     \
+\           A ~: lost;  B ~: lost;  evs : otway lost |]                  \
+\        ==> K ~: analz (sees lost C evs)";
+by (rtac (subset_insertI RS sees_mono RS analz_mono RS contra_subsetD) 1);
+by (rtac (sees_lost_agent_subset_sees_Spy RS analz_mono RS contra_subsetD) 1);
+by (FIRSTGOAL (rtac Spy_not_see_encrypted_key));
+by (REPEAT_FIRST (fast_tac (!claset addIs [otway_mono RS subsetD])));
+qed "Agent_not_see_encrypted_key";
+
+
+(**** Authenticity properties relating to NB ****)
+
+(*If the encrypted message appears then it originated with the Server!*)
+goal thy 
+ "!!evs. [| B ~: lost;  evs : otway lost |]                   \
+\    ==> Crypt {|NB, Agent A, Agent B, Key K|} (shrK B)       \
+\         : parts (sees lost Spy evs)                         \
+\        --> (EX NA. Says Server B                                          \
+\                     {|Crypt {|NA, Agent A, Agent B, Key K|} (shrK A),     \
+\                       Crypt {|NB, Agent A, Agent B, Key K|} (shrK B)|}    \
+\                     : set_of_list evs)";
+by (parts_induct_tac 1);
+by (ALLGOALS (asm_simp_tac (!simpset addsimps [ex_disj_distrib])));
+(*OR3*)
+by (Fast_tac 1);
+qed_spec_mp "NB_Crypt_imp_Server_msg";
+
+
+(*Guarantee for B: if it gets a message with matching NB then the Server
+  has sent the correct message.*)
+goal thy 
+ "!!evs. [| B ~: lost;  evs : otway lost;               \
+\           Says S B {|X, Crypt {|NB, Agent A, Agent B, Key K|} (shrK B)|} \
+\            : set_of_list evs |]                                  \
+\        ==> EX NA. Says Server B                                          \
+\                     {|Crypt {|NA, Agent A, Agent B, Key K|} (shrK A),     \
+\                       Crypt {|NB, Agent A, Agent B, Key K|} (shrK B)|}    \
+\                     : set_of_list evs";
+by (fast_tac (!claset addSIs [NB_Crypt_imp_Server_msg]
+                      addEs  partsEs
+                      addDs  [Says_imp_sees_Spy RS parts.Inj]) 1);
+qed "B_trust_OR3";
--- /dev/null	Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000
+++ b/src/HOL/Auth/OtwayRees_AN.thy	Thu Oct 10 18:40:34 1996 +0200
@@ -0,0 +1,70 @@
+(*  Title:      HOL/Auth/OtwayRees
+    ID:         $Id$
+    Author:     Lawrence C Paulson, Cambridge University Computer Laboratory
+    Copyright   1996  University of Cambridge
+
+Inductive relation "otway" for the Otway-Rees protocol.
+
+Simplified version with minimal encryption but explicit messages
+
+From page 11 of
+  Abadi and Needham.  Prudent Engineering Practice for Cryptographic Protocols.
+  IEEE Trans. SE 22 (1), 1996
+*)
+
+OtwayRees_AN = Shared + 
+
+consts  otway   :: "agent set => event list set"
+inductive "otway lost"
+  intrs 
+         (*Initial trace is empty*)
+    Nil  "[]: otway lost"
+
+         (*The spy MAY say anything he CAN say.  We do not expect him to
+           invent new nonces here, but he can also use NS1.  Common to
+           all similar protocols.*)
+    Fake "[| evs: otway lost;  B ~= Spy;  
+             X: synth (analz (sees lost Spy evs)) |]
+          ==> Says Spy B X  # evs : otway lost"
+
+         (*Alice initiates a protocol run*)
+    OR1  "[| evs: otway lost;  A ~= B;  B ~= Server |]
+          ==> Says A B {|Agent A, Agent B, Nonce (newN evs)|}
+                 # evs : otway lost"
+
+         (*Bob's response to Alice's message.  Bob doesn't know who 
+	   the sender is, hence the A' in the sender field.*)
+    OR2  "[| evs: otway lost;  B ~= Server;
+             Says A' B {|Agent A, Agent B, Nonce NA|} : set_of_list evs |]
+          ==> Says B Server {|Agent A, Agent B, Nonce NA, Nonce (newN evs)|}
+                 # evs : otway lost"
+
+         (*The Server receives Bob's message.  Then he sends a new
+           session key to Bob with a packet for forwarding to Alice.*)
+    OR3  "[| evs: otway lost;  B ~= Server;  A ~= B;
+             Says B' Server {|Agent A, Agent B, Nonce NA, Nonce NB|}
+               : set_of_list evs |]
+          ==> Says Server B 
+               {|Crypt {|Nonce NA, Agent A, Agent B, Key(newK evs)|} (shrK A),
+                 Crypt {|Nonce NB, Agent A, Agent B, Key(newK evs)|} (shrK B)|}
+              # evs : otway lost"
+
+         (*Bob receives the Server's (?) message and compares the Nonces with
+	   those in the message he previously sent the Server.*)
+    OR4  "[| evs: otway lost;  A ~= B;  B ~= Server;
+             Says S B {|X, 
+                        Crypt {|Nonce NB, Agent A, Agent B, Key K|} (shrK B)|}
+               : set_of_list evs;
+             Says B Server {|Agent A, Agent B, Nonce NA, Nonce NB|}
+               : set_of_list evs |]
+          ==> Says B A X # evs : otway lost"
+
+         (*This message models possible leaks of session keys.  Alice's Nonce
+           identifies the protocol run.*)
+    Revl "[| evs: otway lost;  A ~= Spy;
+             Says B' A (Crypt {|Nonce NA, Agent A, Agent B, Key K|} (shrK A))
+               : set_of_list evs;
+             Says A  B {|Agent A, Agent B, Nonce NA|} : set_of_list evs |]
+          ==> Says A Spy {|Nonce NA, Key K|} # evs : otway lost"
+
+end