| M. Hennessy. The security picalculus and non-interference. Journal of Logic and Algebraic Programming, 2003. to appear. |
....Examining the theoretical results offered by existing works, we find some of them to be somewhat lacking in strength or simplicity. Hepburn and Wright [10] propose a type system which enjoys subject reduction, but do not establish any kind of security property. Hennessy and Riely [9] and Hennessy [8] base their non interference statements on may or must testing equivalence; a statement based on a stronger notion of process equivalence would seem preferable. Sewell and Vitek [20] do not prove noninterference. They instead define a so called causal flow property concerning the traces of a ....
M. Hennessy. The security picalculus and noninterference. Technical Report
....Examining the theoretical results offered by existing works, we find some of them to be somewhat lacking in strength or simplicity. Hepburn and Wright [10] propose a type system which enjoys subject reduction, but do not establish any kind of security property. Hennessy and Riely [9] and Hennessy [8] base their non interference statements on may or must testing equivalence; a statement based on a stronger notion of process equivalence would seem preferable. Sewell and Vitek [21] do not prove noninterference. They instead define a so called causal flow property concerning the traces of a ....
M. Hennessy. The security picalculus and noninterference. Technical Report
No context found.
M. Hennessy. The security picalculus and non-interference. Journal of Logic and Algebraic Programming, 2003. to appear.
No context found.
M. Hennessy. The security pi-calculus and non-interference. In Proc. of MFPS XIX, ENTCS. Elsevier, 2003. Full version to appear in Journal of Logic and Algebraic Programming.
Online articles have much greater impact More about CiteSeer.IST Add search form to your site Submit documents Feedback
CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC