We present BMC4TimeSec, an end-to-end tool for verifying Timed Security Protocols (TSP) based on SMT-based bounded model checking and multi-agent modelling in the form of Timed Interpreted Systems (TIS) and Timed Interleaved Interpreted Systems (TIIS). In BMC4TimeSec, TSP executions implement the TIS/TIIS environment (join actions, interleaving, delays, lifetimes), and knowledge automata implement the agents (evolution of participant knowledge, including the intruder). The code is publicly available on GitHub, as is a video demonstration.
Tools like Tamarin and ProVerif have achieved notable success in analyzing and verifying complex real-world protocols such as EMV, 5G, and WPA2, even detecting zero-day exploits. Despite these successes, verifying such protocols remains a time-consuming, challenging task, often requiring significant human effort and expertise. In this paper, we present a reinforcement learning (RL) framework inspired by AlphaZero and AlphaProof that implements a new style of proof search for Tamarin. We have developed a stateless API for Tamarin that acts as a classical RL environment. We guide a Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) by a neural heuristic that learns from completed subproofs. We evaluate our framework on 16 case studies, ranging from classical protocol models to challenging state-of-the-art protocol models from recent publications. Our method finds more proofs automatically than Tamarin's standard search and produces shorter proofs than both the standard and human-engineered heuristics. Our pipeline is applicable out of the box to assist Tamarin users in active research, reducing the human effort required. Moreover, our standardized interface provides a programmatic way for users to interact with Tamarin. Finally, our work demonstrates the promising potential of adapting RL-based methods to the Tamarin domain.
Matthias Cosler, Cas Cremers, Bernd Finkbeiner +2
CISPA Helmholtz Center for Information Security, Saarbrücken, Germany · Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
The benchmarks used to evaluate AI agents in security-critical roles suffer from crucial weaknesses. Building on recent empirical evidence, we characterize three core challenges that undermine security evaluations: benchmark vulnerabilities, temporal staleness, and runtime uncertainty. We then outline practical directions toward building more robust and trustworthy evaluation frameworks.
Sahar Abdelnabi, Chris Hicks, Konrad Rieck +1
ELLIS Institute Tübingen & MPI-IS & Tübingen AI Center, Germany · The Alan Turing Institute, London, UK · BIFOLD & Technische Universität Berlin, Germany +1
AI coding agents produce code faster than humans can review it. In our approach, the prover is the judge of whether the code is correct. Under a verifier-driven loop, AI agents wrote and verified bare-metal security software in Ada/SPARK spanning classical and post-quantum cryptography, TLS 1.3, IKEv2, X.509, and a Matrix client. GNATprove discharged 49,280 proof obligations, established functional correctness for selected primitives, and proved the absence of run-time errors for the rest, at roughly 20-40 times lower supervision cost than comparable hand verification. GNATprove alone was insufficient: some defects could not be detected and were resolved using known-answer tests, interoperability, or human review of specifications. Given weak checks, the agent tried to bypass them and reported success. We report where each layer caught faults and draw the central lesson: what an agent can be trusted to establish is bounded by the strength of its feedback.