|WikiProject Cryptography / Computer science||(Rated C-class, High-importance)|
This article may be too technical for most readers to understand. Please help improve it to make it understandable to non-experts, without removing the technical details. (September 2010) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
I've replaced one line with TeX. More of the same is needed in this article. Michael Hardy 01:25 Mar 29, 2003 (UTC)
I agree, and the reason I didn't go ahead with it in the first place is that I knew I was going to need to experiment with TeX itself to figure out the right ways to manufacture the various glyphs. Until then, I think the use of English words is acceptable. Dominus 00:02 Apr 5, 2003 (UTC)
Sorry about the link to one of my own peer-reviewed papers, but it is I think the simplest one justifying that BAN is decidable. David.Monniaux 17:06, 30 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Seems good to me (!); I've moved it into a references section. — Matt 09:35, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- ...one weakness of BAN logic: the lack of a good semantics with a clear meaning in terms of knowledge and possible universes.
Erk...can someone reword this with a slightly clearer meaning?— Matt 09:39, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Yes, I'm on it.
I've rewritten the intro. I look forward to feedback. --Davidstrauss 19:13, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
Source: The Burrows-Abadi-Needham logic The link is dead as of (see sig/timestamp)--Bah23 13:01, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
- Citeseer moved from NEC to PSU. I fixed the link. --Dominus 19:57, 19 January 2007 (UTC)