Most of the proofs that I have seen for cryptographic protocol include completeness and soundness.

  • Why do we always prove completeness and soundness?
  • Why do we not also see other propertes such as "validity", "consistency", "integrity"?
  • $\begingroup$ To clarify your question: Rather than write "most of the proofs I have seen for cryptographic protocol..." maybe write "the proofs I have seen for <<examples of cryptographic protocols where you have seen them>>..." $\endgroup$
    – user2768
    Apr 19, 2017 at 9:51
  • $\begingroup$ Perhaps we've looked at different proofs, which is why most of the proofs I have seen don't include completeness and soundness. Nonetheless, let me try to advise upon why completeness and soundness are useful. Soundness says that something is valid (thus, I can't prove something that isn't valid). Completeness says that everything valid can be shown (thus, nothing is considered invalid when it isn't). $\endgroup$
    – user2768
    Apr 19, 2017 at 9:55


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.