  We give a sequential model for noninterference security including probability
(but not demonic choice), thus supporting reasoning about the likelihood that
high-security values might be revealed by observations of low-security
activity. Our novel methodological contribution is the definition of a
refinement order and its use to compare security measures between
specifications and (their supposed) implementations. This contrasts with the
more common practice of evaluating the security of individual programs in
isolation.
  The appropriateness of our model and order is supported by our showing that
our refinement order is the greatest compositional relation --the compositional
closure-- with respect to our semantics and an "elementary" order based on
Bayes Risk --- a security measure already in widespread use. We also relate
refinement to other measures such as Shannon Entropy.
  By applying the approach to a non-trivial example, the anonymous-majority
Three-Judges protocol, we demonstrate by example that correctness arguments can
be simplified by the sort of layered developments --through levels of
increasing detail-- that are allowed and encouraged by compositional semantics.
