A Comprehensive Survey on Certificate-Less Authentication Schemes for Vehicular Ad hoc Networks in Intelligent Transportation Systems

Abstract

Data transmission in intelligent transportation systems is being challenged by a variety of factors, such as open wireless communication channels, that pose problems related to security, anonymity, and privacy. To achieve secure data transmission, several authentication schemes are proposed by various researchers. The most predominant schemes are based on identity-based and public-key cryptography techniques. Due to limitations such as key escrow in identity-based cryptography and certificate management in public-key cryptography, certificate-less authentication schemes arrived to counter these challenges. This paper presents a comprehensive survey on the classification of various types of certificate-less authentication schemes and their features. The schemes are classified based on their type of authentication, the techniques used, the attacks they address, and their security requirements. This survey highlights the performance comparison of various authentication schemes and presents the gaps in them, thereby providing insights for the realization of intelligent transportation systems.

A Gap Analysis of the Adoption Maturity of Certificateless Cryptography in Cooperative Intelligent Transportation Systems

“…However, some surveys are included in Table 4 if they partially included papers relevant for the intersection of C-ITSs and CLC, and in that case, the proportion of schemes implemented are only counted from the set of CLC-based schemes mentioned in the survey. Surveys [32,78,79] In the analyzed time frame of 2022-2023 there was no proof-of-concept implementations on-site, i.e., corresponding to level 5 in CLC TRL. The majority of implementations, and, thereby, performance analysis of CLC schemes, were made on laptops and/or PC clients with varying specifications in both Ubuntu and Windows.…”

“…Moreover, the literature analysis suggests that the nomenclature, notation, and grouping of schemes is not fully harmonized; thus, potentially leading to even slower adoption due to a lower level of comprehension. As pointed out by Sripathi Venkata Naga et al [78] from the literature analysis, future work in investigating notation standards as in what type of CLC solutions there are with regards to type of application scenario, is suggested. Indeed, lacking a common language among information security practitioners have been noted as a major factor that slows down progression within the field [82].…”