2017
DOI: 10.1007/s11277-017-5156-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Cryptanalysis and Enhancement of an Anonymous Self-Certified Key Exchange Protocol

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
15
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 41 publications
0
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Alzahrani et al [6] proposed an ECC-based key-agreement protocol for D2D communications in IoV networks that does not need a TA in the authentication and key-agreement phase. They analyzed and revealed security pitfalls of protocols by Islam and Biswas [7] and Mandal et al [8]. In this article, we demonstrate that the protocol proposed by Alzahrani et al [6] suffers from some problems in design and is insecure against insider attacks, key compromise attack, and fails to provide anonymity.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 66%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Alzahrani et al [6] proposed an ECC-based key-agreement protocol for D2D communications in IoV networks that does not need a TA in the authentication and key-agreement phase. They analyzed and revealed security pitfalls of protocols by Islam and Biswas [7] and Mandal et al [8]. In this article, we demonstrate that the protocol proposed by Alzahrani et al [6] suffers from some problems in design and is insecure against insider attacks, key compromise attack, and fails to provide anonymity.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 66%
“…In order to reduce evaluation overhead and authenticate public keys, and to solve the key escrow problem, Islam and Biswas [7] designed an ECC-based key agreement protocol along with the self-certified public key for two-party communications. Mandal et al [8] improved the security issues of Islam and Biswas' protocol. Nevertheless, Alzahrani et al [6] showed that both protocols by Islam-Biswas [7] and Mandal et al [8] suffered from key compromise impersonation attacks and do not ensure the anonymity of IoT devices.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…By simulating a clogging attack [1–5], an adversary forces a communicating entity to process a forged/replayed authentication request by the adversary impersonating on behalf of a legitimate entity. The clogging attack represents a significant class of denial of services (DoS) attack and quality of services (QoS) degradation attack [3–6].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…By simulating a clogging attack [1–5], an adversary forces a communicating entity to process a forged/replayed authentication request by the adversary impersonating on behalf of a legitimate entity. The clogging attack represents a significant class of denial of services (DoS) attack and quality of services (QoS) degradation attack [3–6]. The clogging attack can be launched through the replay of old messages and get these accepted as legitimate and fresh ones from the receiving entity or adversary can try to construct a forged message, which can pass authentication requests from the receiving entity [6].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation