2007
DOI: 10.1016/j.comnet.2007.01.011
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

HB-MP: A further step in the HB-family of lightweight authentication protocols

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
52
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 125 publications
(52 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
0
52
0
Order By: Relevance
“…On the one hand, researchers have attempted to design multiple HBlike protocols with MIM security [8,11,25,13] without or only partial security proofs. Otherwise, provably MIM-secure constructions all in fact provide a full message-authentication code (MAC) secure under LPN or Field LPN [20,10,15].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…On the one hand, researchers have attempted to design multiple HBlike protocols with MIM security [8,11,25,13] without or only partial security proofs. Otherwise, provably MIM-secure constructions all in fact provide a full message-authentication code (MAC) secure under LPN or Field LPN [20,10,15].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, HB + was shown vulnerable to manin-the-middle attacks [28]. Several variants were proposed [12,21,47] but all of them suffer from the same vulnerability [29]. A new variant HB # was proposed by Gilbert, Robshaw and Seurin [30] to improve the transmission cost of the protocol and its securtiy against man-in-the-middle attacks but an attack was also found in this variant [49].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In particular, Gilbert et al [14] showed that HB + can be broken by a MIM attack. Several variants HB ++ [9], HB * [11], HB-MP [24] were proposed to prevent the particular attack from [14], but all of them were later shown to be insecure [15]. In [16], a variant HB # was presented which provably resists the particular attack from [14], but was shown susceptible to a more general MIM attack [25].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%