Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Skip to main content

Advertisement

A Scalable Group Authentication Scheme Based on Combinatorial Designs with Fault Tolerance for the Internet of Things

  • Original Research
  • Published:
SN Computer Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Publisher Correction to this article was published on 28 September 2023

This article has been updated

Abstract

With the development of the Internet of Things, the scale of IoT system is becoming large. Due to the network congestion problems and the server capability, using unicast authentication will bring burden to the network link and server. In this paper, we propose a scalable group authentication scheme with fault tolerance based on combinatorial designs. Performance analysis of the proposed scheme is based on several metrics such as fault tolerance, scalability, energy consumption and storage overhead. Simulation results have shown that oval designs realize the best trade-off for all metrics.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Change history

References

  1. El Mouaatamid O, Lahmer M, Belkasmi M. Internet of Things Security: layered classification of attacks and possible countermeasures. Electron J Inf Technol. 2016;9:24–37.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Borgia E. The Internet of Things vision: Key features, applications and open issues. Comput Commun. 2014;54:1–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Chengzhe L, et al. SE-AKA: a secure and efficient group authentication and key agreement protocol for LTE networks. Comput Netw. 2013;57(17):3492–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Mahalle PN, Prasad NR, Prasad R. Threshold cryptography-based group authentication (TCGA) scheme for the internet of things (IoT). In: 2014 4th international conference on wireless communications, vehicular technology, information theory and aerospace & Electronic Systems (VITAE). IEEE; 2014.

  5. Simplicio MA Jr, Marcos A, et al. Lightweight and escrow-less authenticated key agreement for the internet of things. Comput Commun. 2017;9:43–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Zhang Z, Wang H, Vasilakos AV, Fang H. ECG-IJS key agreement and authentication in wireless body sensor networks. IEEE. 2014;1–10.

  7. Chengzhe Lai et al. LGTH: A lightweight group authentication protocol for machine-type communication in LTE networks. In: Global communications conference (GLOBECOM), 2013 IEEE. IEEE, 2013.

  8. Elmouaatamid O, Lahmer M, Belkasmi M. Group authentication with fault tolerance for internet of things. In: International symposium on ubiquitous networking. Springer, Cham; 2017. pp. 299–307

  9. Huang J-J, et al. Lightweight authentication scheme with dynamic group members in IoT environments. In: Adjunct proceedings of the 13th international conference on mobile and ubiquitous systems: computing networking and services. ACM, 2016.

  10. Yates F. Incomplete randomized blocks. Ann Eugen. 1936;7(2):121–40.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Çamtepe SA, Yener B. Combinatorial design of key distribution mechanisms for wireless sensor networks. IEEE/ACM Trans Netw. 2007;15(2):346–58.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Walid B, et al. A highly scalable key pre-distribution scheme for wireless sensor networks. IEEE Trans Wirel Commun. 2013;12(2):948–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Chang Y-S, Tzong-Chen W. Group-oriented authentication mechanism with key exchange. Comput Commun. 1998;21(5):485–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Lin SJ, Chung WH. A probabilistic model of (t, n) visual cryptography scheme with dynamic group. IEEE Trans Inf Forensics Secur. 2012;7(1):197–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Chengzhe L, et al. GLARM: group-based lightweight authentication scheme for resource-constrained machine to machine communications. Comput Netw. 2016;99:66–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Lai C, et al. SEGR: a secure and efficient group roaming scheme for machine to machine communications between 3GPP and WiMAX networks. In: 2014 IEEE international conference on communications (ICC). IEEE; 2014.

  17. Xiong H, et al. An efficient certificateless aggregate signature with constant pairing computations. Inf Sci. 2013;219:225–35.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Huan W. Studying on Internet of things based on fingerprint identification. In: 2010 international conference on computer application and system modeling (ICCASM). vol 14. IEEE; 2010.

  19. Habib K, Torjusen A, Leister W. A novel authentication framework based on bio-metric and radio fingerprinting for the IoT in eHealth. In: Proceedings of international conference on smart systems, devices and technologies (SMART) 2014.

  20. Fremantle P, Scott P. A security survey of middleware for the Internet of Things. Peer J Computer Science. 2017;3:e114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Zeng K, Govindan K, Mohapatra P. Non-cryptographic authentication and identification in wireless networks [security and privacy in emerging wireless networks]. IEEE Wirel Commun. 2010;17(5):56–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Raj Chandra B, Shrikhande SS. On the construction of sets of mutually orthogonal Latin squares and the falsity of a conjecture of Euler. Trans Am Math Soc. 1960;95(2):191–209.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Assmus EF, Key JD. Designs and codes: an update. Codes, designs and geometry. Boston: Springer; 1996. p. 3–23.

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Otmane El Mouaatamid.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendices

Appendix A: Oval Design Construction

  • Let us construct the finite projective plane \(PG\left( 2,2^{2}\right)\), which is based on \(GF\left( 4\right)\). Let \(\alpha\) be the primitive element in the field, thus \(GF\left( 4\right) =\left\{ 0,1,\alpha ,\alpha ^{2}\right\}\). There are 63 triples different from \(\left( 0,0,0\right)\), of the form \(P=\left( p_{1},p_{2},p_{3}\right) \in GF\left( 4\right) ^{3}\). Every point P has 3 equivalent points, thus there are 21 equivalent classes. For simplification, we denote \(\left( p_{1},p_{2},p_{3}\right)\) as \(p_{1}p_{2}p_{3}\), then, there will be 21 equivalent classes of the points in \(PG\left( 2,2^{2}\right)\) :

100, 010, 001, \(1\alpha \alpha\), \(1\alpha ^{2}0\), \(01\alpha ^{2}\), \(1\alpha 1\), 101, \(10\alpha\), \(1\alpha ^{2}\alpha\), \(1\alpha ^{2}1\), \(10\alpha ^{2}\), \(11\alpha\), \(1\alpha ^{2}\alpha ^{2}\), 110, 011, \(1\alpha 0\), \(01\alpha\), \(1\alpha \alpha ^{2}\), \(11\alpha ^{2}\), 111.

The lines are obtained as described earlier.

They are consecutively 21 lines, and 5 points in each line:

\(\left[ 100\right]\): 010 001 \(01\alpha ^{2}\) 011 \(01\alpha\)

\(\left[ 010\right]\): 100 001 101 \(10\alpha\) \(10\alpha ^{2}\)

\(\left[ 001\right]\): 100 010 \(1\alpha ^{2}0\) 110 \(1\alpha 0\)

\(\left[ 110\right]\): 001 \(11\alpha\) 110 \(11\alpha ^{2}\) 111

\(\vdots\)

Let \(x \cdot z=y^{2}\) be the equation of the conic, there are 5 points that satisfy this equation, namely 100, \(001,\,1\alpha \alpha ^{2},\,1\alpha ^{2}\alpha ,\,111\). By adding the nucleus point \(P_{0}=010\), we obtain the oval.

By removing the secant and the tangent lines, we obtain the exterior lines that pass through the retained points, which are summarized in Table 3.

Table 3 The exterior lines and their points

The oval design obtained from this construction is the \(\left( 6,\,15,\,5\right)\), which has the 6 exterior lines as its points, and the 15 retained points as its blocks.

Appendix B: The Scheme Evaluation

  • In the Table 4, we evaluate some balanced incomplete block deigns performances. We evaluate the performance of some metrics based on these designs as special Steiner System Designs (SSD), specifically are t-designs with \(\lambda =1\) and \(t=2\).

  • The metrics computed and evaluated are the scalability of the group (the group size), the storage overhead noted by C, the probability of sharing a common key-share \(s_{i}\) noted by \(P_{c}\) and the energy consumption requisite for unicast and group authentication denoted, respectively, by \(E_{UC}\) and \(E_{GA}\).

Table 4 Oval and Unital designs numerical performance evaluation

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

El Mouaatamid, O., Lahmer, M. & Belkasmi, M. A Scalable Group Authentication Scheme Based on Combinatorial Designs with Fault Tolerance for the Internet of Things. SN COMPUT. SCI. 1, 234 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42979-020-00247-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42979-020-00247-3

Keywords