Fault-Tolerant and Scalable Key Management Protocol for IoT-Based Collaborative Groups
Citations
22 citations
Cites background from "Fault-Tolerant and Scalable Key Man..."
...2) More complex tree structure is adopted to setup the groups in hierarchical architecture [19], [20], [30]....
[...]
...3) Inter-cluster communication is not supported [30]....
[...]
...It also considers the heterogeneity of the devices with multiple capabilities under IoT enabled sensing networks [30]....
[...]
...4) In [1], [19], [30], LNT maintained on GC causes computation and memory overheads....
[...]
...In [1], [10], [12], and [30], each group is divided into smaller sub-groups or logical subtrees as depicted in Figure 2....
[...]
4 citations
1 citations
1 citations
Cites background from "Fault-Tolerant and Scalable Key Man..."
...These schemes focus on specific use cases, such as wireless, ad hoc networks, and IoT [1][6][8][28]....
[...]
References
277 citations
"Fault-Tolerant and Scalable Key Man..." refers background in this paper
...This classi cation of decentralized protocols can further be re ned [10] by including time-driven rekeying subcategory [9] [29] and membership-driven rekeying subcategory [27] [8]....
[...]
271 citations
"Fault-Tolerant and Scalable Key Man..." refers methods in this paper
...Among them, the Logical Key Hierarchy (LKH) protocol [37], later improved by the One-way Function Tree protocol [7] are typical examples....
[...]
237 citations
"Fault-Tolerant and Scalable Key Man..." refers methods in this paper
...This list can be maintained using one of the existing solutions in the literature, such as [23]....
[...]
205 citations
154 citations
Related Papers (5)
Frequently Asked Questions (10)
Q2. What future works have the authors mentioned in the paper "Fault-tolerant and scalable key management protocol for iot-based collaborative groups" ?
The authors plan to further investigate DsBGK security strength by thoroughly assessing properties such as data integrity, data authentication, and data con dentiality through an implementation using automated formal validation tools ( e. g. Avispa, Scyther ).
Q3. What is the code for generating the univariate polynomial?
To secure the transmission of tickets, the active controller generates a univariate polynomial P (x) modulo the product of two large prime numbers.
Q4. What is the cost of asymmetric primitives?
distributed protocolsinvolve a high number of exchanged messages during rekeying operations, in addition to an important computation cost due to the use of heavy asymmetric primitives.
Q5. What is the simplest way to authenticate an object?
In case of a successful authentication, the object is initialized (through a secure channel) with a long term key (i.e. SK), and a shared key with its AKMS.
Q6. What are some examples of hierarchical based protocols?
Among them, the Logical Key Hierarchy (LKH) protocol [37], later improved by the One-way Function Tree protocol [7] are typical examples.
Q7. How many members are in possession of the same tickets?
Based on experimental results (see section IV.B in [3]), DBGK outperforms its peers within a proportion of around 50% of the members in possession of the same tickets as the leaving (ejected) member.
Q8. What is the drawback of the DH primitive?
Compared to other solutions based on DH primitives, one of the drawbacks of this protocol lies in the pre-sharing assumption of the seeds, which a ects both its scalability and feasibility.
Q9. What are the main categories of group key management protocols?
In this section, the authors review the main categories under which group key management protocols are usually categorized [11] [28], namely, the centralized, the decentralized, and the distributed categories.
Q10. How do the authors set the degree of the polynomial?
the authors set the degree m of the polynomial in a way to keep the factorization not easily feasible while maintaining e ciency.