The KryptoKnight family of light-weight protocols for authentication and key distribution
TL;DR: The paper argues that key distribution may require substantially different approaches in different network environments and shows that the proposed family of protocols offers a flexible palette of compatible solutions addressing many different networking scenarios.
Abstract: An essential function for achieving security in computer networks is reliable authentication of communicating parties and network components. Such authentication typically relies on exchanges of cryptographic messages between the involved parties, which in turn implies that these parties be able to acquire shared secret keys or certified public keys. Provision of authentication and key distribution functions in the primitive and resource-constrained environments of low-function networking mechanisms, portable, or wireless devices presents challenges in terms of resource usage, system management, ease of use, efficiency, and flexibility that are beyond the capabilities of previous designs such as Kerberos or X.509. This paper presents a family of light-weight authentication and key distribution protocols suitable for use in the low layers of network architectures. All the protocols are built around a common two-way authentication protocol. The paper argues that key distribution may require substantially different approaches in different network environments and shows that the proposed family of protocols offers a flexible palette of compatible solutions addressing many different networking scenarios. The mechanisms are minimal in cryptographic processing and message size, yet they are strong enough to meet the needs of secure key distribution for network entity authentication. The protocols presented have been implemented as part of comprehensive security subsystem prototype called KryptoKnight. >
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: The design, rationale, and implementation of a security architecture for protecting the secrecy and integrity of Internet traffic at the Internet Protocol (IP) layer, which includes a modular key management protocol, called MKMP, is presented.
Abstract: In this paper we present the design, rationale, and implementation of a security architecture for protecting the secrecy and integrity of Internet traffic at the Internet Protocol (IP) layer. The design includes three components: (1) a security policy for determining when, where, and how security measures are to be applied; (2) a modular key management protocol, called MKMP, for establishing shared secrets between communicating parties and meta-information prescribed by the security policy; and (3) the IP Security Protocol, as it is being standardized by the Internet Engineering Task Force, for applying security measures using information provided through the key management protocol. Effectively, these three components together allow for the establishment of a secure channel between any two communicating systems over the Internet. This technology is a component of IBM's firewall product and is now being ported to other IBM computer platforms.
1,480 citations
TL;DR: It is shown that the group key management service, using any of the three rekeying strategies, is scalable to large groups with frequent joins and leaves, and the average measured processing time per join/leave increases linearly with the logarithm of group size.
Abstract: Many emerging network applications are based upon a group communications model. As a result, securing group communications, i.e., providing confidentiality, authenticity, and integrity of messages delivered between group members, will become a critical networking issue. We present, in this paper, a novel solution to the scalability problem of group/multicast key management. We formalize the notion of a secure group as a triple (U,K,R) where U denotes a set of users, K a set of keys held by the users, and R a user-key relation. We then introduce key graphs to specify secure groups. For a special class of key graphs, we present three strategies for securely distributing rekey messages after a join/leave and specify protocols for joining and leaving a secure group. The rekeying strategies and join/leave protocols are implemented in a prototype key server we have built. We present measurement results from experiments and discuss performance comparisons. We show that our group key management service, using any of the three rekeying strategies, is scalable to large groups with frequent joins and leaves. In particular, the average measured processing time per join/leave increases linearly with the logarithm of group size.
1,376 citations
Cites methods from "The KryptoKnight family of light-we..."
...Initially, the client and server mutually authenticate each other using an authentication protocol or service; subsequently, a symmetric key is created and shared by them to be used for pairwise confidential communications [ 4 ], [21], [23], [27]....
[...]
01 Oct 1998
TL;DR: It is shown that the group key management service, using any of the three rekeying strategies, is scalable to large groups with frequent joins and leaves, and the average measured processing time per join/leave increases linearly with the logarithm of group size.
Abstract: Many emerging applications (e.g., teleconference, real-time information services, pay per view, distributed interactive simulation, and collaborative work) are based upon a group communications model, i.e., they require packet delivery from one or more authorized senders to a very large number of authorized receivers. As a result, securing group communications (i.e., providing confidentiality, integrity, and authenticity of messages delivered between group members) will become a critical networking issue.In this paper, we present a novel solution to the scalability problem of group/multicast key management. We formalize the notion of a secure group as a triple (U,K,R) where U denotes a set of users, K a set of keys held by the users, and R a user-key relation. We then introduce key graphs to specify secure groups. For a special class of key graphs, we present three strategies for securely distributing rekey messages after a join/leave, and specify protocols for joining and leaving a secure group. The rekeying strategies and join/leave protocols are implemented in a prototype group key server we have built. We present measurement results from experiments and discuss performance comparisons. We show that our group key management service, using any of the three rekeying strategies, is scalable to large groups with frequent joins and leaves. In particular, the average measured processing time per join/leave increases linearly with the logarithm of group size.
1,027 citations
Cites methods from "The KryptoKnight family of light-we..."
...Initially, the client and server mutually authenticate each other using an authentication protocol or service; subsequently, a symmetric key is created and shared by them to be used for pairwise con dential communications [4, 21, 23, 27]....
[...]
29 May 1995
TL;DR: This paper provides the first treatment of session key distribution in the three-party setting of Needham and Schroeder in the complexity-theoretic framework of modern cryptography, assuming the (minimal) assumption of a pseudorandom function.
Abstract: We study session key distribution in the three-party setting of Needham and Schroeder. (This is the trust model assumed by the popular Kerberos authentication system.) Such protocols are basic building blocks for contemporary distributed systems—yet the underlying problem has, up until now, lacked a definition or provably-good solution. One consequence is that incorrect protocols have proliferated. This paper provides the first treatment of this problem in the complexitytheoretic framework of modern cryptography. We present a definition, protocol, and a proof that the protocol satisfies the definition, assuming the (minimal) assumption of a pseudorandom function. When this assumption is appropriately instantiated, our protocols are simple and efficient. Abstract appearing in Proceedings of the 27th ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing, May 1995.
709 citations
Cites background from "The KryptoKnight family of light-we..."
...One contemporary solution which in uenced our thinking is IBM's KryptoKnight family of protocols [4]....
[...]
Patent•
10 May 2006TL;DR: In this paper, a digital license corresponding to the content is obtained, where the digital license includes the content key (KD) therein in an encrypted form, and a sub-license corresponding to and based on the obtained license is composed.
Abstract: To render digital content encrypted according to a content key (KD) on a first device having a public key (PU1) and a corresponding private key (PR1), a digital license corresponding to the content is obtained, where the digital license includes the content key (KD) therein in an encrypted form. The encrypted content key (KD) from the digital license is decrypted to produce the content key (KD), and the public key (PU1) of the first device is obtained therefrom. The content key (KD) is then encrypted according to the public key (PU1) of the first device (PU1 (KD)), and a sub-license corresponding to and based on the obtained license is composed, where the sub-license includes (PU1 (KD)). The composed sub-license is then transferred to the first device.
460 citations
References
More filters
TL;DR: An encryption method is presented with the novel property that publicly revealing an encryption key does not thereby reveal the corresponding decryption key.
Abstract: An encryption method is presented with the novel property that publicly revealing an encryption key does not thereby reveal the corresponding decryption key. This has two important consequences: (1) Couriers or other secure means are not needed to transmit keys, since a message can be enciphered using an encryption key publicly revealed by the intented recipient. Only he can decipher the message, since only he knows the corresponding decryption key. (2) A message can be “signed” using a privately held decryption key. Anyone can verify this signature using the corresponding publicly revealed encryption key. Signatures cannot be forged, and a signer cannot later deny the validity of his signature. This has obvious applications in “electronic mail” and “electronic funds transfer” systems. A message is encrypted by representing it as a number M, raising M to a publicly specified power e, and then taking the remainder when the result is divided by the publicly specified product, n, of two large secret primer numbers p and q. Decryption is similar; only a different, secret, power d is used, where e * d ≡ 1(mod (p - 1) * (q - 1)). The security of the system rests in part on the difficulty of factoring the published divisor, n.
14,659 citations
IBM1
TL;DR: It is argued that the random oracles model—where all parties have access to a public random oracle—provides a bridge between cryptographic theory and cryptographic practice, and yields protocols much more efficient than standard ones while retaining many of the advantages of provable security.
Abstract: We argue that the random oracle model—where all parties have access to a public random oracle—provides a bridge between cryptographic theory and cryptographic practice. In the paradigm we suggest, a practical protocol P is produced by first devising and proving correct a protocol PR for the random oracle model, and then replacing oracle accesses by the computation of an “appropriately chosen” function h. This paradigm yields protocols much more efficient than standard ones while retaining many of the advantages of provable security. We illustrate these gains for problems including encryption, signatures, and zero-knowledge proofs.
5,313 citations
Proceedings Article•
01 Apr 1992
TL;DR: This document describes the MD5 message-digest algorithm, which takes as input a message of arbitrary length and produces as output a 128-bit "fingerprint" or "message digest" of the input.
Abstract: This document describes the MD5 message-digest algorithm. The
algorithm takes as input a message of arbitrary length and produces as
output a 128-bit "fingerprint" or "message digest" of the input. This
memo provides information for the Internet community. It does not
specify an Internet standard.
3,514 citations
PARC1
TL;DR: Use of encryption to achieve authenticated communication in computer networks is discussed and example protocols are presented for the establishment of authenticated connections, for the management of authenticated mail, and for signature verification and document integrity guarantee.
Abstract: Use of encryption to achieve authenticated communication in computer networks is discussed. Example protocols are presented for the establishment of authenticated connections, for the management of authenticated mail, and for signature verification and document integrity guarantee. Both conventional and public-key encryption algorithms are considered as the basis for protocols.
2,671 citations