Dual cryptography authentication protocol and its security analysis for radio frequency identification systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
SUMMARY The open radio frequency identification (RFID) air interface may suffer from severe threats that make security problem become a critical issue for RFID systems and applications. This paper proposes a dual cryptography authentication protocol (DCAP) for RFID systems. DCAP partitions randomly the tag identifier into two partial identifiers that are used in the forward link and in the backward link, respectively. The protocol applies hash function and shared‐key encryption algorithm to safeguard both forward and backward links and provides a three‐round authentication mode on each tag and reader in a session. Then, authentication is carried out by the primary, secondary, and final verifications. For a formal analysis, a graphical method Colored Petri Nets is applied to model and analyze the correctness of DCAP. We prove that the protocol owns tag anonymity and forward security and has the capability to resist major attacks such as replay, reader forgery, and tag forgery. Finally, the performance in terms of storage, communication overhead, and computation load is evaluated to demonstrate that the protocol has modest complexity and high efficiency. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".