MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075291929 · doi:10.1109/cjece.2014.2344447

Secure and Efficient Smart-Card-Based Remote User Authentication Scheme for Multiserver Environment

2015· article· en· W2075291929 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Saraswathi Shunmuganathan, R. Saravanan, Yogesh Palanichamy

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Authentication Protocols Security
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSmart cardPasswordComputer securitySpoofing attackReplay attackPassword crackingChallenge–response authenticationOne-time passwordAuthentication (law)Scheme (mathematics)Computer networkAuthentication protocol

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The growth of the Internet and telecommunication technology has facilitated remote access. During the last decade, many secure dynamic identity (ID)-based remote user authentication schemes have been proposed for the multiserver environment using smart cards. Recently, Li et al. point that the Lee et al. scheme is vulnerable to forgery attack, server spoofing attack, improper authentication, and unfriendly and inefficient password change. To overcome these security weaknesses, Li et al. propose a novel smart-card- and dynamic ID-based remote user authentication scheme for multiserver environments. In this paper, we show that the Li et al. scheme is also vulnerable to offline password guessing attack, stolen smart-card attack, forgery attack, and poor reparability. Their scheme does not also provide two-factor security. To provide a secure remote user authentication scheme for the multiserver environment and to overcome the security weaknesses, we propose an enhanced scheme. Our scheme is aimed at logically securing the data stored in the smart card and improving the dynamic property of the ID using password randomization for each session. Our scheme resists forgery attack, replay attack, stolen smart-card attack, offline password guessing attack, and spoofing attack. Our scheme's efficiency has been established analytically and confirmed through simulation.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.196 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations47
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Electrical and Computer EngineeringSame topicAdvanced Authentication Protocols SecurityFrench-language works237,207