MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3152283462 · doi:10.1109/tnsm.2021.3071087

A New Mutual Authentication and Key Agreement Protocol for Mobile Client—Server Environment

2021· article· en· W3152283462 on OpenAlexafffund
Loïc D. Tsobdjou, Samuel Pierre, Alejandro Quintero

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Authentication Protocols Security
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer networkProtocol (science)Mutual authenticationAuthentication protocolKey (lock)Key-agreement protocolAuthentication (law)Computer securityPublic-key cryptographyKey distributionEncryption

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mobile devices are becoming an essential part of many users’ lives. Users exchange sometimes very sensitive data with remote servers. This raises a security problem in terms of the confidentiality and integrity of these data, and users’ privacy. Mutual authentication protocols allow a user and a server to confirm each other’s legitimacy and share a session key to encrypt subsequent communications. Several protocols have been proposed to achieve this goal. However, these have certain weaknesses, such as impersonation, lack of anonymity, the use of additional hardware, and the synchronization problem associated with the use of timestamps. In this paper, we propose a mutual authentication protocol based on elliptic curve cryptography for mobile client – server environments, which addresses the above problems. This protocol is intended to be lightweight as it is designed for resource constrained mobile devices. Moreover, we present a formal and informal analysis of the security of the proposed protocol. This latter has security attributes, such as session key security, perfect forward secrecy, user anonymity, resistance to impersonation, replay and insider attacks. Performance evaluation shows that we outperform similar protocols. Therefore, the proposed protocol is secure, efficient and suitable for mobile environments.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.008
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.253 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations50
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Network and Service ManagementSame topicAdvanced Authentication Protocols SecurityFrench-language works237,207