MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414348299 · doi:10.1109/jiot.2025.3612005

Attack Scenarios and Security Analysis of a Blockchain and PUF-Based Lightweight Authentication Protocol for Wireless Medical Sensor Networks

2025· article· en· W4414348299 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Milica Knežević, Siniša Tomović, Miodrag J. Mihaljević

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Internet of Things Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSecurity in Wireless Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOntario Ministry of Research, Innovation and ScienceMinistry of Science and Innovation, New Zealand
KeywordsSecurity analysisWireless sensor networkBlockchainAuthentication (law)Protocol (science)Cryptographic protocolAuthentication protocolMessage authentication code

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Wireless Medical Sensor Networks (WMSNs) wearable or implantable sensors are used to collect vital body parameters, allowing remote monitoring and advanced predictive and preventive healthcare. This involves transmitting patients’ physiological data, which are sensitive and should be confidential, over the network. Thus, ensuring the security and privacy of these data is one of the most important prerequisites for the successful development of healthcare systems based on WMSN. In this regard, reliable authentication protocols designed for this specific scenario are needed. In this paper, we propose the most efficient attacks to date on the widely referenced lightweight authentication protocols for WMSNs - Wang et al.’s protocol (IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 9(11), 2022, doi: 10.1109/JIOT.2021.3117762). This protocol relies on blockchain and smart contracts to address the issue of centralization, and on Physically Unclonable Functions (PUFs) to ensure advanced physical layer security. Our attacks exploit the protocol’s vulnerabilities that stem from an inadequate use of the underlying blockchain component, unlike the previous attacks which require challenging conditions to meet, i.e. physical access to users’ mobile devices and specialized power analysis techniques. We introduce new attack scenarios and prove that Wang et al.’s protocol is vulnerable to impersonation, tracing, message replay and session key disclosure. We validate these vulnerabilities using the ProVerif tool, thereby confirming the feasibility of the attack scenarios and refuting Wang et al.’s claims regarding the protocol’s security properties. In addition, we identify and discuss other design weaknesses in Wang et al.’s proposal that further undermine its overall security and practical applicability. Finally, we revisit the feasibility of previously published attacks on Wang et al.’s protocol.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Internet of Things JournalSame topicSecurity in Wireless Sensor NetworksFrench-language works237,207