4.6 Article

A Lightweight Cloud-Assisted Identity-Based Anonymous Authentication and Key Agreement Protocol for Secure Wireless Body Area Network

期刊

IEEE SYSTEMS JOURNAL
卷 15, 期 2, 页码 2779-2786

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/JSYST.2020.2990749

关键词

Wireless communication; Cloud computing; Protocols; Body area networks; Authentication; Servers; Anonymous; authentication; impersonation attack; security; wireless body area network (WBAN)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The article proposes an identity-based anonymous authentication and key agreement protocol for WBAN in a cloud-assisted environment, which ensures security and user anonymity. The scheme is proven to be secure under computational diffie-hellman assumption and random oracle model, with low computational and communication costs compared to existing schemes.
Recent advancements in ubiquitous technologies, such as an intelligible sensor, wireless communication, internet of things, and cloud computing have enabled the wearable devices to integrate with the wireless body area network (WBAN) for improving the patient's health remotely. Due to the resource-constraint nature of the WBAN, it provides limited services to the patients. Cloud technology has strengthened the WBAN potential by facilitating the storage and computation. However, due to the open nature of the cloud technology and wireless communication, these type of systems encounter several security issues. In this article, we propose an identity-based anonymous authentication and key agreement (IBAAKA) protocol for WBAN in the cloud-assisted environment, which achieves mutual authentication and user anonymity. In the security analysis, we show that under the well-known computational diffie-hellman assumption and random oracle model, the proposed IBAAKA scheme is provably secure, as well as achieves the required security properties. Further, it requires the least computational cost and comparable communication cost with the existing schemes.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据