4.8 Article

Secure and efficient two-party collaborative SM9 signature scheme suitable for smart home

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jksuci.2022.05.008

关键词

Smart home; SM9 algorithm; Two-party collaborative signature; Random oracle model; Provable security

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The smart home often suffers from poor security due to the limitations of embedded processors. To enhance the communication security of smart home systems, this paper proposes a two-party collaborative signature scheme based on the SM9 algorithm to reduce the risk of signature private key leakage.
The smart home usually has poor security and is vulnerable to attack since it adopts embedded proces-sors that are limited by volume and power consumption. To improve the communication security of the smart home system, identity-based signature schemes are widely used in wireless network communica-tions. However, the user's signature private key is generally stored in a single device, it is easy to be stolen by attackers to control the smart home devices. To reduce the risk of leakage of the signature private key, a two-party collaborative signature scheme based on the SM9 algorithm is proposed in this paper. The user's signature private key is generated through the collaboration of the two-party key generation center (KGC), and the integer secrets related to the signature private key are stored in two devices respectively. During the signing process, the two devices sign collaboratively to prevent the complete private key from being leaked. The security of the scheme is proved in the random oracle model. Theoretical analysis and experimental results show that our proposed scheme can achieve higher security with lower computa-tion cost and communication cost when compared with the existing two-party SM9 signature schemes.(c) 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of King Saud University. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

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

4.8
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