4.4 Article

New attribute-based encryption schemes with anonymous authentication and time limitation in fog computing

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/cpe.7681

关键词

authentication scheme; CP-ABE-AA; fog computing; KP-ABE-AA; user anonymity; user untraceability

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article proposes two new schemes, CP-ABE-AA and KP-ABE-AA, based on attribute-based encryption (ABE), to address security and privacy challenges in fog computing. These schemes provide more secure communications and anonymous recognition, and the simulation results show improvements in key generation, encryption, and decryption times compared to existing schemes.
Fog computing is a suitable platform for the Internet of Things (IoT). However, it faces threats that pose security and privacy challenges. This article proposes two new, faster, and more secure schemes based on attribute-based encryption (ABE) address some security concerns. The new schemes are Cipher text-policy-ABE-anonymous authentication (CP-ABE-AA) and key-policy-ABE-anonymous authentication (KP-ABE-AA), providing more secure communications and anonymous recognition between servers and users employing registration center (RC). Users and servers register with RC and receive time parameter t and aliases to build an access tree. During the valid time, t a more secure transfer is established. After each t has expired, the servers and users obtain new aliases. RC provides anonymous authentication, and t determines the key's validity period. For simulation, a multi-paradigm programming language, Rust, was installed on Ubuntu 20. Compared to five existing schemes, the simulation results indicated that, on average, CP-ABE-AA has a 5.48% reduction time for key generation but an increased time of 11.28% in encryption and a reduction time of 11.33% in decryption. Also, compared to two other schemes, KP-ABE-AA produced an average time increase of 17.31% for key generation, but encryption and decryption times were reduced by 17.31% and 9.57%.

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

4.4
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