Distributed Collaborative Key Agreement Protocols for Dynamic Peer Groups Patrick P. C. Lee, John C. S. Lui and David K. Y. Yau IEEE ICNP 2002.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Efficient Kerberized Multicast Olga Kornievskaia University of Michigan Giovanni Di Crescenzo Telcordia Technologies.
Advertisements

A Survey of Key Management for Secure Group Communications Celia Li.
A hierarchical key management scheme for secure group communications in mobile ad hoc networks Authors: Nen-Chung Wang and Shian-Zhang Fang Sources: The.
Group Protocols for Secure Wireless Ad hoc Networks Srikanth Nannapaneni Sreechandu Kamisetty Swethana pagadala Aparna kasturi.
1 Performance Char’ of Region- Based Group Key Management --- in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks --- by Ing-Ray Chen, Jin-Hee Cho and Ding-Chau Wang Presented by.
TAODV: A Trusted AODV Routing Protocol for MANET Li Xiaoqi, GiGi March 22, 2004.
Fall, Privacy&Security - Virginia Tech – Computer Science Click to edit Master title style A Survey on Decentralized Group Key Management Schemes.
Computer Science Dr. Peng NingCSC 774 Adv. Net. Security1 CSC 774 Advanced Network Security Topic 5 Group Key Management.
KAIS T Distributed Collaborative Key Agreement and Authentication Protocols for Dynamic Peer Groups IEEE/ACM Trans. on Netw., Vol. 14, No. 2, April 2006.
Secure and Efficient Key Management in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks Bing Wu, Jie Wu, Eduardo B. Fernandez, Mohammad Ilyas, Spyros Magliveras Department of Computer.
Small-world Overlay P2P Network
1.1 Distributed and Collaborative Key Agreement Protocols with Authentication and Implementation for Dynamic Peer Groups Patrick Pak-Ching LEE.
Secure Multicast (II) Xun Kang. Content Batch Update of Key Trees Reliable Group Rekeying Tree-based Group Diffie-Hellman Recent progress in Wired and.
1 Dynamic Key-Updating: Privacy- Preserving Authentication for RFID Systems Li Lu, Lei Hu State Key Laboratory of Information Security, Graduate School.
Secure Multicast Xun Kang. Content Why need secure Multicast? Secure Group Communications Using Key Graphs Batch Update of Key Trees Reliable Group Rekeying.
Dept. of Computer Science & Engineering, CUHK1 Trust- and Clustering-Based Authentication Services in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks Edith Ngai and Michael R.
A Secure Fault-Tolerant Conference- Key Agreement Protocol Wen-Guey Tzeng Source : IEEE Transactions on computers Speaker : LIN, KENG-CHU.
Secure Group Communications Using Key Graphs Chung Kei Wong, Member, IEEE, Mohamed Gouda Simon S. Lam, Fellow, IEEE Evgenia Gorelik Yuksel Ucar.
TAODV: A Trust Model Based Routing Protocol for Secure Ad Hoc Networks Xiaoqi Li, Michael R. Lyu, and Jiangchuan Liu IEEE Aerospace Conference March 2004.
An Authentication Service Against Dishonest Users in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks Edith Ngai, Michael R. Lyu, and Roland T. Chin IEEE Aerospace Conference, Big.
Database caching in MANETs Based on Separation of Queries and Responses Author: Hassan Artail, Haidar Safa, and Samuel Pierre Publisher: Wireless And Mobile.
Multicast Security May 10, 2004 Sam Irvine Andy Nguyen.
LPT for Data Aggregation in Wireless Sensor networks Marc Lee and Vincent W.S Wong Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of British.
Study of the Relationship between Peer-to-Peer Systems and IP Multicasting T. Oh-ishi, K. Sakai, K. Kikuma, and A. Kurokawa NTT Network Service Systems.
Supporting VCR-like Operations in Derivative Tree-Based P2P Streaming Systems Tianyin Xu, Jianzhong Chen, Wenzhong Li, Sanglu Lu Nanjing University Yang.
Group Key Distribution Chih-Hao Huang
Peer-to-peer file-sharing over mobile ad hoc networks Gang Ding and Bharat Bhargava Department of Computer Sciences Purdue University Pervasive Computing.
Study of the Relationship between Peer to Peer Systems and IP Multicasting From IEEE Communication Magazine January 2003 學號 :M 姓名 : 邱 秀 純.
Overview of Security Research in Ad Hoc Networks Melanie Agnew John Folkerts Cory Virok.
Brian Padalino Sammy Lin Arnold Perez Helen Chen
Computer Science 1 CSC 774 Advanced Network Security Secure Group Communications Using Key Graphs Presented by: Siddharth Bhai 9 th Nov 2005.
Hierarchical agent-based secure and reliable multicast in wireless mesh networks Yinan LI, Ing-Ray Chen Robert Weikel, Virginia Sistrunk, Hung-Yuan Chung.
Simple and Fault-Tolerant Key Agreement for Dynamic Collaborative Groups David Insel John Stephens Shawn Smith Shaun Jamieson.
Minimal Hop Count Path Routing Algorithm for Mobile Sensor Networks Jae-Young Choi, Jun-Hui Lee, and Yeong-Jee Chung Dept. of Computer Engineering, College.
Overlay Network Physical LayerR : router Overlay Layer N R R R R R N.
Secure Group Communication: Key Management by Robert Chirwa.
Project guide Dr. G. Sudha Sadhasivam Asst Professor, Dept of CSE Presented by C. Geetha Jini (07MW03)
Trust- and Clustering-Based Authentication Service in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks Presented by Edith Ngai 28 October 2003.
Fall, Privacy&Security - Virginia Tech – Computer Science Click to edit Master title style Collusion-Resistant Group Key Management Using Attribute-
Distributed Authentication in Wireless Mesh Networks Through Kerberos Tickets draft-moustafa-krb-wg-mesh-nw-00.txt Hassnaa Moustafa
Quantitative Evaluation of Unstructured Peer-to-Peer Architectures Fabrício Benevenuto José Ismael Jr. Jussara M. Almeida Department of Computer Science.
Evoting using collaborative clustering Justin Gray Osama Khaleel Joey LaConte Frank Watson.
Optimal Content Delivery with Network Coding Derek Leong, Tracey Ho California Institute of Technology Rebecca Cathey BAE Systems CISS 2009 March 19, 2009.
Cryptanalysis and Improvement of an Access Control in User Hierarchy Based on Elliptic Curve Cryptosystem Reporter : Tzer-Long Chen Information Sciences.
Yu-Li Lin and Chien-Lung Hsu Department of Information Management, Chang-Gung University Information Science(SCI) Reporter: Tzer-Long Chen.
1 Distributed and Collaborative Key Agreement Protocols with Authentication and Implementation for Dynamic Peer Groups Patrick P. C. Lee.
A secure re-keying scheme Introduction Background Re-keying scheme User revocation User join Conclusion.
2007/03/26OPLAB, NTUIM1 A Proactive Tree Recovery Mechanism for Resilient Overlay Network Networking, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Volume 15, Issue 1, Feb.
Kaleidoscope – Adding Colors to Kademlia Gil Einziger, Roy Friedman, Eyal Kibbar Computer Science, Technion 1.
S-Paxos: Eliminating the Leader Bottleneck
The School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science (EECS) CS/ECE 419/478 Applied Cryptography ADVANCED KEY ESTABLISHMENT AND GROUP KEY MANAGEMENT.
Secure and efficient key management in mobile ad hoc networks Authors: Bing Wu, Jie Wu, Eduardo B. Fernandez, Mohammad Ilyas, and Spyros Magliveras Sources:
K-Anycast Routing Schemes for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks 指導老師 : 黃鈴玲 教授 學生 : 李京釜.
SAODV and Distributed Key Management Mark Guzman, Jeff Walter, Dan Bress, Pradhyumna Wani.
Group Key Distribution Xiuzhen Cheng The George Washington University.
On Reducing Mesh Delay for Peer- to-Peer Live Streaming Dongni Ren, Y.-T. Hillman Li, S.-H. Gary Chan Department of Computer Science and Engineering The.
J.-H. Cho, I.-R. Chen, M. Eltoweissy ACM/Springer Wireless Networks, 2007 Presented by: Mwaffaq Otoom CS5214 – Spring © 2007 On optimal batch re-keying.
An Adaptive Protocol for Efficient & Secure Multicasting in Wireless LANS Sandeep Gupta & Sriram Cherukuri Arizona State University
Efficient Group Key Management in Wireless LANs Celia Li and Uyen Trang Nguyen Computer Science and Engineering York University.
Efficient Resource Allocation for Wireless Multicast De-Nian Yang, Member, IEEE Ming-Syan Chen, Fellow, IEEE IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, April.
Authors: Ing-Ray Chen and Ding-Chau Wang Presented by Chaitanya,Geetanjali and Bavani Modeling and Analysis of Regional Registration Based Mobile Service.
Project Orda Secure Key Distribution Over Ad Hoc Networks Security in Ad Hoc Networks – Team A Lane Westlund, Roderic Campbell, Mark Allen, Dima Novikov,
Dept. of Computer Science & Engineering, CUHK1 Trust- and Clustering-Based Authentication Service in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks Presented by Edith Ngai Supervised.
Presented by Edith Ngai MPhil Term 3 Presentation
Zueyong Zhu† and J. William Atwood‡
CSC 774 Advanced Network Security
Group Key Management Scheme for Simultaneous Multiple Groups with Overlapped Membership Andrew Moore 9/27/2011.
Distributed security – Dynamic Group Key Management by Jaman Bhola
Combinatorial Optimization of Multicast Key Management
Key Management Protocols
Presentation transcript:

Distributed Collaborative Key Agreement Protocols for Dynamic Peer Groups Patrick P. C. Lee, John C. S. Lui and David K. Y. Yau IEEE ICNP 2002

Outline Identify the motivations of group key agreement and its requirements. Introduce Tree-Based Group Diffie-Hellman (TGDH), which uses a key tree to arrange all the keys. Propose three interval-based rekeying algorithms: Rebuild, Batch and Queue-batch. Illustrate experimental results.

Motivations Many group-oriented and distributed applications require security services. Example: a closed and confidential business meeting in a p2p network. We therefore need a secure distributed group key agreement scheme so that the group can encrypt their communication data with a common secret group key.

Requirements of Group Key Agreement Distributed: there is no centralized key server, which has the following limitations: A single point of failure; and Not suitable for peer groups and ad hoc networks. Collaborative: all group members contribute their own part to generate a group key. Dynamic: the protocol remains efficient even when the occurrences of join/leave events are very frequent.

Our Work We worked on the Tree-Based Group Diffie- Hellman protocol by Kim et al. in ACM CCS’00. We designed three interval-based rekeying algorithms that have the distributed, collaborative and dynamic features. We performed quantitative and simulation- based analysis to illustrate the performance merits of the interval-based algorithms.

Tree-Based Group Diffie-Hellman Protocol (TGDH) A key tree is formed. Each node v represents a secret (private) key K v and a blinded (public) key BK v. BK v = α K v mod p, where α and p are public parameters. Every member holds the secret keys along the key path, and all the blinded keys in the key tree. K 0 is the group key. 0 M1M1 M2M M3M3 M4M4 M5M5 M6M6

TGDH: Relationships between nodes K v = (BK 2v+2 ) K 2v+1 mod p = (α K 2v+2 ) K 2v+1 mod p v  The secret key of a non-leaf node v can be generated by: K v = (BK 2v+1 ) K 2v+2 mod p = (α K 2v+1 ) K 2v+2 mod p 2v+12v+2 BK 2v+1 BK 2v+2 K v = α K 2v+1 K 2v+2 mod p

Tree-Based Group Diffie-Hellman Protocol (TGDH) A key tree is formed. Each node v represents a secret (private) key K v and a blinded (public) key BK v. BK v = α K v mod p, where α and p are public parameters. Every member holds the secret keys along the key path, and all the blinded keys in the key tree. K 0 is the group key. 0 M1M1 M2M M3M3 M4M4 M5M5 M6M6

TGDH: Handle membership events Rekeying (renewing the keys of the nodes) is performed for every single join/leave event to ensure backward and forward confidentiality. A special member called sponsor is elected to be responsible for broadcasting updated blinded keys. t JoinLeaveJoin Leave rekey

TGDH: Single Leave Case M 4 becomes the sponsor. It rekeys the secret keys K 2 and K 0 and broadcasts the blinded key BK 2. M 1, M 2 and M 3 compute K 0 given BK 2. M 6 and M 7 compute K 2 and then K 0 given BK M4M4 M5M5 0 2 M1M1 M2M M3M3 M6M M7M M 5 leaves 5 M 4(S)

M4M TGDH: Single Join Case M 8 broadcasts its individual blinded key BK 12 on joining. M 4 becomes the sponsor again. It rekeys K 5, K 2 and K 0 given BK 12 and broadcasts the blinded key BK 5 and BK 2. Now everyone can compute the new group key M 4(S) M 8 joins 2 5 M8M8 M1M1 M2M M3M3 M6M M7M7 5

Interval-Based Rekeying Algorithms We can reduce one rekeying operation if we can simply replace M 5 by M 8 in node 12. Interval-based rekeying is proposed such that rekeying is performed on a batch of join and leave requests at regular rekey intervals. Interval-based rekeying improves system performance. We propose three interval-based rekeying algorithms, namely Rebuild, Batch and Queue-batch.

0 M1M1 M2M M3M3 M4M4 M5M5 M6M M7M7 Rebuild Algorithm Intuition: Minimize the final tree height so that the number of rekeying operations of every member is reduced. Basic Idea: Reconstruct the whole key tree to form a complete tree. We can explore under which workload Rebuild is good. 0 M 1(s) M 3(S) M 4(S) M 6(S) M 8(S) M 2, M 5, M 7 leave M 8 joins

Batch Algorithm Based on the centralized batch rekeying approach by Li et al. in WWW Basic Idea: add the joins to suitable nodes: Replace the leave nodes with the join nodes. Attach the join nodes to the shallowest positions. Keep the key tree balanced. Elect the sponsors who help broadcast new blinded keys. Given J joins and L leaves, we illustrate two cases: L > J > 0 J > L > 0

0 M1M1 M2M M3M3 M4M4 M5M5 M6M M7M7 Batch – Example 1: L > J > 0 M 8 broadcasts its join request, including its blinded key. M 1 rekeys secret keys K 1 and K 0. M 4 rekeys K 5, K 2 and K 0. M 1 broadcasts BK 1. M 4 broadcasts BK 5 and BK M 2, M 5, M 7 leave M 8 joins M 1(S) 3 M 4(S) 11 M 8(S) 6

0 M1M1 M2M M3M3 M4M4 M5M5 M6M M7M7 Batch – Example 2: J > L > 0 M 8 and M 9 form a subtree T 1 ’. M 10 itself forms a subtree T 2 ’. M 8 and M 9 compute K 6, and one of them broadcasts BK 6. M 1 rekeys K 3 and K 1. M 6 rekeys K 2. M 1 broadcasts BK 3 and BK 1. M 6 broadcasts BK M 8(S) M 9(S) T1’T1’ M 8, M 9, M 10 join M 2, M 7 leave M 10(S) 8 T2’T2’

Queue-batch Algorithm Intuition: The previous approaches perform rekeying at the start of every rekey interval, leading to a heavy processing workload at the update instance. Reduce the load by pre-processing the join events during the idle rekey interval.

Queue-batch Algorithm Two stages: Queue-subtree and Queue-merge. Queue-subtree: Within the idle rekey interval, form a subtree T’ with all joining members, just like individual rekeying for a single join event. Queue-merge: At the beginning of the next rekey interval, prune all departed leaf nodes if any and add the subtree T’ to the highest leave position (or attach T’ to the shallowest position). Elect the sponsors who can help broadcast the new blinded keys.

Queue-batch – Example of Queue-merge Phase T’ is attached to node 6. M 10, the sponsor, will broadcast BK 6. M 1 rekeys K 1. M 6 rekeys K 2. M 1 broadcasts BK 1. M 6 broadcasts BK M1M1 M2M M3M3 M4M4 M5M5 M6M M7M7 M 8, M 9, M 10 join M 2, M 7 leave 36 8 M 1(S) M8M8 M9M9 T’ 2728 M 10(S)

Performance Evaluations Study the performance of the interval-based algorithms. Performance Metrics: Number of renewed nodes: a renewed node refers to a non-leaf node whose keys are renewed. This metric provides a measure of the communication cost. Number of exponentiation operations: this metric provides a measure of the computation load. Settings: There is only one group. The population size is fixed at 1024 users. Originally, 512 members are in the group. Every potential member joins the group with probability p J, and every existing member leaves the group with probability p L.

Experiment 1: Evaluation using Mathematical Models Start with a well-balanced tree with 512 members. Obtain the metrics under different numbers of joins and leaves. Queue-batch offers the best performance, and a significant computation/communication reduction when the group is very dynamic. Details on mathematical models are referred to the paper/technical report.

Experiment 2: Average Analysis Average number of exponentiations at different join probabilities: p J =0.25p J =0.5 p J =0.75

Experiment 2: Average Analysis Average number of renewed nodes at different join probabilities: p J =0.25p J =0.5 p J =0.75

Experiment 3: Instantaneous Analysis Instantaneous number of exponentiations at different join probabilities for Batch and Queue-batch: p J =0.25 p L =0.25 p J =0.25 p L =0.75 p J =0.75 p L =0.75 p J =0.75 p L =0.25

Experiment 3: Instantaneous Analysis Instantaneous number of renewed nodes at different join probabilities for Batch and Queue-batch: p J =0.25 p L =0.25 p J =0.25 p L =0.75 p J =0.75 p L =0.75 p J =0.75 p L =0.25

Experimental Results Queue-batch offers the best performance in terms of computation and communication costs among the three interval-based algorithms. The superior performance of Queue-batch is more obvious when the occurrences of joins/leaves are highly frequent.

Future Work Authentication Sponsors’ coordination Fault tolerance System implementation