Comparative studies in key disagreement correction process on wireless key agreement system

Authors:
Toru Hashimoto;Takashi Itoh;Masazumi Ueba;Hisato Iwai;Hideichi Sasaoka;Kazukuni Kobara;Hideki Imai
Affiliations:
ATR Wave Engineering Laboratories, Japan;ATR Wave Engineering Laboratories, Japan;ATR Wave Engineering Laboratories, Japan;Doshisha University, Japan;Doshisha University, Japan;National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology, Japan and Chuo University, Japan;Chuo University, Japan and National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology, Japan
Venue:
WISA'07 Proceedings of the 8th international conference on Information security applications
Year:
2007

Citing 2
Cited 1

A method for obtaining digital signatures and public-key cryptosystems

Communications of the ACM
Information-theoretically secure secret-key agreement by NOT authenticated public discussion

EUROCRYPT'97 Proceedings of the 16th annual international conference on Theory and application of cryptographic techniques

Vulnerabilities of wireless key exchange based on channel reciprocity

WISA'10 Proceedings of the 11th international conference on Information security applications

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

This paper describes the comparison of the error-correcting codes that is adopted by the key disagreement correction process about wireless key agreement system called ESPARSKEY that is expected to achieve information-theoretic security. This system consists of AP with a variable directional antenna, that is, an ESPAR antenna, and UT with an omni-directional antenna. We employ conditional mutual information as the evaluation index. From experimental evaluation results, we clarified that the best way is adopting BCH(31,16,7) with table-aided soft-decision decoding as the key disagreement process where one eavesdropper exists more than 40cm from UT. After adopting this errorcorrecting code, we should transact 200 wireless packets between the nodes to share a 128-bit unguessable key against an eavesdropper.