The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Security flaws in two improved remote user authentication schemes using smart cards
Abstract
SUMMARY: Understanding security failures of cryptographic protocols is the key to both patching existing protocols and designing future schemes. In this paper, we analyze two recent proposals in the area of password‐based remote user authentication using smart cards. First, we point out that the scheme of Chen et al. cannot achieve all the claimed security goals and report its following flaws: (i) it is vulnerable to offline password guessing attack under their nontamper resistance assumption of the smart cards; and (ii) it fails to provide forward secrecy. Then, we analyze an efficient dynamic ID‐based scheme without public‐key operations introduced by Wen and Li in 2012. This proposal attempts to overcome many of the well‐known security and efficiency shortcomings of previous schemes and supports more functionalities than its counterparts. Nevertheless, Wen–Li's protocol is vulnerable to offline password guessing attack and denial of service attack, and fails to provide forward secrecy and to preserve user anonymity. Furthermore, with the security analysis of these two schemes and our previous protocol design experience, we put forward three general principles that are vital for designing secure smart‐card‐based password authentication schemes: (i) public‐key techniques are indispensable to resist against offline password guessing attack and to preserve user anonymity under the nontamper resistance assumption of the smart card; (ii) there is an unavoidable trade‐off when fulfilling the goals of local password update and resistance to smart card loss attack; and (iii) at least two exponentiation (respectively elliptic curve point multiplication) operations conducted on the server side are necessary for achieving forward secrecy. The cryptanalysis results discourage any practical use of the two investigated schemes and are important for security engineers to make their choices correctly, whereas the proposed three principles are valuable to protocol designers for advancing more robust schemes. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Password authentication with insecure communication
Lamport, L. (1981) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/358790.358797 · Cited by 2,789
Cited by
Anonymous Two-Factor Authentication in Distributed Systems: Certain Goals Are Beyond Attainment
Wang, D., He, D., Wang, P., & Chu, C.-H. (2015) · IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing · doi:10.1109/tdsc.2014.2355850 · Cited by 451
Self-citationWang, D., Li, W., & Wang, P. (2018) · IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics · doi:10.1109/tii.2018.2834351 · Cited by 272
Self-citationQiu, S., Wang, D., Xu, G., & Kumari, S. (2020) · IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing · doi:10.1109/tdsc.2020.3022797 · Cited by 224
Self-citationAn efficient two-factor user authentication scheme with unlinkability for wireless sensor networks
Jiang, Q., Ma, J., Lu, X., & Tian, Y. (2015) · Peer-to-Peer Networking and Applications · doi:10.1007/s12083-014-0285-z · Cited by 191
Improved ECC-Based Three-Factor Multiserver Authentication Scheme
Wu, T.-Y., Yang, L., Lee, Z., Chen, C.-M., Pan, J.-S., & Islam, S. H. (2021) · Security and Communication Networks · doi:10.1155/2021/6627956 · Cited by 52
Metadata
- Authors
- Ma, C., Wang, D., & Zhao, S.
- Venue
- International Journal of Communication Systems
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2012-11-07
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 2215-2227
- ISSN
- 1074-5351 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-1131
- OpenAlex
- W2147883419
- Cited by
- 167
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 17.30
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.