Wireless Networks

, Volume 21, Issue 2, pp 405–419 | Cite as

A group-based security protocol for machine-type communications in LTE-advanced

  • Daesung Choi
  • Hyoung-Kee Choi
  • Se-Young Lee


Machine-type communication (MTC) takes advantage of millions of devices being connected to each other in sensing our environment. A third-generation partnership project has been actively considering MTC as an enabler for ubiquitous computing and context-aware services. Until recently, we have not yet known how to productively manage the signaling traffic from these MTC devices because authentication requirements may impose such large signaling loads that they overwhelm the radio access of 4G cellular networks. This paper proposes the design of an efficient security protocol for MTC. This protocol is designed to be compatible with the incumbent system by being composed of only symmetric cryptography. Efficiency is attained by aggregating many authentication requests into a single one. The security and performance of the new design are evaluated via formal verification and theoretical analysis. Implementation of the proposed protocol in a real LTE-A network is provided through a feasibility analysis undertaken to prove the practicability of the protocol. Based on these evaluations, we contend that the proposed protocol is practical in terms of security and performance for MTC in LTE-Advanced.


Long-term evolution advanced (LTE-A) Machine-type communications (MTC) Authentication and key agreement (AKA) 

Supplementary material

11276_2014_788_MOESM1_ESM.docx (430 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 429 kb)


  1. 1.
    Lien, S.-Y., et al. (2011). Toward ubiquitous massive accesses in 3GPP machine-to-machine communications. IEEE Communications Magazine, 49(4), 66–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jain, P., Hedman, P., & Zisimopoulos, H. (2012). Machine type communications in 3GPP systems. IEEE Communications Magazine, 50(11), 28–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Taleb, T., & Kunz, A. (2012). Machine type communications in 3GPP networks: Potential, challenges and solutions. IEEE Communications Magazine, 50(3), 178–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lee, T., et al. (2009). Enhanced delegation-based authentication protocol for PCSs. IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, 8(5), 2166–2171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zhang, Y., et al. (2012). Dynamic group based authentication protocol for machine type communications. In IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Networking and Collaborative Systems (InCoS). Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chen, Y., et al. (2010). Group-based authentication and key agreement. Springer Wireless Personal Communications, 62(4), 965–979.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jiang, R., et al. (2013). EAP-based group authentication and key agreement protocol for machine-type communications. International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks (Hindawi).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lai, C., et al. (2013). SE-AKA: A secure and efficient group authentication and key agreement protocol for LTE networks. Computer Networks (Elsevier), 57(17), 3492–3510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Huang, J., et al. (2011). ABAKA: An anonymous batch authenticated and key agreement scheme for value-added services in vehicular ad hoc networks. IEEE Transaction on Vehicular Technology, 60(1), 248–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cao, J., et al. (2012). A group-based authentication and key agreement for MTC in LTE networks. In IEEE Global Communications Conference (Globecom).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wong, C., et al. (1998). Secure group communication using key graphs. In ACM Conferences on Applications, Technologies, Architectures, and Protocols for Computer Communication (Sigcomm).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Harney, H., et al. (1999). Logical key hierarchy protocol. IETF Internet Draft.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pietro, R., et al. (2002). Efficient and secure keys management for wireless mobile communications. In ACM International Workshop on Principles of Mobile Computing (POMC).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Astely, D., et al. (2013). LTE release 12 and beyond. IEEE Communications Magazine, 51(7), 154–160.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yang, M., et al. (2013). Solving the data overload: Device-to-device bearer control architecture for cellular data offloading. IEEE Vehicular Technology Magazine, 8(1), 31–39.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    3GPP TS 33.102 ver.11.5.1. (2013). 3G security: security architecture (release 11).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    3GPP TR 33.868 ver.12.0.0. (2014). Security aspects of machine-type communications (release 12).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Han, C., & Choi, H. (2014). Security analysis of handover key management in 4G LTE/SAE networks. IEEE Transaction on Mobile Computing, 13(2), 457–468.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Blanchet, B., Smyth, B., & Cheval. V. (2013). ProVerif 1.88: Automatic cryptographic protocol verifier, user manual and tutorial. Google Scholar
  20. 20.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Information and Communication EngineeringSungkyunkwan UniversitySeoulSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations