Advertisement

Evaluation and Analysis of Computational Complexity for Secure Multicast Models

  • Elijah R. Blessing
  • Rhymend Uthariaraj
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2668)

Abstract

Multicast is an internetwork service that provides efficient delivery of packets from a single source to multiple recipients. When there are large number of members in the group, security and scalability problems arise and an attempt to solve this, gives rise to additional computational complexities at the server. A model is said to be highly efficient if only it has less computational complexity at the server for all membership events and highly secure only when it requires large number of computations to successfully break the multicast model. In this paper, the computational complexities are determined and analyzed for different multicast models. Theoretical evaluation and experimental results prove that for all the membership events, the recently proposed multicast model named LeaSel has computational complexity of O(NSG) when compared to other models which has computational complexity of O(N), where N ≫ NSG. It is also shown that to successfully break LeaSel, the computational complexity is O(SaN) when compared to other models whose computational complexity is O(Sn).

Keywords

Multicast LeaSel computational complexity encryptions key distribution security scalability 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    C. Wong, M. Gouda, S.S. Lam, “Secure group communication using key graphs,” IEEE/ACM Transaction on Networking, vol. 8, no. 1, Feb 2000, pp.16–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    S. Berkovits, “How to broadcast a secret,” in advances in cryptology,EUROCRYPT91, D.W. Davis, ed. Berlin, Germany: Springer Verlag,1991, vol.547, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 535–541.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    R. Elijah Blessing, V. Rhymend Uthariaraj, “LeaSel: An Efficient Key Management Model for Scalable Multicast System,” in Proc. ICORD 2002, Dec 2002.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    R. Elijah Blessing, V. Rhymend Uthariaraj, “Secure and Efficient Scalable Multicast Model for Online Network Games,” in Proc. of 2 nd International Conference on Application and Development of Computer Games ADCOG 2003, pp.8–15.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    A. Fiat and M. Naor, “Broadcast encryption,” in Advances in Cryptology,CRYPTO’93, D.R. Stinson, Ed. Berlin, Germany: Springer Verlag,1994,vol.773, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp.480–491.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    D.M. Wallner, E.J. Harder and R.C. Agee, “Key management for multicast: Issues and architectures,” RFC 2627, July 1997.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    R. Poovendran, S. Ahmed, S. Corson, and J. Baras, “A Scalable Extension of Group Key Management Protocol,” Technical Report TR 98-14, Institute for Systems Research, 1998.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    D. Balenson, D. McGrew, and A. Sherman, “Key Management for Large Dynamic Groups: One-Way Function Trees and Amortized Initialization,” IETF Internet draft, August 2000.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    T. Dunigan and C. Cao, “Group key management,” Experimental, July 1997.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    G.H. Chiou and W.T. Chen, “Secure Broadcast Using the Secure Lock,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 15(8):929–934, August 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    S. Mittra, “Iolus: A framework for scalable secure multicasting,” Proc. of ACM SIGCOMM’ 97, pp.277–288.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    R.H. Deng, L. Gong, A.A. Lazar and W. Wang,“Authenticated key distribution and secure broadcast using no conventional encryption: A unified approach based on block codes,” in Proc.IEEE Globecom’95.Nov 1995.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    H. Harney and C. Muckenhirn, “Group key management protocol (GKMP) architecture,” RFC 2094, July 1997.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Waldvogel, G. Caronni, D. Sun, N. Weiler, and B. Plattner., “The VersaKey Framework: Versatile Group Key Management,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications. (Special Issue on Middleware), 17(8): 1614–1631, August 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    G. Caronni, M. Waldvogel, D. Sunand, and B. Plattner., “Efficient Security for Large and Dynamic Multicast Groups,” In Workshop on Enabling Technologies,(WETICE 98).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    D.A. McGrew and A. T. Sherman. Key Establishment in Large Dynamic Groups Using One-Way Function Trees. Technical Report No. 0755, TIS labs, Inc., Glenwood, MD, May 1998.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elijah R. Blessing
    • 1
  • Rhymend Uthariaraj
    • 2
  1. 1.Ramanujan Computing centreAnna UniversityChennaiIndia
  2. 2.Ramanujan Computing centreAnna UniversityChennaiIndia

Personalised recommendations