Secure Mobility Management Based on Session Key Agreements

  • Younchan Jung
  • Enrique Festijo
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7672)


The issue of securing control signaling in mobility management is still an unsolved concern. To offer enhanced security, features in the recent mobile IP protocols rely on the use of IP Security (IPSec) Security Association (SA). However, the SA itself will cease to be valid if a mobile node moves or a network moves. This paper proposes secure mobile IP (SecMIP) scheme based on one-time transaction key agreements instead of using the pre-generated IPsec SA. In the proposed scheme, the mobile node is responsible for relaying its blind key information from the Home Agent (HA) to the Foreign Agent (FA) while the relating secret value is securely kept in its HA. Receiving the Binding Update (BU) message that contains the FA’s blind key, the HA can calculate the same transaction key as the FA. We analyze the time required for the enemy to succeed to attack our SecMIP scheme on integrity and authentication. Based on the analysis results, we suggest the optimum use of the operational parameters in our SecMIP scheme relating to the length of the secret value and the length of the prime number q in digit. The derived dimensions can guarantee an average of 1 year required for exhaustive key searching by brute force approaches while maintaining a maximum addition of 200 millisecond time latency for the HA and the FA to process the secured BU message.


Mobile IP Mobility Management Security Support Diffie-Hellman Key Agreement Domain Name Resource Record 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Li, R., Wei, Y., Lin, H., Yang, R., Wang, S., Wang, H.: Mobility Management for Global IP Connectivity of MANET. In: 5th IEEE Emergency Situations, Consumer Communications and Networking Conference, CCNC 2008, January 10-12, pp. 217–221 (2008)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jung, Y.C., Peradilla, M.: Tunnel Gateway Satisfying Mobility and Security Requirements of Mobile and IP-Based Networks. Journal of Communications and Networks 13(6), 583–590 (2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rehunathan, D., Atkinson, R., Bhatti, S.: Enabling Mobile Networks through secure naming. In: IEEE Military Communications Conference, MILCOM 2009, October 18-21, pp. 1–8 (2009)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ghosh, A., Talpade, R., Elaoud, M., Bereschinsky, M.: Securing ad-hoc networks using IPsec. In: IEEE Military Communications Conference, MILCOM 2005, vol. 5, pp. 2948–2953 (October 2005)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Moravejosharieh, A., Modares, H., Salleh, R.: Overview of Mobile IPv6 Security. In: 2012 Third International Conference on Intelligent Systems, Modelling and Simulation (ISMS), February 8-10, pp. 584–587 (2012)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kandikattu, R., Jacob, L.: Comparative Analysis of Different Cryptosystems for Hierarchical Mobile IPv6-based Wireless Mesh Network. International Journal of Network Security 10(3), 190–203 (2010)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Perkins, C.: IP Mobility Support for IPv4, Network Working Group, RFC 3220 (January 2002)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ding, S.: Mobile IP handoffs among multiple internet gateways in mobile ad hoc networks. Communications IET 3(5), 752–763 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Khair, M.G., Kantarci, B., Mouftah, H.T.: Towards cellular IP address assignment in wireless heterogeneous sensor networks. In: 2011 IEEE Symposium on Computers and Communications (ISCC), June 28 -July 1, pp. 615–619 (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Droms, F.R.: Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol, Network Working Group, RFC 2131 (March 1997)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Devarapalli, V., Wakikawa, R., Petrescu, A., Thubert, P.: Network Mobility (NEMO) Basic Support Protocol, RFC 3963 (January 2005)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Morera, R., McAuley, A.: Adapting DNS to dynamic ad hoc networks. In: IEEE Military Communications Conference 2005, MILCOM 2005, October 17-20, vol. 2, pp. 1303–1308 (2005)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cheng, H., Maltz, D.A., Li, J., Greenberg, A.: Public DNS system and Global Traffic Management. In: 2011 Proceedings IEEE INFOCOM, April 10-15, pp. 2615–2623 (2011)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jung, Y.,C., Atwood, J.W.: Design of robust DNS adaptable to dynamic Ad hoc networks. In: International Conference on DNS EASY (October 18, 2011)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hu, P., Hong, P., Li, J.: Name resolution in on-demand MANET. In: IEEE International Conference on Wireless and Mobile Computing, Networking and Communications (WiMob 2005), August 22-24, vol. 3, pp. 462–466 (2005)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Yahya, B., Ben-Othman, J.: Achieving host mobility using DNS dynamic updating protocol. In: 33rd IEEE Conference on Local Computer Networks, LCN 2008, October 14-17, pp. 634–638 (2008)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    US DoD: High-Assurance IP Encryption Interoperability Specification (HAIPE IS), Version 1.3.5 (May 2004)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kent, S., Atkinson, R.: Security Architecture for the Internet Protocol, RFC 2401 (November 1998)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Encarnacao, A., Bayer, G.: Mobile IPv6 Binding Update - Return Routability Procedure (2008)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Johnson, D., Perkins, C., Arkko, J.: Mobility Support in IPv6, IETF draft (June 2004)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Simpson, W.: IPng Mobility Considerations, RFC 1688 (1994)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Younchan Jung
    • 1
  • Enrique Festijo
    • 1
  1. 1.The Catholic University of KoreaBucheon-siSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations