On key agreement and conference key agreement
An attack is demonstrated on a previously proposed class of key agreement protocols. Analysis of the attack reveals that a small change in the construction of the protocols is sufficient to prevent the attack. The insight gained allows a generalisation of the class to a new design for conference key agreement protocols.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.S. Bakhtiari, R. Safavi-Naini and J. Pieprzyk, “Keyed Hash Functons, Cryptography: Policy and Algorithms, Springer-Verlag, LNCS 1029, pp.210–214, 1996.Google Scholar
- 2.T. Berson, L. Gong and M. Lomas, “Secure, Keyed and Collisionful Hash Function”, Technical Report, SRI International, September 1994.Google Scholar
- 3.C. Boyd, “Towards a Classification of Key Agreement Protocols”, IEEE Computer Security Foundations Workshop, pp.38–43, IEEE Press 1995.Google Scholar
- 4.M. Burmester and Y. Desmedt, “A Secure and Efficient Conference Key Distribution System”, Advances in Cryptology — Eurocrypt 94, Springer-Verlag, 1995, pp.275–286.Google Scholar
- 7.M. Just and S. Vaudenay, “Authenticated Multi-Party Key Agreement”, Advances in Cryptology — Asiacrypt 96, Springer-Verlag, 1996, pp.26–35.Google Scholar
- 8.B. Klein, M. Otten and T. Beth, “Conference Key Distribution Protocols in Distributed Systems”, Codes and Cyphers — Cryptography and Coding IV, IMA, 1995, pp.225–242.Google Scholar
- 9.B. Preneel and P. van Oorschot, “MDx-MAC and Building Fast MACs from Hash Functions”, Advances in Cryptology — Crypto '95, Springer-Verlag, 1995, pp.1–14.Google Scholar
- 10.M. Rabin, “Digitalized Signatures and Public-Key Functions as Intractable as Factorization”, MIT Laboratory for Computer Science, 1979.Google Scholar
- 11.R. Rueppel and P. van Oorschot, “Modern Key Agreement Techniques”, Computer Communications, July 1994.Google Scholar