Abstract

The Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) consists of sensors, networks, and services to connect and control production systems. Its benefits include supply chain monitoring and machine failure detection. However, it has many vulnerabilities, such as industrial espionage and sabotage. Furthermore, many IIoT devices are resource-constrained, which impedes the use of traditional security services for them. Authentication allows devices to be confident of each other’s identity, preventing some security attacks. Many authentication protocols have been proposed for IIoT; however, they have high computing requirements not viable to resource-constrained devices, or they have been found insecure. In this paper, an authentication protocol for resource-constrained IIoT devices is proposed. It is based on the lightweight operations xor, addition, and subtraction, and a hash function. Also, only four messages are exchanged between the principals to authenticate. It has a low execution-time and communication-cost. Its security was successfully assessed with the formal methods Automated Validation of Internet Security Protocols and Applications (AVISPA) tool and Burrows–Abadi–Needham (BAN) logic, together with an informal analysis of its resistance to known attacks. Its performance and security were compared with state-of-the-art protocols, resulting in a good performance for resource-constrained IIoT devices, and higher security similar to computational expensive schemes.

Highlights

  • Internet of Things (IoT) is a technology where physical objects are empowered with a virtual representation, allowing them to exchange contextual information to coordinate actions, have a prompt and better response to environmental changes, and use their resources efficiently

  • Both are broadly-accepted instruments to analyse the accomplishment of mutual authentication and resistance to known attacks, and they have been used to assess the security of many protocols, including [43,44,45]

  • An authentication protocol called Lightweight Authentication and Key Distribution (LAKD) is proposed for Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) devices

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Internet of Things (IoT) is a technology where physical objects are empowered with a virtual representation, allowing them to exchange contextual information to coordinate actions, have a prompt and better response to environmental changes, and use their resources efficiently. IoT devices are composed of sensors and actuators to have awareness and to respond in their environment, and have a method of communication to interact with other devices [4] These physical objects have a connection to the Internet, directly or through another device, making them available any time and from everywhere in the world to their service clients. Whereas the proposed protocol uses only the operations of xor, addition, subtraction, and hash function Because those functions are lightweight, the scheme does not have a high impact on the limited computing and battery resources of IoT devices. To be suitable to them, the proposal is based only on the lightweight operations of xor, addition, and subtraction, and a one-way hash function; the protocol does not have a high impact on the device’s computational and battery resources.

Related Work
Network Architecture
Threat Model
LAKD Protocol
Registration
Authentication
Security Analysis
Formal Verification with AVISPA
Formal Verification with BAN Logic
Confidentiality
Data Integrity
Mutual Authentication
Sensor Node Anonymity
Perfect Forward and Backward Secrecy
Known Session Key Security
Resistance to the Tracking Attack
Resistance to the Offline Identity Guessing Attack
Resistance to Impersonation Attack
5.3.10. Resistance to the Injection Attack
5.3.11. Resistance to the MITM Attack
5.3.12. Resistance to the Privileged Insider Attack
5.3.13. Resistance to the Replay Attack
5.3.14. Resistance to the Known Session-Specific Temporary Information Attack
5.3.15. Resistance to the DoS Attack
5.3.16. Resistance to the Desynchronization Attack
5.3.17. Resistance to Key Disclosure Attack
Performance and Security Evaluation
Execution-Time Analysis
Communication-Cost Analysis
Attack Resistance Comparison
Findings
Discussion
Conclusions
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.