a comparative study of rfid solutions for security and privacy: pop vs. previous solutions

Post on 06-Jan-2016

22 Views

Category:

Documents

0 Downloads

Preview:

Click to see full reader

DESCRIPTION

A Comparative Study of RFID Solutions for Security and Privacy: POP vs. Previous Solutions. K.H.S Sabaragamu Koralalage and J. Cheng Department of Information and Computer Sciences, Saitama University, Japan {krishan, cheng}@aise.ics.saitama-u.ac.jp. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

A Comparative Study of RFID Solutions for Security and Privacy:

POP vs. Previous Solutions

Advanced Information Systems Engineering LabSaitama University, Japan2008-April-17

K.H.S Sabaragamu Koralalage and J. ChengK.H.S Sabaragamu Koralalage and J. ChengDepartment of Information and Computer Sciences,Department of Information and Computer Sciences,

Saitama University, JapanSaitama University, Japan{krishan, cheng}@aise.ics.saitama-u.ac.jp{krishan, cheng}@aise.ics.saitama-u.ac.jp

Agenda

POP ArchitectureThe Problem GoalEvaluationConclusionFuture Works

17-April-2008 ISA 2008 3

What is POP

What is Product-flow with Ownership-transferring Protocol A comprehensive mechanism used to

ensure the security and privacy of the passive RFID systems used in a product lifecycle

How Tagged-product flow with an anonymous

ownership transference Robust communicational protocol

17-April-2008 ISA 2008 4

How to change the ownership

PR

IVA

CY

SEC

UR

ITY

Ka Sa EPC E

Kb Sb EPC E

Kd Sd EPC E

Ke Se EPC E

Kf Sf EPC E

Kg Sg EPC E

Kh Sh EPC E

Ki Si EPC E

Kj Sj EPC E

Kk Sk EPC E

Kl Sl EPC E

EPC E

EPC E

EPC E

Kc Sc EPC E

17-April-2008 ISA 2008 5

The Problem Position of POP Architecture ? Level of Security ? Level of Privacy ? Level of Functionality ?

17-April-2008 ISA 2008 6

Goal and Objectives Goal

Compare and contrast previously proposed RFID solutions against the POP Architecture

Objectives1. Define security criterion 2. Define privacy criterion3. Define desired functionalities4. Evaluate available RFID Solutions

17-April-2008 ISA 2008 7

Previous Solutions1. Faraday Cage[1]2. Blocker Tag[1]3. Active Jamming[1]4. Frequency Modification[12]5. Kill Tag[1]6. RFID Guardian[10]7. Renaming[3]8. Hash Based

Schemes[12,11,9]9. Delegated Pseudonym[7]10. Zero knowledge[5]11. Re-encryption Method[8,2]

17-April-2008 ISA 2008 8

Security Objectives Authentication Authorization Confidentiality Anonymity Data Integrity No-Repudiation Availability Forward Security Anti-Cloning Anti-Reverse Engineering

17-April-2008 ISA 2008 9

Achievement of security objectives

17-April-2008 ISA 2008 10

Attacking RFID Tags Attacking Interrogators Access-key/Cipher-text

Tracing Eavesdropping Spoofing Man-in-the-middle Replay Attack Brute-force Attacks

Security Attacks

17-April-2008 ISA 2008 11

Protection Against the attacks

17-April-2008 ISA 2008 12

Corporate espionage Competitive

marketing Action threat Association threat Location threat Preference threat Constellation threat Transaction threat Breadcrumb threat

Privacy Threats

17-April-2008 ISA 2008 13

Protection against privacy threats

17-April-2008 ISA 2008 14

Interoperability Reliability Usability Feasibility Scalability Manage new and damaged tags Control Accessing Transfer ownership online/offline Achieve multiple authorizations Recycle the tagged products

Desired Functionalities

17-April-2008 ISA 2008 15

Functional Abilities

17-April-2008 ISA 2008 16

Evaluation POP Achieves

Highest security objectives, attack prevention throughout the product lifecycle

Highest protection against the privacy threats

Highest interoperability

Highest level of feasibility, scalability, manageability of new and damaged tags and self controllability

Resolve multiple authorizations issue

17-April-2008 ISA 2008 17

Evaluation No solution provides both online/offline

anonymous ownership transference other than POP

But

POP yields for universal customer card and PIN only for after purchase use

17-April-2008 ISA 2008 18

Our evaluation reveals that the POP Architecture is the best out of all those solutions as no one provides such level of achievement so far.

Conclusion

17-April-2008 ISA 2008 19

Future Works

We hope to analyze the performance of POP Tags in following aspects Computational Overhead Storage Overhead Communication Overhead Cost Overhead

17-April-2008 ISA 2008 20

Thank you very much for your

attention !!!.....

Thank you very much for your

attention !!!.....

Please feel free to ask questions…………or put forward your opinions……..

17-April-2008 ISA 2008 21

Q & A

17-April-2008 ISA 2008 22

Thank youThank you

17-April-2008 ISA 2008 23

K. H. S. Sabaragamu Koralalage and Jingde Cheng: A Comparative Study of RFID Solutions for Security and Privacy: POP vs. Previous Solutions, Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Information Security and Assurance (ISA '08), pp. 342-349, Busan, Korea, IEEE Computer Society Press, April 2008.

top related