{"title":"Examining indistinguishability-based security models for key exchange protocols: the case of CK, CK-HMQV, and eCK","authors":"C. Cremers","doi":"10.1145/1966913.1966925","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Many recent key exchange (KE) protocols have been proven secure in the CK, CK-HMQV, or eCK security models. The exact relation between these security models, and hence the relation between the security guarantees provided by the protocols, is unclear. We show first that the CK, CK-HMQV, and eCK security models are formally incomparable. Second, we show that these models are also practically incomparable, by providing for each model attacks on protocols from the literature that are not considered by the other models. Third, our analysis enables us to find previously unreported flaws in protocol security proofs from the literature. We identify the causes of these flaws and show how they can be avoided.","PeriodicalId":72308,"journal":{"name":"Asia CCS '22 : proceedings of the 2022 ACM Asia Conference on Computer and Communications Security : May 30-June 3, 2022, Nagasaki, Japan. ACM Asia Conference on Computer and Communications Security (17th : 2022 : Nagasaki-shi, Japan ; ...","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"66","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asia CCS '22 : proceedings of the 2022 ACM Asia Conference on Computer and Communications Security : May 30-June 3, 2022, Nagasaki, Japan. ACM Asia Conference on Computer and Communications Security (17th : 2022 : Nagasaki-shi, Japan ; ...","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/1966913.1966925","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 66
Abstract
Many recent key exchange (KE) protocols have been proven secure in the CK, CK-HMQV, or eCK security models. The exact relation between these security models, and hence the relation between the security guarantees provided by the protocols, is unclear. We show first that the CK, CK-HMQV, and eCK security models are formally incomparable. Second, we show that these models are also practically incomparable, by providing for each model attacks on protocols from the literature that are not considered by the other models. Third, our analysis enables us to find previously unreported flaws in protocol security proofs from the literature. We identify the causes of these flaws and show how they can be avoided.