A comparative study of rfid solutions for security and privacy pop vs previous solutions
Sponsored Links
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
1 / 23

A Comparative Study of RFID Solutions for Security and Privacy: POP vs. Previous Solutions PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 58 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

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.

Download Presentation

A Comparative Study of RFID Solutions for Security and Privacy: POP vs. Previous Solutions

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


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

Advanced Information Systems Engineering Lab

Saitama University, Japan

2008-April-17


Agenda

POP Architecture

The Problem

Goal

Evaluation

Conclusion

Future Works


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

ISA 2008


E

E

E

E

E

E

E

E

Ki

Kk

Ke

Ka

Kg

Kc

Kl

Sg

Sk

Sl

Sa

Se

Sc

Si

EPC

EPC

EPC

EPC

EPC

EPC

EPC

EPC

PRIVACY

SECURITY

E

E

E

E

E

E

E

Kd

Kf

Kb

Kh

Kj

Sj

Sh

Sb

Sf

Sd

EPC

EPC

EPC

EPC

EPC

EPC

EPC

How to change the ownership

ISA 2008


The Problem

  • Position of POP Architecture ?

  • Level of Security ?

  • Level of Privacy ?

  • Level of Functionality ?

ISA 2008


Goal and Objectives

  • Goal

    • Compare and contrast previously proposed RFID solutions against thePOP Architecture

  • Objectives

    • Define security criterion

    • Define privacy criterion

    • Define desired functionalities

    • Evaluate available RFID Solutions

ISA 2008


Previous Solutions

Faraday Cage[1]

Blocker Tag[1]

Active Jamming[1]

Frequency Modification[12]

Kill Tag[1]

RFID Guardian[10]

Renaming[3]

Hash Based Schemes[12,11,9]

Delegated Pseudonym[7]

Zero knowledge[5]

Re-encryption Method[8,2]

ISA 2008


Security Objectives

  • Authentication

  • Authorization

  • Confidentiality

  • Anonymity

  • Data Integrity

  • No-Repudiation

  • Availability

  • Forward Security

  • Anti-Cloning

  • Anti-Reverse Engineering

ISA 2008


Achievement of security objectives

ISA 2008


Security Attacks

  • Attacking RFID Tags

  • Attacking Interrogators

  • Access-key/Cipher-text Tracing

  • Eavesdropping

  • Spoofing

  • Man-in-the-middle

  • Replay Attack

  • Brute-force Attacks

ISA 2008


Protection Against the attacks

ISA 2008


PrivacyThreats

  • Corporate espionage

  • Competitive marketing

  • Action threat

  • Association threat

  • Location threat

  • Preference threat

  • Constellation threat

  • Transaction threat

  • Breadcrumb threat

ISA 2008


Protection against privacy threats

ISA 2008


Desired Functionalities

  • Interoperability

  • Reliability

  • Usability

  • Feasibility

  • Scalability

  • Manage new and damaged tags

  • Control Accessing

  • Transfer ownership online/offline

  • Achieve multiple authorizations

  • Recycle the tagged products

ISA 2008


Functional Abilities

ISA 2008


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

ISA 2008


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

ISA 2008


Conclusion

  • 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.

ISA 2008


Future Works

  • We hope to analyze the performance of POP Tags in following aspects

    • Computational Overhead

    • Storage Overhead

    • Communication Overhead

    • Cost Overhead

ISA 2008


Thank you very much for your attention !!!.....

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

ISA 2008


Q & A

ISA 2008


Thank you

ISA 2008


  • 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.

ISA 2008


  • Login