A Hybrid Information Reconciliation Method for Physical Layer Key Generation.
A Hybrid Information Reconciliation Method for Physical Layer Key Generation.
复制标题
物理层密钥生成的混合信息协调方法
DOI：
10.3390/e21070688
复制
发表时间：
2019-07-14
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Hu A
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Li G;Zhang Z;Yu Y;Hu A
物理层密钥生成（PKG）解决了传统密码机制难以解决的密钥分发问题，成为密码学研究的热点。信息协调是PKG中获取对称密钥的关键过程。已经提出了各种协调方案，包括基于错误检测协议的方法（EDPA）和基于纠错码的方法（ECCA）。EDPA和ECCA在信息泄漏、交互延迟和计算复杂度方面各有优缺点。本文以EDPA的BBBSS协议和ECCA的BCH码为例，分别分析了它们的综合效率性能随通过次数和比特不一致率（BDR）的变化。其次，我们综合两者的优点，设计了一种新的混合信息协调协议（HIRP）。HIRP的设计包括三个主要阶段，即，训练、查表和测试。为了全面评估和解方案，我们提出了一种新的效率度量，以实现平衡的纠正比特，信息泄漏，时间延迟和计算时间，这代表了有效纠正比特每单位时间。仿真结果表明，该方法优于其他协调方案，提高了综合协调效率。当BDR的取值范围为0.5%~ 11.5%时，平均效率分别比BBBSS和BCH码提高了2.48倍和22.36倍。与BBBSS协议和BCH码相比，HIRP在信息泄漏和计算时间开销方面处于中等水平。此外，HIRP以最小的时延代价达到最高的协调效率。
Physical layer key generation (PKG) has become a research focus as it solves the key distribution problem, which is difficult in traditional cryptographic mechanisms. Information reconciliation is a critical process in PKG to obtain symmetric keys. Various reconciliation schemes have been proposed, including the error detection protocol-based approach (EDPA) and error correction code-based approach (ECCA). Both EDPA and ECCA have advantages and drawbacks, regarding information leakage, interaction delay, and computation complexity. In this paper, we choose the BBBSS protocol from EDPA and BCH code from ECCA as a case study, analyzing their comprehensive efficiency performance versus pass number and bit disagreement ratio (BDR), respectively. Next, we integrate the strength of the two to design a new hybrid information reconciliation protocol (HIRP). The design of HIRP consists of three main phases, i.e., training, table lookup, and testing. To comprehensively evaluate the reconciliation schemes, we propose a novel efficiency metric to achieve a balance of corrected bits, information leakage, time delay, and computation time, which represents the effectively corrected bits per unit time. The simulation results show that our proposed method outperforms other reconciliation schemes to improve the comprehensive reconciliation efficiency. The average improvement in efficiency is 2.48 and 22.36 times over the BBBSS and BCH code, respectively, when the range of the BDR is from 0.5% to 11.5%. Compared to the BBBSS protocol and the BCH code, HIRP lies at a mid-level in terms of information leakage and computation time cost. Besides, with the lowest time delay cost, HIRP reaches the highest reconciliation efficiency.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
4.1
作者：
Zhao Feng;Li Jingling
通讯作者：
Li Jingling
影响因子：
11.2
作者：
Zeng, Kai
通讯作者：
Zeng, Kai
影响因子：
2.9
作者：
Buttler, WT;Lamoreaux, SK;Peterson, CG
通讯作者：
Peterson, CG
影响因子：
5.6
作者：
Huth, Christopher;Guillaume, Rene;Gueneysu, Tim
通讯作者：
Gueneysu, Tim
基于主成分分析预处理的高一致性不相关密钥生成
影响因子：
8.3
作者：
Li, Guyue;Hu, Aiqun;Cao, Daming
通讯作者：
Cao, Daming