Cluster Computing

, Volume 19, Issue 1, pp 497–504 | Cite as

Proposing and verifying a security protocol for hash function-based IoT communication system

  • Kun-Hee Han
  • Woo-Sik Bae


Internet of things (IoT) has recently drawn much attention around the world. Technological development in relevant industries has facilitated great strides in the advancement of multifunctional high-performance electronic communication system. IoT technology conceptually encompasses information service, transmission, identification, hardware, infrastructure, embedded, security, material and network technologies. In particular, the importance of security technology is highlighted in IoT technology due in part to the concerns over hacking attacks leading to system malfunction, remote control and authorization in the guise of administrators. Thus, mutual authentication and security are regarded as the overarching aspect of communication. In the same vein, secure communication protocols have extensively been explored in the field of security. The present paper designed a secure communication protocol using hash locks, timestamps, agent passwords and security keys. Unlike most of previous studies intended to prove the security of protocols using mathematical theorems, the present paper established the security of the proposed protocol against a range of intruders’ attacks by testing it using a formal verification tool, Casper/FDR. The test results confirmed the security of the proposed protocol in terms of safety, deadlock and livelock.


IoT Authentication protocol IoT security Casper IoT authentication Model checking 



This research is supported by 2015 Baekseok University research fund.


  1. 1.
    Seo, D.B., Jeong, C.S., Jeon, Y.B., Lee, K.H.: Cloud infrastructure for ubiquitous M2M and IoT environment mobile application. Clust. Comput. 18(2), 599–608 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Park, R.C., Jung, H., Shin, D.-K., Kim, G.-J., Yoon, K.-H.: M2M-based smart health service for human UI/UX using motion recognition. Clust. Comput. 18(1), 221–232 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Punithavathani, D.S., Sujatha, K., Jain, J.M.: Surveillance of anomaly and misuse in critical networks to counter insider threats using computational intelligence. Clust. Comput. 18(1), 435–451 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gill, H., Lin, D., Nguyen, C., Gill, T., Loo, B.T.: Declarative platform for high-performance network traffic analytics. Clust. Comput. 17(4), 1121–1137 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kang, A.N.: A strengthening plan for enterprise information security based on cloud computing. Clust. Comput. 17(3), 703–710 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lowe, G.: Casper: a compiler for the analysis of security protocols. User Manual and Tutorial. Version 1.12 (2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Formal Systems (Europe) Ltd: Failures-Divergence Renement. FDR2 User Manual, Oxford University Computing Laboratory (2010)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hoare, C.A.R.: Communicating Sequential Processes. Prentice-Hall, London (1985)MATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Alavi, S.M., Baghery, K., Abdolmaleki, B., Aref, M.R.: Traceability analysis of recent RFID authentication protocols. Wirel. Pers. Commun. 83(3), 1663–1682 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Duraipandian, M., Palanisamy, C.: Analysis of a combined parameter-based multi-objective model for performance improvement in wireless networks. Wirel. Pers. Commun. 83(4), 2425–2437 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mugunthan, S.R., Palanisamy, C.: A dynamic interoperability mobility management architecture for mobile personal networks. Wirel. Pers. Commun. 83(3), 1683–1697 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bae, W.-S.: Formal verification of an RFID authentication protocol based on hash function and secret code. Wirel. Pers. Commun. 79(4), 2595–2609 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Erguler, I., Anarim, E.: Scalability and security conflict for RFID authentication protocols. Wirel. Pers. Commun. 59(1), 43–56 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yang, M.H., Hu, H.Y.: Protocol for ownership transfer across authorities: with the ability to assign transfer target. Secur. Commun. Netw. 5(2), 164–177 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ahn, H.-S., Bu, K.-D., Yoon, E.-J., Nam, I.-G.: RFID mutual authentication protocol providing stronger security. Korea Inf. Process. Soc. 16(3), 325–334 (2009)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kim, B., Ryoo, I.: RFID mutual authentication protocol against reflection attack. Korean Inst. Commun. Inf. Sci. 32(3), 348–358 (2007)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Information Communication EngineeringBaekseok UniversityCheonanSouth Korea
  2. 2.Department of AIS CenterAjou Motor CollegeBoryeong-SiSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations