Advertisement

Modified RC-4 Algorithm Against FMS Attack

  • Poonam JindalEmail author
  • Harika Menda
  • Dedeepya Rongali
  • Shraddha
Conference paper
  • 9 Downloads
Part of the Lecture Notes on Data Engineering and Communications Technologies book series (LNDECT, volume 51)

Abstract

RC4 is the simplest and most widely adopted stream cipher which finds its application in Wired Equivalent Privacy Protocol (WEP) and Wi-Fi-protected access (WPA). Being the simplest available cipher, RC4 is vulnerable to a number of security threats and attacks. In this paper, we have focused on one such vulnerability of RC4, which makes the cipher prone to Fluhrer, Mantin, and Shamir (FMS) attack and proves the insecurity of RC4 algorithm. To overcome FMS attack, a new variant of RC4 named RC4FMS has been proposed and compared with the existing RC4 variants. Performance analysis has been done in terms of processing intricacy (PI), processor cycles, run time, throughput, energy consumed, and security. Modification in RC4 has been made aiming to remove the trade-off between security and performance. It is observed that the proposed algorithm does not increase the computational complexity as increased with existing RC4+ and other variants, but provides better security. Encryption time of the proposed scheme RC4FMS is 0.16 s (PRGA) which is comparable to the conventional RC4 and less than the other existing RC4 variants. The proposed modified algorithm removes the initial byte bias and makes the algorithm resistant to the FMS attack.

Keywords

Stream cipher Processing intricacy Run time FMS attack Cipher text Complexity 

References

  1. 1.
    Paul, G., & Maitra, S. (2011). RC4 stream cipher and its variants. Boca Raton: CRC Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jindal, P., & Singh, B. (2015). RC4 encryption—A literature survey. Procedia Computer Science, 46, 697–705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Crainicu, B. (2015). On invariance weakness in the KSAm algorithm. Procedia Technology, 19, 850–857.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sarkar, S., & Venkateswarlu, A. (2016). Revisiting (nested) Roos bias in RC4 key scheduling algorithm. Designs, Codes and Cryptography, 82(1–2), 131–148.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jindal, P., & Singh, B. (2015, May). Analyzing the security-performance tradeoff in block ciphers. In International conference on computing, communication & automation (pp. 326–331). IEEE.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jindal, P., & Makkar, S. (2019). Modified RC4 variants and their performance analysis. In Microelectronics, electromagnetics and telecommunications (pp. 367–374). Singapore: Springer.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jindal, P., & Singh, B. (2014, May). Performance analysis of modified RC4 encryption algorithm. In International conference on recent advances and innovations in engineering (ICRAIE-2014) (pp. 1–5). IEEE.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jindal, P., & Singh, B. (2017). Optimization of the security-performance tradeoff in RC4 encryption algorithm. Wireless Personal Communications, 92(3), 1221–1250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Weerasinghe, T. D. B. (2013, December). An effective RC4 stream cipher. In 2013 IEEE 8th international conference on industrial and information systems (pp. 69–74). IEEE.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Xie, J., & Pan, X. (2010, October). An improved RC4 stream cipher. In 2010 international conference on computer application and system modeling (ICCASM 2010) (Vol. 7, pp. V7-156). IEEE.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Maitra, S., & Paul, G. Analysis of RC4 and proposal of additional layers for better security margin. In Progress in cryptology INDOCRYPT 2008 (pp. 27–39). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Poonam Jindal
    • 1
    Email author
  • Harika Menda
    • 1
  • Dedeepya Rongali
    • 1
  • Shraddha
    • 1
  1. 1.NITKurukshetraIndia

Personalised recommendations