International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) – Volume 18 Number2- Dec 2014
A Manageable Method for Multicast Key
Management Protocol
Pothala Siva Kiran Kumar1, V Sangeeta2
1
1,2
Final M.Tech Student, 2Associate professor
Dept of CSE,Pydah College of Engineering and Technology, JNTUK University
Abstract: - In multicasting the main role is for group key
management. By using inaccurate mathematical
computations and un-eligible curve theories or polynomials
for generate group keys. By achieving these we introduced
a multicast key exchange algorithm that consists of
recursive mathematical operations such as chebyshev map
theory which is contains recursive and accurate group key
generation technique.
Index terms: Chebyshev Map Theory, Multicast key,Group
Key management
I.INTRODUCTION
Multicast groupkey[1] can be circulated in
reckoning. A typical model where session keys are issued
and dispersed by a focal Group controller, as it has
considerably less correspondence intricacy contrasted with
appropriated key exchange conventions, which is a greatly
coveted property in many remote applications. The assets
requirement for the grouping controller to disseminate
session keys to grouping parts incorporate correspondence,
stockpiling, and processing assets. The correspondence
unpredictability is generally measured by the quantity of
information bits that required being transferred from the
group controller to grouping parts to pass on data of
session keys and the stockpiling multifaceted nature is
measured by the quantity of information bits that the group
controller and grouping parts need to store to acquire
session keys. Some other also is imperative yet ordinarily
under recognized and in the event that it is not overlooked
element is the processing many-sided quality and it can
measured by the quantity of calculation operations (or the
reckoning time on a given registering stage) that the Group
Controller and grouping parts need to disperse and
concentrate session keys. The issue of how assets can
viably be utilized to appropriate session keys is alluded to
as the grouping key conveyance issue.
For an element multicast bunch, a session key is
issued by a Group Controller [1]. Utilizing this session key,
the GC is a created secure multicast channel with the
approved grouping parts. Each time bunch Memberships
change due to the join or leave of some grouping parts, the
grouping controller reissues another session key, which is
free of all the previous group session keys. This rekeying
technique guarantees the protection of the present session
and that of the previous sessions and that is the recently
ISSN: 2231-5381
joined parts can't recuperate the interchanges of the old
sessions and old parts who left the grouping can't get to the
current session. Therefore, both the regressive mystery and
the forward mystery of grouping correspondence are kept
up.
Group key management, which is concerned with
producing and overhauling mystery keys, is one of the
basic advances to secure such grouping correspondences.
Key management encourages access control and
information classifiedness by guaranteeing that the keys
used to encode bunch correspondence are imparted just
among authentic grouping parts. Just the honest to
goodness bunch parts can get to grouping interchanges.
The imparted grouping key can likewise be utilized for
verification. At the point when a message is scrambled
utilizing the grouping key, the message must be from an
authentic grouping part. To diminish the issues the
accompanying two security criteria are essential for the
grouping key appropriation in secure multicast
correspondence.
Forward secrecy: In the event that an individual
has left a group and withdrew part can't unscramble
encoded messages transmitted in the wake of clearing out.
Retrogressive mystery: If an individual joins a group and
he can't decode scrambled messages transmitted before the
joining. The procedure for attaining forward and regressive
mystery obliges redistributing the group key. This
procedure is called group rekeying.
Security requirements of group key management:
1. Forward mystery obliges that clients who left
the grouping ought not have entry to any future key. This
demonstrates that the part can't unscramble information
after it leaves the grouping. It is certain that the forward
mystery and a re-key of the grouping with another Traffic
Encryption Key after each one leave from the grouping is a
definitive arrangement.
2. Retrogressive mystery obliges that another
client that joins the session ought not have admittance to
http://www.ijettjournal.org
Page 113
International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) – Volume 18 Number2- Dec 2014
any old key. This can beyond any doubt that a part can't
unscramble information sent before it joins the grouping.
To beyond any doubt retrogressive mystery and a re-key of
the grouping with another TEK after each one join to the
grouping is a definitive arrangement.
3. Agreement flexibility obliges that any set of
false clients ought not have the capacity to derive the
current activity encryption key.
4. Key autonomy: a convention is said key autonomous if
an exposure of a key does not bargain different keys.
5. Insignificant trust: the key management plan ought not
place confide in a high number of elements. Something
else, the successful sending of the plan would not be
simple.
II.RELATED WORK
In multicast bunch correspondences, a legitimate
MKD protocol[3] [4] is needed for producing and
dispersing a mystery grouping key that can be utilized to
secure (scramble) information sent from one source to all
objectives that are part of the same grouping. Since
multicast groupings are frequently extremely rapid,
because of the join of new parts and the leave of old parts,
the MKD needs to handle such grouping participation
changes by re-creating and re-circulating new grouping
keys.
All the more correctly, the grouping key ought to
be modified after every join and that is excluded through a
suitable rekeying operation and so that a previous
grouping part has no right to gain entrance to current
interchanges and another part has no right to gain entrance
to past correspondences. These prerequisites can be
communicated by presenting the ideas of forward mystery
and retrogressive mystery. As indicated by the previous,
nonmembers ought not have the capacity to acquire the
grouping key at any moment built just with respect to the
data acquired at or before that moment.
A more strict prerequisite, is the idea of regressive
mystery, agreeing with the group key at any moment ought
not be process able by non-parts considerably after that
moment (as it were, the new comers can't process past
group keys). Additionally, group correspondence ought to
ISSN: 2231-5381
be impervious to conspiracy assaults, in which (past or
current) part of the group trade data ''out-of-band'' so as to
illegally have admittance to data. Join and leave operations
can happen at whatever time (in an offbeat and element
design), or on the other hand, they can be synchronized at
particular moments (in an opened way). In the second case,
various join/leave operations ought to be mutually
overseen in the same fleeting space and thus these systems
are additionally alluded as ""clump"" strategies. In this
work, we concentrate on this sort of instruments, since they
altogether diminish the many-sided quality (measured
regarding number of traded messages) and they fit well the
attributes of reasonable administrations, for example,
internet diversion, where the join/leave operations have an
everyday or an hourly granularity.
The Key Tree Manager [9] is capable to deal with
the key tree and to create new gathering keys. It doles out a
position to a recently included hub and imprints the keys
on the key tree that need to be upgraded. The Key Tree
Manager additionally changes the key tree structure
focused around the probabilities got from the Request
Predictor. It may change the quantity of limbs at the top
level of the key tree so as to keep up the ideal key tree
structure as indicated by the anticipated probabilities. This
can be effortlessly fulfilled by erasing or including one
level instantly underneath the top level. The Delay
Controller figures and controls the measure of the
defenselessness window.
By controlling the time postpone, the framework can
perform the synchronized key upgrade with variable time
periods. The data transmission needed for securing the
multicast bunch correspondence can be decreased if the
time of the key upgrade can be alertly changed. The Delay
Controller sends its processed deferral time to the Key Tree
Manager, which will look at if the time is arrived at.
Assuming this is the case, the Key Tree Manager will show
the overhauled keys to set up the telecast information. The
Key Tree supervisor checks the hubs along every way from
the new client hub at the leaf to the root. On the off chance
that it discovers a hub that is stamped, it will encode the
new key put away in this hub by utilizing the keys put
away as a part of its youngster hub.
III. PROPOSED WORK
In our proposed work contains a system for
gathering key management and productive correspondence
cost in correspondence. It contains a calculation for
http://www.ijettjournal.org
Page 114
International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) – Volume 18 Number2- Dec 2014
creating keys for part removal and expansion from a
gathering. This methodology is purported as rekeying.
From secure key era we embrace chebyshev map cycle
idea. It is utilized for creating positive keys for clients.
There is an impediment in past methodology, for example,
the premise of the above calculation is semi-bunch
property, which is constantly valid for Chebyshev
delineate. On the other hand, we must perceive that, on one
hand, Chebyshev guide is characterized over genuine
numbers and delicate to introductory conditions. Then
again, machine can just do estimated other than exact
reckoning. Subsequently,
= b × c × an if a; b; c are genuine numbers
Multicast key management, which is much not the
same as unicast key management, is a standout amongst the
most appealing region of cryptography. For unicast
application theDiffie-Hellman key exchange convention
can be utilized to make a KEK (Key Encryption Key)
between two elements. At that point utilize this KEK to
dispatch or overhaul a session key. Interestingly, the
circumstances is significantly more convoluted for a
multicast application. A multicast application should
powerfully handle multi-elements. Case in point, in an
element multicast bunch, the participation is alterable all
the time because of oftentimes clients' expansion and
expulsion. So the key materials will most likely be
uncovered if no security approaches are embraced.
In the previous two decades, analysts have
proposed numerous multicast key management plans .
These plans can be sorted into three separate sorts:
concentrated, decentralized and circulated. A concentrated
gathering key management plan includes a Key Server
(KS) to produce and appropriate imparted key to all
gathering parts by means of a correspondence channel. The
decentralized key management separates the entire
gathering into littler subgroups. Every subgroup is
controlled by a solitary or a few KS. A Distributed plan
permits every part to participate in a gathering key era
collectively. Each of the three plans has its own particular
points of interest and detriments. The incorporated plan is
the least complex one yet has the danger of single-pointdisappointment. Decentralized plan includes some
correspondence many-sided quality between two parts
inside distinctive subgroups. Conveyed plan is some way
or another more unpredictable than the other two, however
it doesn't include KS. This peculiarity is extremely helpful
on account of nobody can assume the part of KS, e.g. a
sensor Ad-hoc system application.
The objective of the multicast key exchange
calculation can be communicated as takes after: By trading
messages over untrusted system, multi-elements have the
capacity figure the mystery offer key freely. Amid the
whole process, nobody is in charge of the key era or
dissemination.
Our proposed System as shown below
F0(x) = 1 mod N
F1(x) = x mod N
Fn(x) = 2xFn-1(x) –Fn-2(x) mod N
Where x is users secret key
N is any integer which less 256 and greater than 0
n is number of members in the group
ISSN: 2231-5381
http://www.ijettjournal.org
Page 115
International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) – Volume 18 Number2- Dec 2014
2. Send master key
Network
1. Register
2. Send master key
1.Register
Send Initial key
Start key generation
process
Rotates up to no
of users cycles
User 1
Send second key
User 3
Send third key
…….n
Send nth key
The Algorithm is as follows:
and sends it to the next.
There are some notations such as ‘n’ is number of members
in the group. ‘x’ is public key for user. ‘N’ is large prime
number.
(3) Repeat this until the last member calculates Fn(Fn-1 (· · ·
Fn-i+1(x))) and sends it to the first member.
(1) The first member calculatesF1 (x) and sends it to
thesecond member.
(2) The second member calculates F2 (x) and sends it tothe
third one.
(3) Repeat this until the last member calculatesFrn(x) and
sendsit to the first member.
(1) The first member calculatesFn1 (Frn(x)) and sends it to
the second member.
(2) The second member calculates F2 (F1 (x)) and sends itto
the next.
(3) Repeat this until the last member calculatesFrn(Frn-1
(x))and sends it to the first member.
Stage i.
(1) The first member calculates F1 (Frn(· · · Frn-i+2(x)))and
sends it to the second member.
(2) The second member calculatesFn2 (Fn1 (· · · Frn-i+3(x)))
ISSN: 2231-5381
By n − 1 stages message exchange by any memberand the
ith member calculates the group session key by:
Fi (Fi-1 (· · · F1(Fn(Fn-1(· · · Fi+1(x))))))which is equal to
F12….rn(x)
We call calculation a multicast key exchange calculation,
yet users may watch that this calculation appears to unicast
correspondence. Every hub conveys shared at each one
stage. In other way we ought to recognize that this
calculation initially is intended for building a multicast
session key between gathering parts. After n stages
running, all parts have the capacity arrange a session key,
which will be utilized as a part of multicast
correspondence. This is the reason it is named multicast
key exchange calculation.
In this we proposed a multicast key exchange
protocol, here we illustrate an example. Consider we have
three nodes w, y and Z acts as key server.
Initially all nodes calculate their individual keys using
chebyshev map as shown below.
At z node x=2, n=3, N=7
F3(2)=2*2 F3-1(2) - T3-2(2) mod N
=26
At w node x=3, n=3, N=4
http://www.ijettjournal.org
Page 116
International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) – Volume 18 Number2- Dec 2014
F3(3)=2*3 F3-1(3) - F3-2(3) mod N
=99
At y node x=4, n=3, N=4
F3(4)=2*4 F3-1(4) - F3-2(4) mod N
=120
After calculating of individual keys all nodes exchange
keys in secure channel.
Node z
Node w
Node y
zkey
zkey
wkey
wkey
Ykey
Ykey
After sending individual keys, node z contains z*w*y key,
node w contains w*y*z key and node y contains y*z*w. It
satisfies the main feature association rule.
We presented a comparison that shows the
complexity of the group generation and the processing time
of the process.
Table1.The comparisons of key generation in simultaneous
join or leave operations are shown below.
Join
Leave
LKH
OFT
OKD
CKCS
Proposed
m log2 n
m log2 n
m log2 n
m+1
O(2n(n − 1))
m log2 n
m log2 n
m log2 n
1
O(2n(n − 1))
Processing time
Protocols
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
LKH
OFT
OKD
CKCSS
Proposed
Simultaneous users
In this paper we have focused on the field of
multicast key trade, which is an appealing sub-field of
cryptography. We profoundly dissect the multicast key
management plans proposed in and hence make sense of
the lethal confinements. That is, because of the creators'
wrong suspicions, the three calculations are not
commonsense whatsoever. Notwithstanding, edified by
those written works, we propose an alternate calculation
focused around the stretched out Chebyshev polynomial to
attain multicast key trade. Accuracy and security
examination demonstrate that this new calculation is
sensible and down to earth.
REFERENCES
[1] Sanjoy Paul. Multicasting on the Internet and Its
Applications.Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, MA,
USA, 1998.
[2] M. Park, Y. Park, H. Jeong, and S. Seo. Secure multiple
multicastservices in wireless networks. Mobile Computing,
IEEE Transactionson, PP(99):1, 2012.
[3] H. Harney and C. Muckenhirn.Group key management
protocol(gkmp) protocol specification, 1997.
[4] H. Harney and C. Muckenhirn.Group key management
protocol(gkmp) architecture, 1997.
[5] Jack Snoeyink, SubhashSuri, and George Varghese.A
lowerbound for multicast key distribution.Comput.Netw.,
47(3):429–441, February 2005.
[6] Min-Ho Park, Young-Hoon Park, and Seung-Woo Seo.
A cellbaseddecentralized key management scheme for
secure multicastin mobile cellular networks. In Vehicular
Technology Conference(VTC 2010-Spring), 2010 IEEE
71st, pages 1 –6, may 2010.
[7] Jen-Chiun Lin, Feipei Lai, and Hung-Chang Lee.
Efficient groupkey management protocol with one-way key
derivation. In
Proceedings of the The IEEE Conference on Local
Computer Networks30th Anniversary, LCN ’05, pages
336–343, Washington, DC, USA,2005. IEEE Computer
Society.
[8] Wen Tao Zhu. Optimizing the tree structure in secure
multicastkey management. Communications Letters, IEEE,
9(5):477 – 479,may 2005.
[9] Jun Sik Lee, JuHyung Son, Young Hoon Park, and
Seung WooSeo. Optimal level-homogeneous tree structure
for logical keyhierarchy.In Communication Systems
Software
and
Middleware
andWorkshops,
2008.COMSWARE 2008. 3rd International Conference
on,pages 677 –681, jan. 2008.
[10] Chung Kei Wong, Mohamed Gouda, and Simon S.
Lam. Securegroup communications using key graphs.
IEEE/ACM Trans. Netw.,8(1):16–30, February 2000.
[11] SandroRafaeli and David Hutchison.A survey of key
managementfor secure group communication.ACM
Comput.Surv.,
In our protocol maximum all computations very low.
IV. CONCLUSION
ISSN: 2231-5381
http://www.ijettjournal.org
Page 117
International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) – Volume 18 Number2- Dec 2014
BIOGRAPHIES
Pothala Siva Kiran Kumar completed MSC in
M.S.R.S.Siddhartha P.G College,Sivapuram
Junction, Visakhapatnam. He pursuing M.Tech
in Department of CSE in Pydah College of
Engineering and Technology, JNTUK
University. His interesting areas are data mining network
security.
ISSN: 2231-5381
V Sangeeta completed her M.Tech in Andhra
University, Visakhapatnam in year 2006.She is
currently working as an Associate professor and
Head of the Department of Computer Science and
Engineering at Pydah College of Engineering and
Technology, JNTUK University. She is pursuing her Ph.D
degree in computer science at Andhra University. Her
research focus on Data Mining and Warehousing .
http://www.ijettjournal.org
Page 118