Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Evaluation of Key Management Protocols and Their Implementations
Linköping University, Department of Computer and Information Science.
Linköping University, Department of Computer and Information Science.
2018 (English)Independent thesis Basic level (degree of Bachelor), 10,5 credits / 16 HE creditsStudent thesisAlternative title
Utvärdering av Key Management Protokoll och dess implementationer (Swedish)
Abstract [en]

When constructing a network system it is important to consider the attributes which define said system and how to best build around those attributes. In this report we’ve studied Key Management Protocols as well as 802.15.4 WPAN networks and how key managment is conducted in such networks. This was done to better understand how Key Management Protocols themselves work and if, or how, they differ when used in 802.15.4 networks.

In this report we studied 4 different Key Management Protocols: IKEv2,HIPv2,PANA and 802.1X as well as their various implementations. Based on the information gathered we analyzed how an implementation would work according to IEEE 802.15.9.

Firstly we found was that IKEv2 offers a lot of functionality at the cost of system complexity and required a lot of memory. It also required major modifications to work in 802.15.4 networks.

Secondly we found that HIPv2 offers the ability to separate the locator and identifier tags of TCP/IP and is lightweight. It doesn’t use IP or TCP/UDP and as such required minor changes to work in 802.15.4 networks.

Finally, PANA and 802.1X both offer client-to-network authentication using EAP and use a moderate to high amount of space. 802.1X required a moderate amount of changes to work in 802.15.4 networks. PANA on the other hand required few changes, though it should not be used as a general purpose Key Management Protocol in 802.15.4 networks.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2018. , p. 30
Keywords [en]
Key Management Protcol, Key Management, Evaluation, Comparison, IKEv2, HIPv2, PANA, 802.1X, Implementation, strongSwan, OpenHIP, openPANA, Open1X
National Category
Computer Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-150172ISRN: LIU-IDA/LITH-EX-G--18/047--SEOAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-150172DiVA, id: diva2:1239043
Subject / course
Computer science
Supervisors
Examiners
Available from: 2018-08-31 Created: 2018-08-15 Last updated: 2018-08-31Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(335 kB)86 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 335 kBChecksum SHA-512
91cd7c5a81c9640c4c5fc25efed534e41d0fffa506e7982dea5b98362c12879c4deb4fc60ffd3c85e18489e6d113681fe27aa4df8ad8ab54220c4cb7c9f91c53
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Andersson, ErikCombler, David
By organisation
Department of Computer and Information Science
Computer Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 86 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 195 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf