[Resource Topic] 2014/926: Road-to-Vehicle Communications with Time-Dependent Anonymity: A Light Weight Construction and its Experimental Results

Welcome to the resource topic for 2014/926

Road-to-Vehicle Communications with Time-Dependent Anonymity: A Light Weight Construction and its Experimental Results

Authors: Keita Emura, Takuya Hayashi


This paper describes techniques that enable vehicles to collect local information (such as road conditions and traffic information) and report it via road-to-vehicle communications. To exclude malicious data, the collected information is signed by each vehicle. In this communications system, the location privacy of vehicles must be maintained. However, simultaneously linkable information (such as travel routes) is also important. That is, no such linkable information can be collected when full anonymity is guaranteed using cryptographic tools such as group signatures. Similarly, continuous linkability (via pseudonyms, for example) may also cause problem from the viewpoint of privacy. In this paper, we propose a road-to-vehicle communication system with relaxed anonymity via group signatures with time-token dependent linking (GS-TDL). Briefly, a vehicle is unlinkable unless it generates multiple signatures in the same time period. We provide our experimental results (using the RELIC library on a cheap and constrained computational power device, Raspberry Pi), and simulate our system by using a traffic simulator (PTV), a radio wave propagation analysis tool (RapLab), and a network simulator (QualNet). Though a similar functionality of time-token dependent linking was proposed by Wu, Domingo-Ferrer and Gonzälez-Nicoläs (IEEE T. Vehicular Technology 2010), we can show an attack against the scheme where anyone can forge a valid group signature without using a secret key. In contrast, our GS-TDL scheme is provably secure. In addition to the time-dependent linking property, our GS-TDL scheme supports verifier-local revocation (VLR), where a signer (vehicle) is not involved in the revocation procedure. It is particularly worth noting that no secret key or certificate of a signer (vehicle) must be updated whereas the security credential management system (SCMS) must update certificates frequently for vehicle privacy. Moreover, our technique maintains constant signing and verification costs by using the linkable part of signatures. This might be of independent interest.

ePrint: https://eprint.iacr.org/2014/926

See all topics related to this paper.

Feel free to post resources that are related to this paper below.

Example resources include: implementations, explanation materials, talks, slides, links to previous discussions on other websites.

For more information, see the rules for Resource Topics .