2013 IEEE Vehicular Networking Conference 2013
DOI: 10.1109/vnc.2013.6737597
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

SEROSA: SERvice oriented security architecture for Vehicular Communications

Abstract: Abstract-Modern vehicles are no longer mere mechanical devices; they comprise dozens of digital computing platforms, coordinated by an in-vehicle network, and have the potential to significantly enhance the digital life of individuals on the road. While this transformation has driven major advancements in road safety and transportation efficiency, significant work remains to be done to support the security and privacy requirements of the envisioned ecosystem of commercial services and applications (i.e., Inter… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
63
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
1

Relationship

6
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 34 publications
(65 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
2
63
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In this case, the RA coordinates with the PP, CA and Top-level CA requesting the resolution of the given pseudonym's long-term identifier (Steps 10-11) which is then disseminated to other vehicles using (for example) CRLs. However, as described in the previous section, such schemes have been shown to suffer from scalability issues [7] [9] and privacy weaknesses of varying pseudonym re-usage and revocation policies [10]; especially against scenarios where the (trusted) authorities collude with each other to link vehicles' actions or completely de-anonymize their identity.…”
Section: Vehicular Communication Backgroundmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…In this case, the RA coordinates with the PP, CA and Top-level CA requesting the resolution of the given pseudonym's long-term identifier (Steps 10-11) which is then disseminated to other vehicles using (for example) CRLs. However, as described in the previous section, such schemes have been shown to suffer from scalability issues [7] [9] and privacy weaknesses of varying pseudonym re-usage and revocation policies [10]; especially against scenarios where the (trusted) authorities collude with each other to link vehicles' actions or completely de-anonymize their identity.…”
Section: Vehicular Communication Backgroundmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Vehicular Communication systems are susceptible to both outsider and insider adversaries [9] [33]. The former are unauthorized entities (i.e., no credentials or trust relationships with other system entities) that seek to compromise the system and disrupt its operation.…”
Section: A Threat and Adversary Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The industry, academia, and standardization bodies [24], [25] have converged to the use of pseudonymous authentication for protecting the location privacy of vehicles [24], [26]- [31]. These ephemeral identities are public/private key pairs, used for identifying and authenticating vehicles both in the context of vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) and vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I) communications [32].…”
Section: B Security and Privacy Issuesmentioning
confidence: 99%