Results 1 - 10 of 28,092

TABLE VI NETWORK DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS FOR 7 TYPES OF APPLICATIONS Application Channel Packet Routing Protocol Connection Transportation Security

in Towards characterizing and classifying communication-based automotive applications from a wireless networking perspective
by Fan Bai, Hariharan Krishnan, Varsha Sadekar, Gavin Holland, Tamer ElBatt 2006
Cited by 3

Table 1: Comparison of protocols

in Supertrust a secure and efficient framework for handling trust in super peer networks
by Tassos Dimitriou, Ghassan Karame, Ioannis Christou 2007
"... In PAGE 4: ... However, this work lacks anonymity and security since it does not provide any measure that secures the various voting stages. A comparison of these protocols and their characteristics is shown in Table1 . To be fair, however, we need to mention that these protocols were not designed with the properties of Section 2 in mind.... ..."
Cited by 2

Table 1. Security Classes

in Security Broker for Multimedia Wireless LANs: Design, Implementation and Testbed
by Aura Ganz, Se Hyun Park, Zvi Ganz
"... In PAGE 2: ... Other designs may consider di#0Berent classes. Table1 provides a summary of the security classes. Most of security aspects such as con#0Cdentiality,integrity and authenticityhave been considered in Class 3.... In PAGE 2: ... Sec- ond, even if the remote side is only capable of accept- ing agreed-on parameters, the sending user must decide whether these parameters can be used for the requested session. For example, in our implementation, the security service speci#0Ccations of Class 3 #28 Table1 #29 recommend the 160-bit SHA, 128-bit MD5 with authentication protocol, re-authentication protocol and inline securitylayer #28bulk encryption with RC4#29.... ..."

Table 1. Attack and security levels

in A Simplified Leakage-Resilient Authenticated Key Establishment Protocol with Optimal Memory Size
by Seonghan Shin, Kazukuni Kobara, Hideki Imai 2005
Cited by 2

Tables (DHT) [12]. To the best of our knowledge, only [4] has attempted to present a secure protocol at message level in addition to a trust model. Their protocol is based on a polling based mech- anism and use public key cryptographyto provide various se- curity features. In contrast, the TrustMe design argues that, to provide secure, reliable, and accountable distribution and access of trust ratings of peers, it is not only important to authenticate the P2P messages but also critical to ensure re- questor anonymity and provider anonymity for distributed management of trust relationships in dcentralized P2P sys- tems.

in TrustMe: Anonymous Management of Trust Relationships in Decentralized P2P Systems
by Aameek Singh, Ling Liu 2003
Cited by 43

TABLE V ACHIEVEDTHROUGHPUTOF SECURITY PROTOCOLS

in A Flexible Middleware for Multimedia Communication: Design, Implementation, and Experience
by Burkhard Stiller, Christina Class, Marcel Waldvogel, Germano Caronni, Daniel Bauer, Bernhard Plattner 1999
Cited by 32

Table 1. Security Analysis of the Protocols

in Evaluation of GSM Security
by Basar Kasim, Levent Ertaul 2000
Cited by 1

Table 1: Comparison of Security Protocols

in unknown title
by unknown authors

Table 1: Primitives in Obol.

in Abstract The design and implementation of Obol
by Tage Stabell-kulø, Skogan Per, Harald Myrvang
"... In PAGE 4: ...ection 4.2). Taken together, the core of Obol consists of a small set of primitive operations aimed at the core func- tionality of security protocols. The operations are summarized in Table1 . The operators are designed to facilitate the implementation of security proto- cols, and are designed to ease the translation from a protocol description that will also be used as a starting point for an idealization.... ..."

Table 2: Comparison of security protocol features

in
by Phillip Pudney, Phillip Pudney 2005
"... In PAGE 10: ...able 1: Comparison of 802.11 standards........................................................13 Table2 : Comparison of security protocol features .... ..."
Results 1 - 10 of 28,092