ArticlePloS one2019
An improved and efficient mutual authentication scheme for session initiation protocol.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Qiu et al. made a security analysis about the protocols of Chaudhry et al. and Kumari et al. in 2018, and they pointed out that there are many security weaknesses in the protocols. To improve the security, Qiu et al. proposed an advanced authentication scheme for Session Initiation Protocol on the basis of the previous protocols and claimed that their own protocol was very secure and practical. However, we demonstrate that the protocol of Qiu et al. has a serious mistake which causes their protocol cannot be executed normally. Beyond that, we also find out that their protocol cannot withstand insider attack and denial service attack. In order to remove these weaknesses, we propose an efficient provably secure mutual authentication scheme. Furthermore, our scheme provides security analysis with the help of Burrows-Abadi-Needham (BAN) logic. Compared with their protocol, ours has greater security and better performance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.