Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

David Novick

dblp:182/5136 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2017
—ORCID · unresolved

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Security and privacy · 1

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Network and information security
1 paper
Authentication and access control · 44% Hardware security and side channels · 44% Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis · 13%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Authentication and access control › anonymous credentials
direct anonymous attestation
0.312017
One TPM to Bind Them All: Fixing TPM 2.0 for Provably Secure Anonymous Attestation · IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy 2017
Hardware security and side channels › trusted execution environments
trusted platform module
0.312017
One TPM to Bind Them All: Fixing TPM 2.0 for Provably Secure Anonymous Attestation · IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy 2017

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

security proof · 0.3protocol specification · 0.3
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2017 One TPM to Bind Them All: Fixing TPM 2.0 for Provably Secure Anonymous Attestation
abstract
The Trusted Platform Module (TPM) is an international standard for a security chip that can be used for the management of cryptographic keys and for remote attestation. The specification of the most recent TPM 2.0 interfaces for direct anonymous attestation unfortunately has a number of severe shortcomings. First of all, they do not allow for security proofs (indeed, the published proofs are incorrect). Second, they provide a Diffie-Hellman oracle w.r.t. the secret key of the TPM, weakening the security and preventing forward anonymity of attestations. Fixes to these problems have been proposed, but they create new issues: they enable a fraudulent TPM to encode information into an attestation signature, which could be used to break anonymity or to leak the secret key. Furthermore, all proposed ways to remove the Diffie-Hellman oracle either strongly limit the functionality of the TPM or would require significant changes to the TPM 2.0 interfaces. In this paper we provide a better specification of the TPM 2.0 interfaces that addresses these problems and requires only minimal changes to the current TPM 2.0 commands. We then show how to use the revised interfaces to build q-SDH-and LRSW-based anonymous attestation schemes, and prove their security. We finally discuss how to obtain other schemes addressing different use cases such as key-binding for U-Prove and e-cash.
Jan Camenisch, Liqun Chen 0002, Manu Drijvers, Anja Lehmann, David Novick, Rainer Urian
IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy5