Due Date: Thursday, Feb 12, 2004. In class. No late assignments will be accepted.
Please fit your solution on at most one page (use both sides, if necessary), typeset, with 10 point or larger font.
(b) In what sense are the two different? Illustrate by examples.
1. B --> A: B, r 2. A --> B: A, {A, r}k 3. B --> A: B, {B, r}k
(a) One way to eliminate reflection attacks is by insisting that the challenge/response for the initiator is different from that employed the responder. Since the response r+1 is different from r-1, we might modify the protocol as follows.
1. B --> A: B, r 2. A --> B: A, {A, r+1}k 3. B --> A: B, {B, r-1}k
Has this eliminated the reflection attack? Either argue that a reflection attack is no longer possible or exhibit the interleaved protocol steps the constitute an attack.
(b) More generally, suppose we postulate functions G and H and rewrite the protocol in terms of them:
1. B --> A: B, r 2. A --> B: A, {A, G(A,r)}k 3. B --> A: B, {B, H(B,r)}kWhat properties (if any) of G and H would make this protocol immune to reflection attacks? If no G and H would work, then list the interleaved protocol steps (in terms of G and H).