Cryptography-based security provides security with the help of keys and some encryption algorithms. The security is unprovable and challenged by code-breaking algorithms and quantum computers. Moreover, due to the requirement of resource constraint security techniques for the emerging wireless technology these cryptography techniques may not be considered. However, Physical Layer security has emerged to complement Cryptography-based security techniques. Therefore, my question is can PLS replace Cryptography based security?
Crypto-security provides a remote protection of information on communication lines and at databases, computers, servers, mobile devices, soft-applications, and in general everything involved into information storage and exchange. Whereas a physical layer is a complex of security protection methods related to securing a direct physical access to, and ownership of communication lines and computers, servers, mobile devices, databases, records, and facilities containing those things. Clearly, those are two very different animals. One ought to pay serious attention to both of them. However, they aren't mutually replaceable or capable to carry on alone the entire spectrum of security issues and concerns.
As far as crypto-security vs powerful quantum computers is concerned - it's certainly an upcoming challenge. However, there are methods that can puzzle up quantum computers as well. It's gonna be the next generation of crypto-security. Eventually, crypto-security is based on the entire security protocol, not just on the availability of the high speed calculating hardware and algorithms.
The two supplement each other, one can not replace the other. Over all, we need layered security.
Anil,
Therefore, my question is can PLS replace Cryptography based security?
Only in the specific case of a network which exists only in an isolated enclave, physically air-gapped from anything outside that physical layer network. So, for example, no bridges, no routers, to send packets to other local networks. This is because bridges and routers are used to interconnect islands of different physical layer networks. Whatever security one PLS scheme might provide, it cannot go beyond that bridge or router, which tie to different physical layer networks.
Which means, the answer is no, for the majority of cases. If you want to send files securely, outside your organization, or outside your home, you cannot expect any security, if your scheme is effective only within the confines of one local physical layer.
Same holds true for MACsec, by the way.
Here's an example, which might help. Let's say you want to send files securely, to another country. And let's say your local office network wants to make sure that only legitimate company employees can use it.
The office network might very well employ physical layer or link layer security, to permit only legitimate workstations to operate within that organization. But that office security is of no help to you, if you need to send files securely to another company, perhaps in another country.
For your needs, you'll first need PLS or MACsec perhaps, just to get on the office network. But then, you'll have to rely either on IPsec, at layer 3, or Transport Layer Security (TLS), at layer 4, so that your files can cross securely over whatever number of hops it takes, to reach their destination. So that even if intercepted en route, no one but the intended recipient can decode them.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Geoscience
- Cartography
- Mapping