a) Alice just generated a new pair of public and private RSA keys (pkA , skA ) = ((N, e), d) and would like to start a private conversation with Bob. How can Alice interact with Bob and exchange a symmetric key? Describe a key exchange protocol between them which is secure against an eavesdropper adversary.

b) Fully specify a Man-in-The-Middle (MiTM) attack attack against the key exchange protocol you described above.

c) Assume now that Alice and Bob are very old friends and that Bob already knows a public key pkA owned by Alice. How can you improve the above protocol in such a way that Bob can detect the presence of a MiTM? Can Alice also detect the presence of a MiTM?

In part a) I defined a protocol using the idea behind D Hellman, so this is vulnerable to MiTM. However, I dont know how to work out part c

  • "I defined a protocol using the idea behind D Hellman" - So you're doing a standard diffie-hellman key exchange, just with RSA private keys and a (random) message? – SEJPM Dec 12 '15 at 21:59
  • yes, I did that – santteegt Dec 12 '15 at 22:07
  • 1
    So, for part c) Should I use digital signatures ? – santteegt Dec 12 '15 at 22:32
  • 1
    @Santiago Gonzalez Toral: I'm afraid that you over-engineered your protocol in a) and that sent you on tracks far from what the problem's author is trying to guide you. What you have been asked in a) [be secure against an adversary assumed not to send any message] can be done simply, with RSA encryption alone. Hint: Alice first sends a non-encrypted message to Bob; after the second message, Bob and Alice have their shared secret key. $\;$ When you use this simple protocol, b) and c) becomes easy. Hint: some of the shared secret can be devoted to protection against MiTM. – fgrieu Dec 13 '15 at 11:23
  • 1
    1. Alice sends a public key to Bob 2. Bob generates a temporary symmetric key and encrypts it with Alice's public key. Then, he sends the ciphertext to Alice. 3. Alice decrypts it using her private key. Now, both Alice and Bob have a shared key. MiTM ---- Even if, the attacker intercepts communication between Alice and Bob, he is unable to recover the symmetric key because he doesn't have Alice's private key. Right? – santteegt Dec 13 '15 at 17:49

You need an authentic channel from Alice to Bob to get a secret channel from Bob to Alice. This assumption is missing in a), so anyone in control of the communication channel can play man in the middle on any protocol.

As long you don't have a secret channel from Alice to Bob or an authentic channel from Bob to Alice, Alice will never (= for any protocol) be sure who is sending her the secret messages.

See U. Maurer, P. Schmid, A calculus for secure channel establishment in open networks, ESORICS' 94, LNCS 875, pp 175-192.

Your Answer

By clicking "Post Your Answer", you acknowledge that you have read our updated terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy, and that your continued use of the website is subject to these policies.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.