Abstract
Financial Cryptography and Security Engineering are the significant areas for research, advanced development, education, exploration and also for commercial purposes. The paper emphasizes both essential and applied real-world deployments on all aspects as far as e-commerce security is concerned. In essence, we recognize several issues of financial cryptography and suitable technique to concentrate on them. Enhanced multi-sign signature scheme may be considered for parameters like Histogram, Diagram, Trigram and n-gram etc. Quantum Computing and TKIP delivers more comprehensive security and effective performance as compared to existing public key methods.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abdalla, M., Boyen, X., Chevalier, C., & Pointcheval, D. (2009). Distributed public-key cryptography from weak secrets. In S. Jarecki & G. Tsudik (Eds.), PKC 2009. LNCS (Vol. 5443, pp. 139–159). Heidelberg: Springer.
https://bitconnect.co/bitcoin-news/201/how-to-secure-bitcoin-wallet.
Babaioff, M., Dobzinski, S., Oren, S., & Zohar, A. (2011). On bitcoin and red balloons. http://research.microsoft.com/pubs/156072/bitcoin.pdf
Laurent, M., Denouël, J., Levallois-Barth, C., & Waelbroeck, P. (2015). 1—Digital identity. In Digital identity management (pp. 1–45). Elsevier. ISBN 9781785480041. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-1-78548-004-1.50001-8.
Nimbhorkar, S., & Malik, L. (2016). Comparative analysis of authenticated key agreement protocols based on elliptic curve cryptography. Procedia Computer Science, 78, 824–830.
Leaning, M. (2017). Chapter six—Digital divides: Access, skills and participation. In Media and information literacy (pp. 101–114). Chandos Publishing. ISBN 9780081001707, https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-100170-7.00006-8.
Scheerder, A., van Deursen, A., & van Dijk, J. (2017). Determinants of Internet skills, uses and outcomes. A systematic review of the second- and third-level digital divide. Telematics and Informatics, 34(8), 1607–1624. ISSN 0736-5853. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2017.07.007.
Luu, L., Saha, R., Parameshwaran, I., Saxena, P., & Hobor, A. (2015). On power splitting games in distributed computation: The case of bitcoin pooled mining. Technical report, Cryptology ePrint Archive, Report 2015/155. http://eprint.iacr.org.
Bonneau, J., Miller, A., Clark, J., Narayanan, A., Kroll, J. A., & Felten, E. W. (2015). Research perspectives and challenges for bitcoin and cryptocurrencies. In 2015 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy.
Lambert, M., Ferrari, S., & Wajert, B. (2013). Costs and benefits of replacing the $1 Federal Reserve Note with a $1 U.S. coin. Federal Reserve Working Paper. Retrieved January 10, 2014.
Kumar, R., Verma, H. K., Dhir, R. (2015). Analysis and design of protocol for enhanced threshold proxy signature scheme based on RSA for known signers. Wireless Personal Communications – An International Journal, 80(3), 1281–1345. ISSN 0929-6212 (Print) 1572-834X (Online).
Kumar, R. (2018). Cryptanalysis of protocol for enhanced threshold proxy signature scheme based on elliptic curve cryptography for known signers. Knowledge Computing and Its Applications. ISBN 978-981-10-6679-5.
Rivest, R. L., Shamir, A., & Adleman, L. M. (1978). A method for obtaining digital signatures and public-key cryptosystems. Communications of the ACM, 21(2), 120–126.
ElGamal, T. (1985). A public-key cryptosystem and a signature scheme based on discrete logarithms. IEEE Transactions of Information Theory, 31(4), 469–472.
Miller, V. S. (1985). Uses of elliptic curves in cryptography. In Advances in cryptology—Crypo’85. LNCS (Vol. 218, pp. 417–426).
Gu, K., et al. (2020). Reusable mesh signature scheme for protecting identity privacy of IoT devices. Sensors (Basel), 20, 758.
Lee, K., & Lee, D. H. (2015). Security analysis of the unrestricted identity-based aggregate signature scheme. PLoS ONE, 10, e0128081.
Shu, H., et al. (2020). An efficient certificateless aggregate signature scheme for blockchain-based medical cyber physical systems. Sensors (Basel), 20, 1521.
Tu, H., et al. (2014). Reattack of a certificateless aggregate signature scheme with constant pairing computations. Scientific World Journal, 2014, 343715.
Xiao, J., et al. (2018). SigMat: A classification scheme for gene signature matching. Bioinformatics, 34, i547–i554.
Yang, X., et al. (2019). A strongly unforgeable certificateless signature scheme and its application in IoT environments. Sensors (Basel), 19, 2692.
Yeh, K. H., et al. (2017). A novel certificateless signature scheme for smart objects in the Internet-of-Things. Sensors (Basel), 17, 1001.
Yuan, E., et al. (2020). A key management scheme based on pairing-free identity based digital signature algorithm for heterogeneous wireless sensor networks. Sensors (Basel), 20, 1543.
Acknowledgments
The author also wish to thank many anonymous referees for their suggestions to improve this paper.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendices
Appendix 1
No. | Substring | Histogram | Diagram | Trigram | n-gram | Histogram | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HLL | Frequency1 | HLL | Frequency1 | HLL | Frequency1 | HLL | Frequency1 | KUOCHEN | Frequency2 | ||
Frequency (in %) | Frequency | Frequency (in %) | Frequency | Frequency (in %) | Frequency | Frequency (in %) | Frequency | Frequency (in %) | Frequency | ||
1 | N | 11.0343 | 654 | 3.6909 | 150 | 11.0343 | 2.806 | 3.5975 | 69 | 11.3387 | 631 |
2 | I | 9.1277 | 541 | 2.5098 | 102 | 9.1277 | 2.4553 | 2.8676 | 55 | 8.841 | 492 |
3 | T | 8.824 | 523 | 2.0423 | 83 | 8.824 | 2.4202 | 1.877 | 36 | 8.6253 | 480 |
4 | E | 8.6216 | 511 | 1.9439 | 79 | 8.6216 | 1.9291 | 1.877 | 36 | 8.4636 | 471 |
5 | S | 7.4405 | 441 | 1.8947 | 77 | 7.4405 | 1.9291 | 1.877 | 36 | 7.8886 | 439 |
6 | R | 7.1368 | 423 | 1.8947 | 77 | 7.1368 | 1.3329 | 1.7727 | 34 | 7.044 | 392 |
7 | A | 5.0785 | 301 | 1.8947 | 77 | 5.0785 | 1.3329 | 1.6163 | 31 | 4.8697 | 271 |
8 | O | 4.6567 | 276 | 1.8209 | 74 | 4.6567 | 1.2627 | 1.6163 | 31 | 4.6361 | 258 |
9 | C | 4.1842 | 248 | 1.7963 | 73 | 4.1842 | 1.2627 | 1.4599 | 28 | 4.4205 | 246 |
10 | D | 3.6612 | 217 | 1.747 | 71 | 3.6612 | 1.2627 | 1.4599 | 28 | 3.8455 | 214 |
11 | U | 3.5937 | 213 | 1.7224 | 70 | 3.5937 | 1.2627 | 1.4077 | 27 | 3.2884 | 183 |
12 | F | 3.2732 | 194 | 1.624 | 66 | 3.2732 | 1.2276 | 1.4077 | 27 | 3.2165 | 179 |
13 | P | 3.1213 | 185 | 1.4764 | 60 | 3.1213 | 1.1926 | 1.1992 | 23 | 3.1626 | 176 |
14 | G | 3.0707 | 182 | 1.4518 | 59 | 3.0707 | 1.1575 | 1.0949 | 21 | 3.0189 | 168 |
15 | L | 3.0201 | 179 | 1.4026 | 57 | 3.0201 | 1.1224 | 1.0949 | 21 | 2.9111 | 162 |
16 | H | 2.8682 | 170 | 1.378 | 56 | 2.8682 | 1.0873 | 1.0428 | 20 | 2.8392 | 158 |
17 | Y | 2.6489 | 157 | 1.3533 | 55 | 2.6489 | 1.0873 | 1.0428 | 20 | 2.6954 | 150 |
18 | M | 2.4296 | 144 | 1.3533 | 55 | 2.4296 | 1.0172 | 1.0428 | 20 | 1.8509 | 103 |
19 | X | 1.4341 | 85 | 1.2549 | 51 | 1.4341 | 0.9821 | 1.0428 | 20 | 1.4196 | 79 |
20 | V | 1.0798 | 64 | 1.1319 | 46 | 1.0798 | 0.9821 | 0.9385 | 18 | 1.2579 | 70 |
21 | W | 0.9954 | 59 | 1.1319 | 46 | 0.9954 | 0.9821 | 0.9385 | 18 | 1.15 | 64 |
22 | J | 0.8267 | 49 | 1.1073 | 45 | 0.8267 | 0.947 | 0.8342 | 16 | 1.0422 | 58 |
23 | B | 0.7761 | 46 | 1.1073 | 45 | 0.7761 | 0.8418 | 0.7821 | 15 | 0.9164 | 51 |
24 | K | 0.6917 | 41 | 1.0827 | 44 | 0.6917 | 0.8067 | 0.7821 | 15 | 0.7907 | 44 |
25 | Q | 0.3374 | 20 | 1.0827 | 44 | 0.3374 | 0.8067 | 0.7299 | 14 | 0.3953 | 22 |
26 | Z | 0.0675 | 4 | 1.0335 | 42 | 0.0675 | 0.8067 | 0.7299 | 14 | 0.0719 | 4 |
No. | Substring | Diagram | Trigram | n-gram | Histogram | Diagram | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
KUOCHEN | Frequency2 | KUOCHEN | Frequency2 | KUOCHEN | Frequency2 | GENGVRF | Frequency3 | GENGVRF | Frequency3 | ||
Frequency (in %) | Frequency | Frequency (in %) | Frequency | Frequency (in %) | Frequency | Frequency (in %) | Frequency | Frequency (in %) | Frequency | ||
1 | N | 3.3183 | 125 | 2.6488 | 69 | 3.8902 | 68 | 10.9658 | 587 | 3.7548 | 136 |
2 | I | 2.3892 | 90 | 2.6104 | 68 | 2.8604 | 50 | 9.4153 | 504 | 2.4848 | 90 |
3 | T | 2.0706 | 78 | 2.0345 | 53 | 2.4027 | 42 | 9.079 | 486 | 2.1535 | 78 |
4 | E | 2.0706 | 78 | 1.9194 | 50 | 2.4027 | 42 | 8.3878 | 449 | 2.0707 | 75 |
5 | S | 2.0441 | 77 | 1.9194 | 50 | 2.2883 | 40 | 7.9208 | 424 | 2.0155 | 73 |
6 | R | 2.0175 | 76 | 1.6123 | 42 | 2.1167 | 37 | 7.1175 | 381 | 1.9602 | 71 |
7 | A | 2.0175 | 76 | 1.6123 | 42 | 1.6018 | 28 | 4.7076 | 252 | 1.8774 | 68 |
8 | O | 1.9379 | 73 | 1.6123 | 42 | 1.6018 | 28 | 4.5769 | 245 | 1.7946 | 65 |
9 | C | 1.8317 | 69 | 1.5739 | 41 | 1.6018 | 28 | 3.9978 | 214 | 1.7946 | 65 |
10 | D | 1.8051 | 68 | 1.5355 | 40 | 1.6018 | 28 | 3.6802 | 197 | 1.767 | 64 |
11 | U | 1.7521 | 66 | 1.3052 | 34 | 1.5446 | 27 | 3.5681 | 191 | 1.767 | 64 |
12 | F | 1.6459 | 62 | 1.2668 | 33 | 1.5446 | 27 | 3.5494 | 190 | 1.7118 | 62 |
13 | P | 1.5397 | 58 | 1.1132 | 29 | 1.3158 | 23 | 3.4747 | 186 | 1.7118 | 62 |
14 | G | 1.46 | 55 | 1.1132 | 29 | 0.9725 | 17 | 2.989 | 160 | 1.5737 | 57 |
15 | L | 1.3804 | 52 | 1.0749 | 28 | 0.9153 | 16 | 2.8956 | 155 | 1.5737 | 57 |
16 | H | 1.3539 | 51 | 1.0749 | 28 | 0.9153 | 16 | 2.7835 | 149 | 1.4633 | 53 |
17 | Y | 1.3539 | 51 | 1.0749 | 28 | 0.9153 | 16 | 2.3538 | 126 | 1.4357 | 52 |
18 | M | 1.3008 | 49 | 1.0749 | 28 | 0.9153 | 16 | 1.8121 | 97 | 1.4081 | 51 |
19 | X | 1.2742 | 48 | 1.0749 | 28 | 0.8581 | 15 | 1.4945 | 80 | 1.3805 | 50 |
20 | V | 1.2477 | 47 | 1.0749 | 28 | 0.8581 | 15 | 1.3824 | 74 | 1.27 | 46 |
21 | W | 1.2211 | 46 | 1.0365 | 27 | 0.8009 | 14 | 0.9714 | 52 | 1.2424 | 45 |
22 | J | 1.1415 | 43 | 0.9981 | 26 | 0.8009 | 14 | 0.8967 | 48 | 1.2148 | 44 |
23 | B | 1.1415 | 43 | 0.9213 | 24 | 0.8009 | 14 | 0.7659 | 41 | 1.1872 | 43 |
24 | K | 1.1415 | 43 | 0.8829 | 23 | 0.8009 | 14 | 0.7286 | 39 | 1.1044 | 40 |
25 | Q | 1.1149 | 42 | 0.8829 | 23 | 0.8009 | 14 | 0.411 | 22 | 1.0768 | 39 |
26 | Z | 1.1149 | 42 | 0.7294 | 19 | 0.8009 | 14 | 0.0747 | 4 | 1.0768 | 39 |
No. | Substring | Trigram | n-gram | Histogram | Diagram | Trigram | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GENGVRF | Frequency3 | GENGVRF | Frequency3 | FNGVERF | Frequency4 | FNGVERF | Frequency4 | FNGVERF | |||
Frequency (in %) | Frequency | Frequency (in %) | Frequency | Frequency (in %) | Frequency | Frequency (in %) | Frequency | Frequency (in %) | |||
1 | N | 2.483 | 62 | 3.6949 | 62 | 10.947 | 630 | 3.7028 | 146 | 2.5118 | |
2 | I | 2.483 | 62 | 2.4434 | 41 | 9.1573 | 527 | 2.2825 | 90 | 2.4754 | |
3 | T | 2.1225 | 53 | 2.4434 | 41 | 8.7576 | 504 | 2.0289 | 80 | 1.9294 | |
4 | E | 1.8823 | 47 | 2.3838 | 40 | 8.3927 | 483 | 2.0036 | 79 | 1.9294 | |
5 | S | 1.8022 | 45 | 2.3838 | 40 | 8.2711 | 476 | 1.9528 | 77 | 1.8202 | |
6 | R | 1.642 | 41 | 2.1454 | 36 | 6.9505 | 400 | 1.9528 | 77 | 1.7474 | |
7 | A | 1.642 | 41 | 2.1454 | 36 | 4.7089 | 271 | 1.9528 | 77 | 1.7474 | |
8 | O | 1.642 | 41 | 2.0262 | 34 | 4.6568 | 268 | 1.9275 | 76 | 1.6017 | |
9 | C | 1.6019 | 40 | 1.907 | 32 | 4.066 | 234 | 1.9275 | 76 | 1.5653 | |
10 | D | 1.4417 | 36 | 1.7282 | 29 | 3.8401 | 221 | 1.7499 | 69 | 1.4925 | |
11 | U | 1.4417 | 36 | 1.6687 | 28 | 3.5274 | 203 | 1.7246 | 68 | 1.4561 | |
12 | F | 1.4417 | 36 | 1.6091 | 27 | 3.5274 | 203 | 1.6992 | 67 | 1.3105 | |
13 | P | 1.4417 | 36 | 1.6091 | 27 | 3.4231 | 197 | 1.6739 | 66 | 1.3105 | |
14 | G | 1.3616 | 34 | 1.5495 | 26 | 3.3189 | 191 | 1.6739 | 66 | 1.3105 | |
15 | L | 1.2415 | 31 | 1.5495 | 26 | 2.7454 | 158 | 1.6739 | 66 | 1.1649 | |
16 | H | 1.2014 | 30 | 0.8939 | 15 | 2.6933 | 155 | 1.5217 | 60 | 1.0921 | |
17 | Y | 1.1614 | 29 | 0.8939 | 15 | 2.6759 | 154 | 1.4456 | 57 | 1.0557 | |
18 | M | 1.1614 | 29 | 0.8939 | 15 | 1.7724 | 102 | 1.3442 | 53 | 1.0557 | |
19 | X | 1.1614 | 29 | 0.8939 | 15 | 1.4248 | 82 | 1.3188 | 52 | 1.0557 | |
20 | V | 1.1213 | 28 | 0.8939 | 15 | 1.1816 | 68 | 1.2427 | 49 | 1.0557 | |
21 | W | 1.0813 | 27 | 0.8343 | 14 | 1.0252 | 59 | 1.192 | 47 | 1.0193 | |
22 | J | 1.0813 | 27 | 0.8343 | 14 | 0.8862 | 51 | 1.192 | 47 | 1.0193 | |
23 | B | 1.0813 | 27 | 0.7747 | 13 | 0.8688 | 50 | 1.1666 | 46 | 1.0193 | |
24 | K | 1.0412 | 26 | 0.7747 | 13 | 0.7298 | 42 | 1.0905 | 43 | 1.0193 | |
25 | Q | 1.0412 | 26 | 0.7747 | 13 | 0.3823 | 22 | 1.0652 | 42 | 0.9465 | |
26 | Z | 1.0412 | 26 | 0.7747 | 13 | 0.0695 | 4 | 1.0398 | 41 | 0.8737 | |
Appendix 2
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kumar, R. Cryptanalytic Performance Appraisal of Improved HLL, KUOCHEN, GENGVRF, FENGVRF Secure Signature with TKIP Digital Workspaces: For Financial Cryptography. Wireless Pers Commun 115, 1541–1563 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11277-020-07642-2
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11277-020-07642-2