# An Introduction of a Modular Framework for Securing 5G Networks and Beyond
## 3 Proposed Network Service Security (NSS) Framework
### Formal Verifications and Performance Evaluation of the Security Protocols
#### 3.4.2 Performance Evaluation Based on Analytical and Simulation Approaches  
To check the effectiveness of these protocols, performance evaluation was carried out using analytical and simulation methods presented in [52]. The analytical model associates an enhanced label to each communication and each decryption based on the ProVerif and Applied pi-calculus processes used in the verification of the protocol. The performance parameters and metrics are displayed in Tables 2 and 3 and the outcomes for each level are represented by applicable protocols in Table 4 for an analytical model. The simulation model is built on the NS-3 5G mmWave module [53, 54] to replicate the current non-standalone deployment of 5G using 5G radio technologies and the LTE network. By evaluating efficiency, throughput and computational cost, the communication and processing costs associated with the protocols are taken into account. The performance parameters and metrics are displayed in Table 5 for computational cost, Tables 6 and 7 for communication cost and Tables 8 and  
Furthermore, the security formal verification and performance evaluation approaches of this framework's underlining protocols were extensively explored in [10; 11; 12; 26; 52; 13], respectively. The behaviour and cost of an algorithm are affected by the cryptographic scheme, formally analysed security properties and system model. An example of this is the employment of symmetric or asymmetric cryptography in a mobile network with a variety of stakeholders from various security realms. As a result, utilising this method \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c} \hline \hline
**Periods** & **Efficiency** & **Throughput** \\ \hline \hline
5G Protocols & & \\ \hline \hline
3 GPP-5G-AKA & \(\frac{\text{3 GPP-5G-AKA}}{\text{3d}}\) & \(\frac{\text{4}}{\text{21+5G+5G}}\) \\ \hline SAP-AKA & \(\frac{\text{4}}{\text{8d}}\) & \(\frac{\text{3d}}{\text{20s+19d+19d}}\) \\ \hline NS-FId & \(\frac{\text{2d}}{\text{10d}}\) & \(\frac{\text{2d}}{\text{26s+26s+28d}}\) \\ \hline DOSS & \(\frac{\text{C}}{\text{8d}}\) & \(\frac{\text{2d}}{\text{20s+20d+20d}}\) \\ \hline
5G D2D Protocols & \(\frac{\text{D}}{\text{7d}}\) & \(\frac{\text{4d}}{\text{27s+27e+27d}}\) \\ \hline DDAcap & \(\frac{\text{E}}{\text{4d}}\) & \(\frac{\text{4d}}{\text{22s+19d+19d}}\) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Protocols Performance Evaluation. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c} \hline \hline
**Variable** & **Description** \\ \hline a & s + e \\ \hline b & 2s + 2e \\ \hline c & 3s + 3e \\ \hline f & 4s + 4e \\ \hline g & 5s + 5e \\ \hline h & 6s + 6e \\ \hline i & 7s + 7e \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Metrics Variables. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c} \hline \hline
**Notation** & **Description** & **Rough Computation** \\  & **(Time to Compute)** & **Time (ms)** \\ \hline \hline \(T_{Adv}\) & authentication vectors & 33.5 \\ \hline \(T_{h}\) & hash function & 5 \\ \hline \(T_{Se}\) & symmetric encryption & 4 \\ \hline \(T_{Sd}\) & symmetric decryption & 5.5 \\ \hline \(T_{Ae}\) & asymmetric encryption & 8 \\ \hline \(T_{Ad}\) & asymmetric decryption & 9.5 \\ \hline \(T_{Tn}\) & token & 5 \\ \hline \(T_{Ts}\) & timestamp & 5 \\ \hline \(T_{KDF}\) & NAC/SL key & 12.0 \\ \hline \(T_{D2D}\) & D2D key & 20.0 \\ \hline \(T_{E}\) & execute & 21.5 \\ \hline \(T_{V}\) & verify & 12.5 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 5: Approximate Time for Cryptographic Operations. with this conceptual framework makes the important cost aspects obvious, helps in the development of security protocols and aids in the selection of cost-effective solutions. Other communications systems in addition to mobile networks can also use these techniques.