# A Survey of Public Key Infrastructure-Based Security for Mobile Communication Systems
## 4 Security Requirements and Performance Analysis  
In this section, we compare schemes in the previous literature to classify which ones satisfy the security requirements for mobile communications systems. (Table 1) demonstrates comparisons of performance efficiency and security requirements for 2G-GSM cellular systems, while (Table 2) demonstrates comparisons of performance efficiency and security requirements for 3 GPP cellular systems. Earlier 2G-GSM systems provide low security level A3, A5 and A8 algorithms; for instance, A3 is a challenge-response algorithm that has many weaknesses (See Section 2), especially in cases of mutual authentication, anonymity, IMSI catcher attacks, and replay attacks. However, most of the latest research works try to solve such vulnerabilities by using PKI cryptosystems but still have computational and communication overhead problems i.e., References [21; 24; 54] provide mutual authentication with relatively high computational cost. On the other hand, References [17; 18] have low computational costs without mutual authentication. Other security features, such as End-to-End security which is proposed by [PERSON] [55], can provide a high level of security because there is no need for the trusted third party (TTP), i.e., make the network operator secure by reducing the trust placed on the third party. In the field of mobile communications and aside from security requirements, the power consumptions, computational cost, and communications overhead are serious issues due to the limitations of mobile \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Reference** & **Security Technique** & **Mutual Authentication** & **Replay Attack** & **MITM Attack** & **TTP** & **End-to-End Security** \\ \hline
[16] & RSA-EKE & No & No & No & No \\
[17] & PKI-EKE & No & Yes & No & Yes & No \\
[18] & PKI-EKE & No & Yes & Yes & Yes & No \\
[19] & ECC & No & Yes & No & Yes & No \\
[20] & CBC & Yes & Yes & No & Yes & No \\
[21] & CBC & Yes & Yes & Yes & Yes & No \\
[24] & CBC & Yes & Yes & No & No & No \\
[25] & ECC & No & No & Yes & No & Yes \\
[55] & CL-PKC & Yes & Yes & Yes & No & Yes \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Comparison of Performance Efficiency in 2G-GSM Security Schemes. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Reference** & **Security Technique** & **Mutual Authentication** & **Replay Attack** & **MITM Attack** & **TTP** & **End-to-End Security** \\ \hline
[30] & Hyper ECC & Yes & No & Yes & No & Yes \\
[32] & ECC-DH & Yes & Yes & Yes & No & No \\
[33] & SSL & No & No & Yes & Yes & No \\
[34] & CBC-TMP & Yes & Yes & Yes & Yes & No \\
[35] & DH & Yes & No & Yes & No & No \\
[36] & CBC & Yes & Yes & No & Yes & No \\
[37] & CRC & No & Yes & Yes & Yes & No \\
[38] & RSA & Yes & No & No & Yes & No \\
[41] & ECC-DH & Yes & Yes & Yes & Yes & No \\
[42] & Proxy & Yes & No & Yes & No & Yes \\
[56] & Pairing & Yes & Yes & Yes & Yes & No \\
[57] & Proxy & Yes & Yes & Yes & No & Yes \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Comparison of performance efficiency in 3 GPP security schemes. system performance, especially with regard to PKI-based security approaches [63]. The performance evaluation is based on the existing experimental in [64; 65] for each of the cryptographic operations by using Multiprecision Integer and Rational Arithmetic C/C++ Library (MIRACLE) [66] in platform with Pentium 4 (PIV) 3 GHZ processor in Windows XP operating system and 512 MB memory. Accordingly, the (relative running time) for the operations employed in the proposed schemes defined in the following terms:  
_Te_: ECC-based scalar multiplication = 0.83 ms  
_Td_: Modular Exponentiation = 1.169 ms  
_Th_: Hash function (e.g., SHA-1, MAC) = 3.04 ms  
_Tp_: Pairing operation = 20.01 ms  
_Tm_: Pairing-based scalar multiplication = 6.38 ms  
_Ts_: Symmetric encryption/decryption (e.g., AES-128) = 0.00541 ms  
Other lightweight operations (e.g., exclusive or XOR) = 0.008 \(\upmu\)s (Omitted)  
Nowadays the processes efficiency has been improved with smart phone.