4G LTE Encryption: Key Security Options Compared

Introduction

When cellular phones first emerged, concerns about data loss and theft were relatively low. This was largely because these devices functioned almost entirely as phones, with perhaps a camera feature added here and there. Nowadays, however, cellular phones are typically smartphones — essentially small computers in terms of the data they carry and the capabilities they possess. Given this reality, and the fact that tablets and other devices have entered the cellular signal landscape, it is important to examine the data security these devices provide, whether that security technology is being used as effectively as it could be, and whether improvements are needed. While technology and encryption have come a long way, it is imperative that the envelope be pushed harder every day in order to maintain — or create — privacy and safety for people using their devices.

Device-to-Device Communication and Disaster Resilience

One important consideration when it comes to cellular technology and how our devices communicate was made starkly apparent when an earthquake and tsunami struck Japan simultaneously in recent years. People with cellular phones were unable to use them because the physical infrastructure supporting cellular networks had been damaged or lost power. Some might wonder what this has to do with encryption. The answer lies in the idea that devices should be able to communicate directly with each other even when prevailing cellular networks are crippled or destroyed. After all, two laptops or workstations can communicate with each other even when the broader Internet is inaccessible, and they can do so in an encrypted, secure manner. The argument being advanced by many researchers is that cellular phones and other devices should be capable of the same thing.

Just as 4G LTE devices can be standardized and equipped to access a shared network, the same standardization should apply to direct device-to-device communication. This concept, known as device-to-device communication or D2D, was emerging as recently as 2014. Even so, the possibilities and benefits of such a framework are considerable, particularly in the context of natural disasters such as hurricanes, earthquakes, tsunamis, and tornadoes. Simply being able to send an "I'm OK" message when infrastructure has failed would provide immeasurable relief to families and first responders alike (Alam, Yang, Rodriguez, & Abd-Alhameed, 2014).

The Se4GE System: RSA and Diffie-Hellman Integration

The business world, and any environment in which encrypted data transmission is essential, presents another important dimension of the 4G security challenge. One of the leading companies in this space is RSA. The vulnerability of LTE-Advanced (LTE-A) to outages caused by natural disasters is one of its known shortcomings, but it is also susceptible to deliberate attacks and breaches. Solutions offered by RSA and similar organizations go a long way toward preventing those vulnerabilities from becoming serious incidents.

RSA and others have proposed or implemented systems based on what they describe as a "novel security scheme." One such proposed system is known as Se4GE — short for Security System for a 4G Environment. This system integrates the information security capabilities of RSA and Diffie-Hellman. It is an end-to-end system that uses a cipher-text transfer mechanism and dynamically changes encryption keys mid-transmission in order to enforce a strong level of security for data sent over a 4G LTE-A system. The system is sophisticated enough to employ two entirely different encryption and decryption techniques within the same framework and for the same devices. Early tests summarized in 2014 reports demonstrated that the Se4GE system outperformed conventional 4G LTE-A security across the board (Huang et al., 2014).

Conclusion

When it comes to smartphones and other 4G LTE devices, many people are prone to focus on speed alone. However, speed without security is fool's gold, and users would be wise to ensure that they are receiving secure data transmission even if that means accepting a modest performance trade-off. The reality, however, is that many users who carry sensitive data on their smartphones are either unaware of or unconcerned with the true vulnerabilities they face. With that in mind, protective measures should be implemented proactively — keeping data safe even for users who are not actively aware that they are being protected. This means that the best, most secure, and most efficient protocols available can and should be deployed to keep data transmissions safe.

References

Alam, M., Yang, D., Rodriguez, J., & Abd-Alhameed, R. (2014). Secure device-to-device communication in LTE-A. IEEE Communications Magazine, 52(4), 66–73.

Huang, Y., Leu, F., You, I., Sun, Y., & Chu, C. (2014). A secure wireless communication system integrating RSA, Diffie-Hellman PKDS, intelligent protection-key chains and a Data Connection Core in a 4G environment. Journal of Supercomputing, 67(3), 635–652. doi:10.1007/s11227-013-0958-z

Huo, F., & Gong, G. (2015). XOR encryption vs. phase encryption, an in-depth analysis. IEEE Transactions on Electromagnetic Compatibility, 57(4), 903–911. doi:10.1109/TEMC.2015.2390229

Samoui, S., El Bouabidi, I., Obaidat, M. S., Zarai, F., Hsiao, K. F., & Kamoun, L. (2015). Improved IPSec tunnel establishment for 3GPP-WLAN interworking. International Journal of Communication Systems, 28(6), 1180–1199. doi:10.1002/dac.2769