Papers › Comparing Distance Bounding Protocols: a Critical Mission Supported by Decision Theory
Comparing Distance Bounding Protocols: a Critical Mission Supported by Decision Theory
Gildas Avoine, Sjouke Mauw, Rolando Trujillo-Rasua
The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.
Distance bounding protocols are security countermeasures designed to thwart relay attacks. Such attacks consist in relaying messages exchanged between two parties, making them believe they communicate directly with each other. Although distance bounding protocols have existed since the early nineties, this research topic resurrected with the deployment of contactless systems, against which relay attacks are particularly impactful. Given the impressive number of distance bounding protocols that are designed every year, it becomes urgent to provide researchers and engineers with a methodology to fairly compare the protocols in spite of their various properties. This paper introduces such a methodology based on concepts from the decision making field. The methodology allows for a multi-criteria comparison of distance bounding protocols, thereby identifying the most appropriate protocols once the context is provided. As a side effect, this paper clearly identifies the protocols that should no longer be considered, regardless of the considered scenario.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections