A Robust and Effective Smart-Card-Based Remote User Authentication Mechanism Using Hash Function

Table 6

Functionality comparison between our scheme and other schemes.

Functionality	[13]	[14]	[3]	[15]	Ours
𝐹1	No	Yes	No	Yes	Yes
𝐹2	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
𝐹3	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
𝐹4	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
𝐹5	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes
𝐹6	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes
𝐹7	Yes	Yes	No	No	Yes
𝐹8	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes
𝐹9	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes
𝐹10	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes
𝐹11	No	Yes	No	No	Yes
𝐹12	No	Yes	No	No	Yes
𝐹13	No	Yes	No	Yes	Yes
𝐹14	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
𝐹15	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
𝐹16	No	No	No	No	No

Notes: 𝐹₁: whether it protects against strong replay attacks or not; 𝐹₂: whether it protects against man-in-the-middle attacks or not; 𝐹₃: whether it protects against privileged insider attacks or not; 𝐹₄: whether it protects against impersonation attacks or not; 𝐹₅: whether it protects against stolen smart card attacks or not; 𝐹₆: whether it protects against password guessing attacks or not; 𝐹₇: whether it protects against denial-of-service attacks or not; 𝐹₈: whether it provides mutual authentication or not; 𝐹₉: whether it provides user anonymity property or not; 𝐹₁₀: whether it establishes a secret session key between 𝑈_𝑖 and 𝑆_𝑗 after successful authentication or not; 𝐹₁₁: whether it provides formal security proof or not; 𝐹₁₂: whether it provides formal security verification or not; 𝐹₁₃: whether it provides session key security or not; 𝐹₁₄: whether it supports local password verification or not; 𝐹₁₅: whether it provides password changing freely and correctly or not; 𝐹₁₆: whether it requires any password verification table or not.