Blockchain-Based Anonymous Authentication in Edge Computing Environment

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

(1)In section 4.2, why does it show unknown source?

(2)In Figure7, the subtitle and the figure should appear on the same page?

(3)The authors propose a blockchain-based identity architecture. However, the advantages of blockchain in this scheme are described in insufficient detail in this article.

(4)The related works has not covered the general aspect of edge computing, the following references are recommended: An Efficient Vehicle-Assisted Aggregate Authentication Scheme for Infrastructure-Less Vehicular Networks, CPP-CLAS: Efficient and Conditional Privacy-Preserving Certificateless Aggregate Signature Scheme for VANETs, PA-CRT: Chinese Remainder Theorem Based Conditional Privacy-Preserving Authentication Scheme in Vehicular Ad-Hoc Networks.

(5) For the security analysis in section 4.1, can a more detailed proof be given?

 

(6) There are few typos and grammatical errors in this paper, the authors should correct them and polish up some sentences in this paper.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors propose a blockchain-based anonymous authentication scheme based on the elliptic curve discrete logarithm problem for edge computing environments. A chameleon hash function is designed to dynamically construct authentication elements, reducing the authentication computation in the mutual authentication between terminal devices. The paper is well-written and scientifically sound, bringing contributions to the field. There are some minor editing requirements to correct some typos and some semantics in the text.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Abstract: Average

Keywords: Good

Introduction: Average

Literature Review: Average

Data Set: Average

Methodology: Good, but required more results on

Caption, Citations & Footnotes: Good

Pictures, graphs & Flowcharts: Average

Results: Weak

Conclusion: Average

Future Work: Poor

References: Average

----------- Overall evaluation -----------

This paper presents a blockchain-based anonymous authentication in edge computing environment.

Suggestion and Recommendation:

Why the concept of lightweight authentication used in this proposed work? Why this is better than the lightweight authentication mechanism for IoV, which was proposed by authors in 2022 (recently).

other concerns are:

1. In the introduction, the scientific problem of the existed evaluation is missing. It should be elucidated clearly in the initial paragraphs.

2. Please check author list and affiliations. It’s completely missing.

3. The authors should be rechecking the grammatical errors and typos issues in the complete manuscript.

4. Please provide a block diagram of the proposed work. It will improve the readability and understanding of the proposed hierarchy.

5. I suggest you explore more open research issues in this domain and add at least 4 open areas that need experts’ futuristic consideration.

6. Reference format must be uniform.

Authors are encouraged to base on recent references about Blockchain-based Anonymous Authentication in Edge Computing Environment using artificial intelligence, such machine learning, deep learning, with blockchain hyperledger technology.

7. Please improve contribution section along with distribution section as well. Till now, it is hard to understand the proposed hierarchy.

8. In methodology, only a single algorithm presented to demonstrate the working operation? authors should be clarifying the events of execution (one-by-one) for the whole process? Please elaborate.

9. Please provide a comparison table, where the features of the proposed work compared with the newly published state-of-the-art methods.

10. The topic is very good and unique but need to improve paper organization.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors have addressed all my concerns in the previous revision.

This paper could meet the publication requirements now.

 

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

We have re-written the abstract and improved the introduction in the revised manuscript.

Thank you again for your valuable comments on our manuscript. If you still have concerns about our revised manuscript, we would be happy to hear from you again!

Best wishes!

Authors

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

All my concerns are addressed properly. Please accept this version.

Thanks for the efforts. Appreciated 

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

We have re-written the abstract in the revised manuscript.

Thank you again for your valuable comments on our manuscript. If you still have concerns about our revised manuscript, we would be happy to hear from you again!

Best wishes!

Authors

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf