Design of Web Login Security System using ElGamal Cryptography

Yudhi Arta, Hendra Pratama, Apri Siswanto, Abdul Syukur and Panji Rachmat Setiawan

Department of Informatics Engineering, Universitas Islam Riau, Pekanbaru, Indonesia

Keywords:

Web Login, ElGamal, Cryptography.

Abstract:

The login system is a process for accessing a computer by entering the identity of the user and the password

to obtain permissions using the destination computer resources. In an information system security issues and

maintaining data conﬁdentiality is one important aspect. However, these security issues often get less attention

from the owners and managers of information systems. If talking about security issues related to the use of

computers, it is difﬁcult to separate it with the login process. Login aims to provide security services on the

system. In this research used ElGamal cryptography algorithm to secure username and password in web login.

The security level of this algorithm is based on the problem of discrete logarithms in the multiplication group

of prime modulo primes. This algorithm includes asymmetric cryptography algorithms that use two key types,

namely public key and secret key. The data contained in the login is secured by using ElGamal algorithm, so

the username and password entered into the database are already in the form of ciphertext.

1 INTRODUCTION

The login system is the process of accessing a com-

puter by entering the identity of the user and password

to get access rights using the destination computer re-

sources. When logging in to enter the system, the user

will be asked to enter a user identity such as user id

and password in anticipation of system security. Pass-

words can be changed according to needs while user

id is never changed because it is a unique identity that

refers to a particular user.

Information system on security issues and main-

taining data conﬁdentiality is one important aspect.

But this security problem often gets less attention

from the owners and managers of information sys-

tems (Arta et al., 2018). Security issues are second

or even last in the list of things that are considered

important(Arta, 2017; Novendra et al., 2018).

Internet users, usually using internet facilities to

carry out the process of changing information. Data

security is very important. The need for information

makes website developers present a variety of ser-

vices for users (Dharmawan et al., 2013). But most

of the website developers ignore system security on

the website. The most widely used attack by these

attackers is the SQL Injection attack. This study fo-

cused on securing the system using the Rijndael algo-

rithm to encrypt data (Minier, 2017). The Rijndael al-

gorithm was chosen as a cryptographic algorithm that

can protect information well and efﬁciently in its im-

plementation and was named the Advanced Encryp-

tion Standard (Daemen and Rijmen, 1998; Daemen

and Rijmen, 2013). This algorithm will be embed-

ded in the system login to protect unauthorized ac-

cess from the attacker (Dawood and Hammadi, 2017;

Sajadieh et al., 2017). The results of using the Rijn-

dael algorithm can protect the login system properly

so that the system is declared safe from the attackers

(Kuo and Verbauwhede, 2001).

Computer network security is part of a system that

is very important to maintain data validity and in-

tegrity and ensure availability of services for its users

(Arta et al., 2016). The current network intruder de-

tection system is generally able to detect various at-

tacks but is unable to take further action. But on the

one hand, hu-mans are very dependent on information

systems. This has caused the statistics of network se-

curity incidents to continue to increase sharply from

year to year (Namjoshi and Narlikar, 2014; Waisman

et al., 2007). This is due to the people’s lack of con-

cern for network security systems. We need a sys-

tem that can help network administrators to be used

as a network trafﬁc monitor with Intrusion Prevention

System (IPS) which is a combination of blocking ca-

pabilities from Firewall (Giokas, 2016).

268

Arta, Y., Pratama, H., Siswanto, A., Syukur, A. and Setiawan, P.

Design of Web Login Security System using ElGamal Cryptography.

DOI: 10.5220/0009186802680273

In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Science, Engineering and Technology (ICoSET 2019), pages 268-273

ISBN: 978-989-758-463-3

2 ElGamal ENCRYPTION

The process of key formation is the process of deter-

mining a number which will then be used as a key

in the process of encryption and decryption of mes-

sages(Hashim, 2014). The key for encryption is gen-

erated from the p value, g, y while the decryption key

consists of the value x, p (Makkaoui et al., 2016).

each value has requirements that must be met. Rare

in making keys are as follows:

• Primes p, with p values > 255.

• Select a random number g with the condition g <

• Select a random number x with the condition 1 <

x < p-2.

• Calculate y = g * x mod p.

The public key is y, g, p while the private key is

x. the value of y, g, and p is not save secret while the

value of x must be kept secret because it is a private

key to describe plaintext (Kiltz and Pietrzak, 2010;

Tsiounis and Yung, 1998; Weinberger et al., 2006).

3 RESULT AND DISCUSSION

3.1 Username Encryption Process with

ElGamal Algorithm

In this section a comparison will be made between

the ElGamal login username and the standard login

on the web login system using ElGamal cryptography,

the results of the comparison can be seen in table 1.

The process in table 1 above, is the result of the

encryption process using the ElGamal method. Below

this is the process of an ElGamal method at work.

• If the testing system uses a username: 23081990,

Number of characters: 59, Uppercase: 0, Small

letters: 0, Numbers: 8, special character: 0, Other:

15, Results: 8.81.

• If the testing system uses username: abcd1234,

Number of characters: 58, Uppercase: 0, Small

letters: 4, Numbers: 8 special character: 0, Other:

15, Result: 4,058.

• If the testing system uses username: AbCd1234,

Number of characters: 56, Upper-case: 2, Small

letters: 2, Numbers: 4, special character: 0, Other:

15, Result: 4,058.

• If the test system uses a username: Ac54$# h,

Number of characters: 50, Uppercase: 1, Small

letter: 2, Numbers: 2, Special character: 2, Other:

13, Result: 23,941.

• If the testing system uses a username: 6$ Ab788,

Number of characters: 50, Uppercase: 1, Small

letter: 1, Number: 3, Special character: 1, Other:

13, Result: 19.981.

• If the test system uses username: aaD#6754,

Number of characters: 57, Uppercase: 1, Small

letter: 2, Number: 4, special character: 1, Other:

15, Result: 4,995.

• If the testing system uses username: &*$# 9764,

Number of characters: 59, Uppercase: 0, Small

letters: 0, Number: 4, Special character: 4, Other:

15, Result: 9,313.

The process in table 2 above, is the result of the

encryption process using the standart character. Be-

low this is the process of standard login process test-

ing

• If the test system uses a username: 23081990,

Number of characters: 8, Large letters: 0, Lower

case letters: 0, Numbers: 8, character specials: 0,

Other: 0 Result: 0.

• If the testing system uses username: abcd1234,

Number of characters: 8, Large letters: 0, Lower-

case letters: 4, Numbers: 8, Special characters: 0,

Other: 0, Results: 0.13.

• If the testing system uses username: AbCd1234,

Number of characters: 8, Large letters: 2, Lower-

case letters: 2, Numbers: 4, Special characters: 0,

Other: 0, Results: 0.13.

• If the testing system uses a username: Ac54$#h,

Number of characters: 7, Large letters: 1, Lower-

case: 2, numbers: 2, special character: 2, Other:

0, Results: 0.5.

• If the testing system uses a username: 6$Ab788,

Number of characters: 7, Large letters: 1, Lower-

case: 1, Number: 3, Special characters: 1, Other:

0, Result: 0.2.

• If the testing system uses username: aaD#6754,

Number of characters: 8, Large letters: 1, Lower-

case: 2, Number: 4, Special character: 1, Other:

0, Results: 0.16.

• If the testing system uses username: &*$# 9764,

Number of characters: 8 ,Large letters: 0, Lower

case letters: 0, Numbers: 4, special character: 4,

Other: 0, Results: 0.31.

In table 1 dan 2 above can be seen the comparison

between the ElGamal login username and the stan-

dard login that has been done. Then the comparison

results will be accumulated into a graph and can be

seen in ﬁgure 1.

In Figure 1, the average time of the encryption and

decryption results of each username gets an ElGamal

Design of Web Login Security System using ElGamal Cryptography

269

Table 1: Username for ElGamal Login Testing.

ElGamal

Exam Username Char Encryp char(U) Char(L) Number Special(A) Other Result

1 23081990 59 0 0 8 0 15 8.81

2 abcd1234 58 4 4 0 15 4.05

3 AbCd1234 56 2 2 4 0 15 4.05

4 Ac54$#h 50 2 1 2 2 13 23.9

5 6$Ab788 50 1 2 3 1 13 19.9

6 aaD#6754 57 1 2 4 1 15 4.99

7 &*$#9764 59 0 0 4 4 15 9.31

Table 2: Username for Standard Login Testing.

Standard

Exam Username Char Encryp char(U) Char(L) Number Special(A) Other Result

1 23081990 8 0 8 0 0

2 abcd1234 8 4 4 0 0.13

3 AbCd1234 8 2 2 4 0 0.13

4 Ac54$#h 7 2 1 2 2 0 0.5

5 6$Ab788 7 1 2 3 1 0 0.2

6 aaD#6754 8 1 2 4 1 0 0.16

7 &*$#9764 8 0 0 4 4 0 0.31

Figure 1: Username Average (Second).

value: 27, 87 and standard: 0.2. Processing requires

a longer span of time than the standard username be-

cause each process from ElGamal requires the inser-

tion of a value before entering the username.

3.2 Password Encryption Process with

ElGamal Algorithm

In this section a comparison will be made between the

ElGamal login password and the standard login on the

web login system using ElGamal cryptography, the

results of the comparison can be seen in table 3.

When a password is given a character using stan-

dard letters, the time required does not take a long

process of about 13 seconds. For ElGamal use using

ASCII numbers, it will take quite a long time. The

combination of standard letters and also ASCII num-

bers is a safe step.

Password ElGamal Process Testing

• If the testing system uses a username: kauy984,

number of characters: 51, uppercase: 3, lower-

case: 1, number: 3, special characters: 0, other:

13, Result: 16,235.

• If the test system uses username: abdx*&#, num-

ber of characters: 53, uppercase: 2, lowercase: 2,

numbers: 0, special characters: 3, other: 13, Re-

sults: 53.99.

• If the testing system uses username: abcd1234,

number of characters: 56, uppercase: 2, lower-

case: 2, numbers: 4, character specials: 0, other:

15, Results: 4,058.

• If the testing system uses a username: 65*&

%k,

number of characters: 53, uppercase: 0, lower-

case: 1, number: 2, special characters :4, other:

13, Results: 63,941.

• If the test system uses username: 6$ab788, num-

ber of characters: 50, uppercase: 1, lowercase: 1,

number: 3, special characters: 1, other: 13, re-

sults: 19.981.

• If the test system uses username: aad#6754, num-

ber of characters: 57, uppercase: 1, lowercase :2,

number: 4, special characters: 1, other: 15, Re-

sults: 4.995.

• If the test system uses username: &*$# 9764,

number of characters: 59, uppercase: 0, lower-

ICoSET 2019 - The Second International Conference on Science, Engineering and Technology

270

Table 3: Password for ElGamal Login Testing.

ElGamal

Exam Password Char Encryp char(U) Char(L) Number Special(A) Other Result

1 kAUY984 51 3 1 3 13 16.2

2 abDX*&# 53 2 2 0 3 15 53.9

3 AbCd1234 56 2 2 4 15 4.05

4 65*&ˆ%k 53 0 1 2 4 13 63.9

5 6$Ab788 50 1 2 3 1 13 19.9

6 aaD#6754 57 1 2 4 1 15 4.99

7 &*$#9764 59 0 0 4 4 15 9.31

case: 0, number: 4, special characters: 4, other:

15, Results: 9,313.

The results from table 4 that use standard num-

bers, are not much different from previous experi-

ments. And for the average results of the above test is

0.23 seconds.

Standart Password Process Testing

• If the test system uses username: kauy984, num-

ber of characters: 7, uppercase letters: 4, lower-

case letters: 0, numbers: 3, character specials: 0,

other: 0, Results: 0.01.

• If the testing system uses username: abdx*&#,

number of characters: 7, uppercase: 2, lowercase:

2, numbers: 0, special characters: 3, other: 0, Re-

sults: 0.44.

• If the test system uses username: abcd1234, num-

ber of characters: 8, uppercase: 2, lowercase: 2,

numbers: 4, special characters: 0, other: 0, Re-

sults: 0.13.

• If the test system uses a username: 65*&*%k,

number of characters: 7, uppercase: 0, lowercase:

1, number: 2, special characters: 4, other: 0, re-

sults: 0.4.

• If the testing system uses a username: 6$ ab788,

number of characters: 8, uppercase: 1, lowercase:

1, number: 3, special characters: 1, other: 0, Re-

sult: 0.2.

• If the test system uses username: aad#6754, num-

ber of characters: 8, uppercase: 1, lowercase: 2,

number: 4, special characters: 1, other: 0, Result:

0.16.

• If the test system uses username: &*$# 9764,

number of characters: 8, uppercase letters: 0, low-

ercase letters: 0, numbers: 4, character specials:

4, other: 0, Results: 0.31.

In table 2 above can be seen the comparison be-

tween the ElGamal login username and the standard

will be accumulated into a graph and can be seen in

ﬁgure 2.

Figure 2: Password Average (Second).

In Figure 2, it can be seen that the process of in-

serting a value into a password takes time. This value

is used for comparison when a password is to be tested

if it is security, it will take a longer time than just us-

ing a password that does not use ElGamal. This is

a subjective assessment for a password security trial.

for the average process of a password using the ElGa-

mal method and ASCII numbers, it takes 24.64 sec-

onds.

The following is the comparative result of calcu-

lations based on ElGamal and Standard login. To

increase the security of the username and password

on the ElGamal encryption login, it should be added

to the length of the character, because the more the

length of characters, the more difﬁcult the hackers in-

tend to break into ElGamal encryption login system.

The graph of these methods are shown in ﬁgure 3.

4 CONCLUSIONS

From the comparison test results above, it can be con-

cluded that the level of security and average hourly for

comparison testing Elgamal login username: 10.73

and for testing the comparison of standard login user-

name: 0.20. Then for testing the comparison of Elga-

Design of Web Login Security System using ElGamal Cryptography

271

Table 4: Password for Standart Login Testing.

Standard

Exam Password Char Encryp char(U) Char(L) Number Special(A) Other Result

1 kAUY984 7 3 1 3 0 0.01

2 abDX*&# 7 2 2 0 3 0 0.44

3 AbCd1234 8 2 2 4 0 0.13

4 65*&ˆ%k 7 0 1 2 4 0 0.4

5 6$Ab788 7 1 2 3 1 0 0.2

6 aaD#6754 8 1 2 4 1 0 0.16

7 &*$#9764 8 0 0 4 4 0 0.31

Table 5: Comparison of Username Password.

USERNAME ElGamal Standard PASSWORD ElGamal Standard

23081990 8.81 0 kAUY984 16.235 0.01

abcd1234 4.058 0.13 abDX*&# 531.99 0.44

AbCd1234 4.058 0.13 AbCd1234 4.058 0.13

Ac54$#h 63.941 0.5 65*&ˆ%k 63.941 0.4

6$Ab788 19.981 0.2 6$Ab788 19.981 0.2

aaD#6754 4.995 0.16 aaD#6754 4.995 0.16

&*$#9764 9.313 0.31 &*$#9764 9.313 0.31

Average 10.73 0.20 Average 24.64 0.23

Figure 3: Graph Comparison ElGamal And Standard Login

(a) Top and (b) bottom views.

mal login passwords: 24.64 and for testing the com-

parison of standard login passwords: 0.23.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We would like to express our gratitude to the Univer-

sitas Islam Riau for the fund this project.

REFERENCES

Arta, Y. (2017). Implementasi intrusion detection system

pada rule based system menggunakan sniffer mode

pada jaringan lokal. IT Journal Research and Devel-

opment, 2(1):43–50.

Arta, Y., Kadir, E. A., and Suryani, D. (2016). Knop-

pix: Parallel computer design and results comparison

speed analysis used amdahl theory. In 2016 4th Inter-

national Conference on Information and Communica-

tion Technology (ICoICT), pages 1–5. IEEE.

Arta, Y., Syukur, A., and Kharisma, R. (2018). Simulasi

implementasi intrusion prevention system (ips) pada

router mikrotik. IT JOURNAL RESEARCH AND DE-

VELOPMENT, 3(1):104–114.

Daemen, J. and Rijmen, V. (1998). The block cipher Rijn-

dael. In International Conference on Smart Card Re-

search and Advanced Applications, pages 277–284.

Daemen, J. and Rijmen, V. (2013). The design of Rijndael:

AES-the advanced encryption standard. Springer Sci-

ence & Business Media.

Dawood, O. A. and Hammadi, O. I. (2017). An analyt-

ical study for some drawbacks and weakness points

ICoSET 2019 - The Second International Conference on Science, Engineering and Technology

272

of the AES cipher (rijndael algorithm). In The 1 st

International Conference on Information Technology

(ICoIT17), page 126.

Dharmawan, E. A., Yudaningtyas, E., and Sarosa, M.

(2013). Perlindungan Web pada Login Sistem

Menggunakan Algoritma Rijndael. Jurnal EECCIS,

7(1):77–84.

Giokas, I. (2016). April 19). Systems and methods for self-

tuning network intrusion detection and prevention.

Kiltz, E. and Pietrzak, K. (2010). Leakage resilient elgamal

encryption. In International Conference on the Theory

and Application of Cryptology and Information Secu-

rity, pages 595–612.

Kuo, H. and Verbauwhede, I. (2001). Architectural opti-

mization for a 1. 82 Gbits/sec VLSI implementation

of the AES Rijndael algorithm.

Makkaoui, E., K., B.-H., A., and Ezzati, A. (2016).

Cloud-ElGamal: An efﬁcient homomorphic encryp-

tion scheme. In 2016 International Conference

on Wireless Networks and Mobile Communications

(WINCOM), pages 63–66.

Minier, M. (2017). Improving impossible-differential at-

tacks against Rijndael-160 and Rijndael-224. Designs,

Codes and Cryptography, pages 117–129.

Namjoshi, K. S. and Narlikar, G. J. (2014). March 25).

Method and apparatus for pattern matching for intru-

sion detection/prevention systems.

Novendra, Y., Arta, Y., and Siswanto, A. (2018). Anal-

isis perbandingan kinerja routing ospf dan eigrp.

IT JOURNAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT,

2(2):97–106.

Sajadieh, M., Mirzaei, A., Mala, H., and Rijmen, V. (2017).

A new counting method to bound the number of ac-

tive S-boxes in Rijndael and 3D. Designs, Codes and

Cryptography, 83(2):327–343.

Tsiounis, Y. and Yung, M. (1998). On the security of ElGa-

mal based encryption. In International Workshop on

Public Key Cryptography, pages 117–134.

Waisman, N., Paterno, H. A., Mata, C. L., and Tamaroff,

A. R. (2007). May 29). Methods and apparatus for

computer network security using intrusion detection

and prevention.

Weinberger, K. Q., Blitzer, J., and Saul, L. K. (2006). Dis-

tance metric learning for large margin nearest neigh-

bor classiﬁcation. In Advances in neural information

processing systems, pages 1473–1480.

Design of Web Login Security System using ElGamal Cryptography

273