Symmetric Authenticated Tunneling Protocol (SATP)

Executive Summary

Certificate-free symmetric tunneling for provisioned systems that cannot absorb asymmetric cost or trust sprawl

SATP is a fully symmetric authenticated channel protocol designed for deployments in which endpoints are provisioned in advance with secret material and the runtime system must remain small, deterministic, and free of public-key infrastructure. It combines a hierarchical derivation model, a two-packet server-authentication handshake, a memory-hard client authentication phase, and an AEAD-protected duplex data channel built from QRCS symmetric primitives.

Within the QRCS stack, SATP occupies the role of a symmetric authenticated tunneling layer for controlled infrastructures. It is not a generic public internet secure transport. Its strongest fit is where operators already control device enrollment, want to avoid certificate lifecycle management and asymmetric key exchange overhead, and need a post-quantum oriented tunnel whose behavior can be explained as deterministic derivation and strict state validation rather than negotiation.

This positioning reflects a deliberate architectural trade: SATP replaces flexible, negotiation-heavy handshake models with a pre-provisioned trust fabric and hierarchical key derivation system. Keys are issued, consumed, and erased in a controlled lifecycle, enabling forward secrecy and predictive resistance without reliance on asymmetric primitives. The result is a tunnel that behaves as a stateful, strictly validated channel, where every session is derived from known inputs, every packet is authenticated with explicit context, and failure conditions lead to immediate termination rather than degraded security states.

High relative value Role: Symmetric authenticated tunneling layer Primary buyers: Defense, aerospace, industrial, embedded, telecom infrastructure
Protocol At A Glance
Trust model Pre-provisioned symmetric hierarchy

A master derivation key creates server keys, server keys create device key trees, and servers reconstruct the active device leaf on demand rather than storing every client tree at runtime.

Handshake model Two packets for tunnel setup

Client sends device identity and nonce; server returns the authenticated validation hash under the newly derived channel. The repository positions the tunnel setup path at under one millisecond in the example implementation.

Packet model 21-byte authenticated header

Each packet carries a 1-byte flag, 8-byte sequence value, 8-byte UTC timestamp, and 4-byte payload length, with the serialized header bound as associated data for authenticated encryption.

Implementation profile Small deterministic symmetric core

The public repository describes a footprint under 30 kB flash and 4 kB RAM, aimed at embedded controllers, PLCs, aerospace devices, and other systems where asymmetric stacks are too costly or operationally undesirable.

GitHub Repository

The current repository README positions SATP as a certificate-free post-quantum tunnel with a two-packet handshake, one-time leaf consumption, and a compact embedded deployment profile.

Open Repository

Formal Analysis

Game-based treatment of channel authenticity, confidentiality, ciphertext integrity, replay resistance, and the bounded forward-secrecy properties of a provisioned symmetric hierarchy.

Open Formal Analysis

Technical Specification

Engineering description of the root, branch, and device key hierarchy, the 16-byte identity structure, the packet header, the handshake stages, and the operational state machine.

Open Technical Specification
Strategic Positioning

SATP is a replacement-class symmetric trust protocol, not a stripped-down variant of TLS

The design is aimed at systems where the primary constraint is not internet interoperability but controlled deployment, predictable cost, and long-lifecycle trust management. SATP therefore rejects both certificate-heavy secure-channel models and static shared-secret schemes that collapse under compromise.

Why the model is materially different

SATP uses deterministic symmetric derivation to remove online key distribution, certificate validation, and asymmetric exchange from the runtime tunnel path. That makes it structurally different from both KEM-based channel protocols and centralized ticket systems.

Dimension TLS / KEM Kerberos / PSK SATP
Crypto model Asymmetric + symmetric Symmetric + tickets Fully symmetric
Key distribution Negotiated online Central KDC service Pre-provisioned hierarchy
Session derivation Interactive handshake Ticket-mediated Single SHAKE expansion
Server state Moderate Persistent / ticketing Minimal / reconstructive
PQ posture Depends on KEM profile Limited Native symmetric posture

High-level technical rationale

The protocol resolves the central weakness of classical symmetric deployments by separating long-term provisioning material from per-session channel state. A device never carries a single static transport key. Instead, it carries a deterministic tree of one-time leaves derived from branch material it cannot reconstruct backward. The server carries only the branch derivation key and reconstructs the active leaf from the device identity at session time.

  • Server authentication is performed through a validation hash bound to the device leaf, the server secret STc, and a fresh client nonce.
  • Client authentication is completed under the newly established channel using a memory-hard verifier derived through SCB.
  • The protocol deliberately eliminates suite negotiation, certificate parsing, and runtime dependence on online trust services.
  • Session keys are derived deterministically from pre-issued key material and contextual inputs, ensuring consistent behavior and eliminating ambiguity in key agreement.
  • Replay protection and state validation are enforced through strict nonce handling and bounded session state, preventing reuse or reordering of authenticated messages.
From an acquisition standpoint, SATP is best understood as a symmetric alternative to tunnel protocols such as DKTP and QSTP for infrastructures where provisioning control is already available and asymmetric cost is strategically undesirable.
Architecture and Mechanism

Three-tier derivation, one-time device leaves, and a strictly ordered session lifecycle

The formal paper and specification describe SATP as a three-tier symmetric trust infrastructure composed of a master provisioning tier, a branch-server tier, and provisioned client devices. The operational benefit is scale without per-device server storage.

Master tier

The provisioning authority holds the master derivation key M = (mdk, mid, exp). This is the root from which branch-specific server derivation keys are generated, but it is not itself derived from higher-level material.

RoleDomain root of the symmetric hierarchy
OutputPer-branch server derivation keys and inherited expiration

Branch tier

Each server stores S = (sdk, sid, STc, exp), where the server derivation key is computed as sdk ← Shake256(mdk ∥ cfg ∥ sid). The server also stores the long-term validation secret STc shared with devices under that branch.

RoleRuntime derivation and device-leaf reconstruction
StateBranch derivation key, server identifier, validation secret

Device tier

Each device is provisioned with a deterministic key tree KTreei, a 16-byte identity string, the shared server secret STc, expiration metadata, and a memory-hard authentication verifier. Each leaf is consumed once and then erased.

RoleOne-time session leaf source and client authentication state
IdentityMaster, branch, epoch, service, device, and key index fields

Session establishment

The tunnel derives all session state from a client-generated 32-byte nonce Nh, the active device leaf Kc,i, and the fixed configuration string. The validation hash is

Server authentication value
Hc = Shake256(STc ∥ Kc,i ∥ Nh)

and the directional channel tuple is obtained through a single expansion, split into receive and transmit key/nonce pairs:

Channel derivation
X = Shake256(Kc,i ∥ cfg ∥ Nh)
(Rk, Rn, Tk, Tn) = X[0:32], X[32:64], X[64:96], X[96:128]
The public repository summarizes the tunnel setup path as a two-packet handshake: client sends device ID and nonce, server returns the authenticated session hash, and the transport channel is ready before the client authentication exchange begins.

Identity and key-tree structure

The specification defines a 16-byte device identity whose final four bytes encode the active key index. This allows the server to reconstruct the correct leaf on demand while the client advances monotonically through the tree.

Field Width Purpose
Master ID2 bytesIdentifies the root provisioning domain
Branch ID2 bytesSelects the branch server scope
Epoch Class2 bytesSupports bulk revocation and migration
Service ID2 bytesEncodes the access profile or service class
Device ID4 bytesUniquely identifies the client device
Key ID4 bytesMonotone index into the device key tree
Operational Profile

Authenticated headers, monotone sequence handling, and deterministic server reconstruction

SATP keeps runtime behavior deliberately narrow. The only plaintext handshake packet is the Connect Request. The Connect Response, the authentication request and response, and all established traffic are processed under AEAD with the serialized packet header bound as associated data.

Packet discipline

Field Size Effect
Flag1 byteDeclares the handshake or data-stage packet type
Sequence8 bytesEnforces strict ordering and rollback rejection
Timestamp8 bytesProvides freshness-window validation and replay filtering
Length4 bytesBinds the exact payload size into authenticated metadata

Because the header is authenticated as AEAD associated data, metadata tampering is not a secondary parsing problem. It becomes an authentication failure. The formal paper models replay resistance directly through the integrity of the AEAD layer together with authenticated sequence and time validation.

Post-handshake authentication and state progression

After the client verifies the server by comparing the returned Hc value to its locally computed value, it sends an encrypted authentication request carrying a device identifier and a memory-hard verifier Hpass,i = SCB(passphrasei). The server validates this pair against the provisioned record and then returns the encrypted server identifier.

Only after those checks complete do both sides transition to the established state. Invalid tags, unexpected sequence behavior, timestamp expiry, or application-level authentication failure all terminate the session and trigger destruction of active session state.

This produces a tunnel lifecycle with minimal runtime state and no online key-distribution dependency. The server reconstructs the active device key leaf when needed, derives the session tuple, and retains no full client key trees beyond the active session.
Security Model

Formal treatment covers authentication, confidentiality, integrity, and replay resistance under a symmetric hierarchy

The formal analysis models an active adversary with network control, oracle access, and selected device-key compromise powers. The protocol claims are expressed as explicit games rather than generic secure-channel language.

Security properties proved or reduced in the formal model

  • Channel authenticity reduces to the pseudo-random behavior of SHAKE-based derivation and correct validation of the server hash Hc.
  • Confidentiality of application data is reduced to the IND-CCA style security of the underlying AEAD channel.
  • Ciphertext integrity follows from AEAD verification with the packet header bound as associated data.
  • Replay resistance is enforced by authenticated sequence numbers and timestamp freshness checks.
  • Localized compromise is achieved because exposure of a device key affects that device, while branch compromise affects only its branch and the root remains the global trust anchor.

The main deliberate trade-off

SATP does not claim full forward secrecy in the same sense as an ephemeral asymmetric key-exchange protocol. The formal paper is explicit: because the client nonce Nh is sent in clear and the session tuple is deterministically derived from Kc,i, later compromise of the active device leaf allows reconstruction of that session from recorded traffic.

The protocol instead chooses a more controlled security model: single-use device leaves, session-key erasure at termination, memory-hard client authentication, and bounded compromise domains. That is the correct framing for SATP. Its strength is disciplined deterministic symmetric operation, not emulation of every property of KEM-based tunnels.

Deployment fit

Provisioned infrastructure is the primary deployment assumption

SATP is aligned with environments where devices are initialized under administrative control and expected to operate for long periods with limited software footprint, narrow trust assumptions, and tightly bounded runtime complexity. That includes embedded and industrial networks, aerospace and satellite systems, telecom or utility infrastructure, secure field equipment, and controlled service environments where certificate distribution and asymmetric negotiation are unattractive operational burdens.

Its practical value comes from the fact that the runtime tunnel path is entirely symmetric. Session establishment requires no signatures, encapsulations, or certificate parsing at the endpoint; only deterministic derivation, validation of a returned hash, and memory-hard client proof under the established channel. That makes SATP particularly useful where operators need a post-quantum oriented secure tunnel without inheriting the full complexity of PKI-driven transports. The reduction in protocol surface area directly limits implementation risk and simplifies both validation and audit. It also enables predictable performance characteristics, since all cryptographic operations in the data plane are symmetric and bounded in cost.

Deployment profile

SATP is not the broadest tunnel in the QRCS family, but it is one of the most operationally distinct. It occupies the symmetric end of the QRCS secure-channel spectrum and therefore complements rather than duplicates DKTP and QSTP.

Role in stackSymmetric authenticated tunneling layer for provisioned systems
Replacement caseStatic shared-secret tunnels, certificate-heavy embedded transports, selected PSK/KDC models
Primary buyersDefense contractors, aerospace systems, industrial control networks, embedded and IoT platform vendors, telecom infrastructure providers