Finite field algebraic coding theory for enhanced physical layer security in wireless communication networks
*Nikhat ParveenCorresponding authornikhat0891@gmail.comDepartment of Computer Science and Artificial IntelligenceCollege of Computing and Information TechnologyUniversity of BishaSaudi ArabiaView full profile → , Khair Ul Nisadrkhairulnisa@gmail.comDepartment of Computer Science and Artificial IntelligenceCollege of Computing and Information TechnologyUniversity of BishaSaudi ArabiaView full profile → , Parasa Gayatrip_gayathri@av.amrita.eduDepartment of Computer Science & EngineeringAmrita Vishwa VidyapeethamAmaravati, Andhra Pradesh, 522503, IndiaView full profile → , Kovvuri N. Bhargavibhargavinag@gmail.comDepartment of Computer Science and EngineeringAditya UniversitySurampalem, Andhra Pradesh, 533437, IndiaView full profile → , Ponnam Lalithalalitha_p@vnrvjiet.inDepartment of Computer Science & EngineeringVallurupalli Nageswara Rao Vignana Jyothi Institute of Engineering & TechnologyBachupally, Hyderabad, Telangana, 500118, IndiaView full profile → , Kuruvikulam Chandrasekaran Arunkchandran.arun@gmail.comAsia Pacific University of Technology and InnovationKuala Lumpur, 57000, MalaysiaView full profile → , Moligi Sangeethamoligisangeetha@cvr.ac.inDepartment of Computer Science and EngineeringCVR College of EngineeringHyderabad, Telangana, 501510, IndiaView full profile → , Anumula Sruthiasruthi@gmail.comDepartment of Computer Science and EngineeringKoneru Lakshmaih Education FoundationVaddeswaram, Andhra Pradesh, 522302, IndiaView full profile →
* Corresponding author · click or hover a name for details
- Received:
- 01 Nov 2025
- Published Online:
- 30 Sep 2026
- Article type:
- Research Article
- Language:
- EN
- Article no.:
- JDMSC-2790
- Pages:
- 3633–3641
Abstract
Physical layer security (PLS) draws on the natural randomness of wireless channels to deliver information-theoretic secrecy that does not depend on computational hardness assumptions. In practice, however, existing PLS schemes lose performance when channel conditions worsen and cannot guarantee authenticated secrecy against attackers with stronger antenna arrays. To address both problems, this paper presents a finite-field algebraic coding framework that combines error-correcting codes over GF(2m) with McEliece-type cryptographic encoding, giving reliable transmission and secrecy at once. A randomized parity-check matrix is derived from a Goppa code over GF(28); a secret permutation and a scrambling transformation turn it into the public encoding matrix, while LDPC soft-decision decoding at the intended receiver preserves throughput and leaves the eavesdropper with an NP-hard decoding task. A secrecy-capacity analysis of the Gaussian wiretap channel shows that the scheme still attains a positive secrecy rate when the eavesdropper’s channel is 3 dB better than the legitimate one, which conventional PLS methods cannot do. Tests over OFDM channels with Rayleigh fading give a bit error rate of 10-6 at SNR = 14 dB for the legitimate receiver, an encryption time of 8.4 ms per frame, and a channel capacity utilization of 0.94 bits per channel use, ahead of Reed-Solomon (0.88) and standard McEliece (0.79) under equivalent settings.
Keywords
Subject Classifications
References
[1] M. Wiese, J. Nötzel, and H. Boche, “The arbitrarily varying wiretap channel: Secret message transmission under adversarial attack,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 67, no. 1, pp. 394–427 (Jan. 2021).
[2] M. Baldi, M. Bianchi, F. Chiaraluce, J. Rosenthal, and D. Schipani, “Enhanced public key security for the McEliece cryptosystem using LDPC codes,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 67, no. 11, pp. 7456–7470 (Nov. 2021).
[3] N. Cai and R. W. Yeung, “Secure network coding on a wiretap network,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 68, no. 2, pp. 879–893 (Feb. 2022).
[4] M. R. B. Harrison and M. R. D. Rodrigues, “Imperfect secrecy in the wiretap channel with physical-layer security,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur., vol. 17, pp. 2201–2215 (2022).
[5] F. Oggier and B. Hassibi, “The secrecy capacity of the MIMO wiretap channel,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 57, no. 8, pp. 5441–5454 (Aug. 2022).
[6] M. B. Hossain, T. Islam, and A. Wahid, “Post-quantum code-based key encapsulation for IoT physical layer security,” IEEE Internet Things J., vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 2834–2848 (Feb. 2023).
[7] Y. Liu and W. Chen, “Rateless codes for adaptive physical layer secrecy in time-varying channels,” IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 71, no. 5, pp. 3012–3025 (May 2023).
[8] M. Hayashi and R. Matsumoto, “Secure multiplex coding with dependent and non-uniform multiple messages,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 68, no. 10, pp. 6415–6432 (Oct. 2022).
[9] Y. Peng, X. Li, B. Vucetic, and P. Fan, “Deep learning-assisted physical-layer authentication in wireless communications,” IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 71, no. 8, pp. 4562–4576 (Aug. 2023).
[10] S. Nair and A. Suresh, “Hybrid physical-cryptographic security framework for 5G millimeter wave networks,” IEEE Access, vol. 12, pp. 18421–18436 (Feb. 2024).
[11] S. Salunkhe, A. O. Mulani, D. Shahane, M. Rana, S. M. Shukla, and M. M. Jadhav, “Secure image transmission using chaotic encryption and DWT watermarking on reconfigurable platform,” J. Discrete Math. Sci. Cryptogr., vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 349–361 (2026).
[12] K. R. Chaudhari, A. O. Mulani, M. P. Gajare, V. Jadhav, P. Yawle, and A. V. Bang, “Bit error rate analysis of various error correction codes with concatenated RS-convolutional codes,” J. Discrete Math. Sci. Cryptogr., vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 199–214 (2026).
