Physical Layer Security (PLS) exploits channel properties, where the attacker cannot decrypt the hidden message due to too many errors on his end compared to the legitimate receiver. This achieves Information-Theoretic Security. In contrast to regular cryptography, where the security is based on the secrecy of a key, which can be computed, Information Theoretic Security promises unconditional security. That means, the message is secure EVEN with the assumption that the attacker has unlimited computational capability.

A lot of PLS schemes are based on error correction codes, such as polar codes, convolutional codes or LDPC codes. [1]

Two main directions are possible for this seminar work:

• An in-depth explanation of some state of the art PLS scheme using error correction codes (such as the scheme in [2] using forward error correction) and evaluation in terms of use case scenarios and HW/SW codesign, advantages/disadvantages and identification of possible future work on this area.
• A historical overview of PLS schemes using error correction codes, their initial basis and their evolutions over time. Particular focus could be the explanation of the context and limitation of each scheme and the trajectory research took on the area over time. 

References:

[1] W. K. Harrison, J. Almeida, M. R. Bloch, S. W. McLaughlin and J. Barros, "Coding for Secrecy: An Overview of Error-Control Coding Techniques for Physical-Layer Security," in IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, vol. 30, no. 5, pp. 41-50, Sept. 2013, doi: 10.1109/MSP.2013.2265141

[2] Rongwo Xu et al 2024 J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 2829 012010, DOI 10.1088/1742-6596/2829/1/012010

Physical Layer Security (PLS) exploits channel properties, where the attacker cannot decrypt the hidden message due to too many errors on his end compared to the legitimate receiver. This achieves Information-Theoretic Security. In contrast to regular cryptography, where the security is based on the secrecy of a key, which can be computed, Information Theoretic Security promises unconditional security. That means, the message is secure EVEN with the assumption that the attacker has unlimited computational capability.

A lot of PLS schemes are based on error correction codes, such as polar codes, convolutional codes or LDPC codes. [1]

Two main directions are possible for this seminar work:

• An in-depth explanation of some state of the art PLS scheme using error correction codes (such as the scheme in [2] using forward error correction) and evaluation in terms of use case scenarios and HW/SW codesign, advantages/disadvantages and identification of possible future work on this area.
• A historical overview of PLS schemes using error correction codes, their initial basis and their evolutions over time. Particular focus could be the explanation of the context and limitation of each scheme and the trajectory research took on the area over time. 

References:

[1] W. K. Harrison, J. Almeida, M. R. Bloch, S. W. McLaughlin and J. Barros, "Coding for Secrecy: An Overview of Error-Control Coding Techniques for Physical-Layer Security," in IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, vol. 30, no. 5, pp. 41-50, Sept. 2013, doi: 10.1109/MSP.2013.2265141

[2] Rongwo Xu et al 2024 J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 2829 012010, DOI 10.1088/1742-6596/2829/1/012010

Physical Layer Security (PLS) exploits channel properties, where the attacker cannot decrypt the hidden message due to too many errors on his end compared to the legitimate receiver. This achieves Information-Theoretic Security. In contrast to regular cryptography, where the security is based on the secrecy of a key, which can be computed, Information Theoretic Security promises unconditional security. That means, the message is secure EVEN with the assumption that the attacker has unlimited computational capability.

PLS is usually limited in scope and not very performant. However, PLS methods give legitimate parties the possibility of exchanging secret keys for which potential eavesdroppers have zero information, thus achieving perfect security. This key can then be used in more performant symmetric encryption scenarios.

There are multiple attempts over the years since the discovery of the wiretap channel to create practical key exchange schemes using methods such as various channel properties, using Channel State Information (CSI) etc. [1]

Two main directions are possible for this seminar work:

• An in-depth explanation of some state of the art scheme for PLS key exchange (such as the scheme in [2] that includes AI) and comparison with regular computaional security in general (Diffie-Hellman, Post-Quantum Cryptography etc.) in terms of use case scenarios, advantages/disadvantages and identification of possible future work on this area.
• A historical overview of PLS key exchange schemes, their initial basis and their evolutions over time. Particular focus could be the explanation of the context and limitation of each scheme and the trajectory research took on the area over time. An initial starting point could be [3].

References:

[1] J. Zhang, G. Li, A. Marshall, A. Hu and L. Hanzo, "A New Frontier for IoT Security Emerging From Three Decades of Key Generation Relying on Wireless Channels," in IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 138406-138446, 2020, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3012006.

[2] J. A. Sanchez Viloria, G. Sklivanitis, D. Pados and E. S. Bentley, "AI-Assisted Physical Layer Key Generation for Secure Wireless Communications," 2025 59th Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems, and Computers, Pacific Grove, CA, USA, 2025, pp. 770-776, doi: 10.1109/IEEECONF67917.2025.11443725. 

[3] Wang, Y.; Du, Q.; Tang, X.; Song, H. Physical-Layer Key Generation Towards 6G: Overview, Challenges, and Evolving Designs. Electronics 2026, 15, 3772. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics15173772

Physical Layer Security (PLS) exploits channel properties, where the attacker cannot decrypt the hidden message due to too many errors on his end compared to the legitimate receiver. This achieves Information-Theoretic Security. In contrast to regular cryptography, where the security is based on the secrecy of a key, which can be computed, Information Theoretic Security promises unconditional security. That means, the message is secure EVEN with the assumption that the attacker has unlimited computational capability.

PLS is usually limited in scope and not very performant. However, PLS methods give legitimate parties the possibility of exchanging secret keys for which potential eavesdroppers have zero information, thus achieving perfect security. This key can then be used in more performant symmetric encryption scenarios.

There are multiple attempts over the years since the discovery of the wiretap channel to create practical key exchange schemes using methods such as various channel properties, using Channel State Information (CSI) etc. [1]

Two main directions are possible for this seminar work:

• An in-depth explanation of some state of the art scheme for PLS key exchange (such as the scheme in [2] that includes AI) and comparison with regular computaional security in general (Diffie-Hellman, Post-Quantum Cryptography etc.) in terms of use case scenarios, advantages/disadvantages and identification of possible future work on this area.
• A historical overview of PLS key exchange schemes, their initial basis and their evolutions over time. Particular focus could be the explanation of the context and limitation of each scheme and the trajectory research took on the area over time. An initial starting point could be [3].

References:

[1] J. Zhang, G. Li, A. Marshall, A. Hu and L. Hanzo, "A New Frontier for IoT Security Emerging From Three Decades of Key Generation Relying on Wireless Channels," in IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 138406-138446, 2020, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3012006.

[2] J. A. Sanchez Viloria, G. Sklivanitis, D. Pados and E. S. Bentley, "AI-Assisted Physical Layer Key Generation for Secure Wireless Communications," 2025 59th Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems, and Computers, Pacific Grove, CA, USA, 2025, pp. 770-776, doi: 10.1109/IEEECONF67917.2025.11443725. 

[3] Wang, Y.; Du, Q.; Tang, X.; Song, H. Physical-Layer Key Generation Towards 6G: Overview, Challenges, and Evolving Designs. Electronics 2026, 15, 3772. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics15173772