An automated algorithmic trading platform logs high-frequency order requests to an external compliance vault. Following a significant financial anomaly, a senior trader asserts that a series of unauthorized trades attributed to their user account were forged by a malicious internal microservice rather than initiated from their terminal. To resolve the dispute, the security audit team must provide irrefutable proof of the trader's authorship as well as guarantee that the order data was not tampered with after creation. Which of the following security mechanisms best fulfills these requirements?
- Digital signatures generated using the trader's asymmetric private key paired with a public key infrastructure timestamping serviceAnswer
- BAES-256 Galois/Counter Mode (GCM) symmetric encryption applied to trade payloads using a shared vault secret
- CSHA-256 cryptographic hashes calculated for each order payload and stored in a database protected by role-based access control
- DMandatory multi-factor authentication (MFA) at terminal login combined with granular API authorization policies
Answer
Digital signatures generated using the trader's asymmetric private key paired with a public key infrastructure timestamping service
Digital signatures fulfill non-repudiation because they rely on asymmetric cryptography. Only the owner possesses the private key used to sign the transaction payload, creating a unique cryptographic proof of origin. Recipients verify signature validity using the sender's public key. Timestamping further ensures proof of existence at a specific time, preventing the trader from denying trade initiation.
Step-by-Step Solution
Key Concept
Non-Repudiation vs Integrity in Asymmetric Cryptography