Optimal Grassmann Manifold Eavesdropping: A
Huge Security Disaster for M -1-2
Wiretap Channels
Dongyang Xu∗† , Pinyi Ren∗† , and James A. Ritcey‡
∗ School

of Electronic and Information Engineering, Xi’an Jiaotong University, China
Smart Networks and Ubiquitous Access Research Center, China.
‡ Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Washington, USA.
E-mail: {xudongyang@stu.xjtu.edu.cn, pyren@mail.xjtu.edu.cn, ritcey@ee.washington.edu }

arXiv:1803.02107v1 [cs.CR] 6 Mar 2018

† Shaanxi

Abstract—We in this paper introduce an advanced eavesdropper that aims to paralyze the artificial-noise-aided secure communications. We consider the M -1-2 Gaussian MISO
wiretap channel, which consists of a M -antenna transmitter,
a single-antenna receiver, and a two-antenna eavesdropper.
This type of eavesdropper, by adopting an optimal Grassmann
manifold (OGM) filtering structure, can reduce the maximum
achievable secrecy rate (MASR) to be zero by using only two
receive antennas, regardless of the number of antennas at
the transmitter. Specifically, the eavesdropper exploits linear
filters to serially recover the legitimate information symbols
and intends to find the optimal filter that minimizes the meansquare error (MSE) in estimating the symbols. During the
process, a convex semidefinite programming (SDP) problem
with constraints on the filter matrix can be formulated and
solved. Interestingly, the resulted optimal filters constitute a
complex Grassmann manifold on the matrix space. Based on
the filters, a novel expression of MASR is derived and further
verified to be zero under the noiseless environment. Besides this,
an achievable variable region (AVR) that induces zero MASR is
presented analytically in the noisy case. Numerical results are
provided to illustrate the huge disaster in the respect of secrecy
rate.
Index Terms—Physical layer security, eavesdropping, artificial noise, MISO, Grassmann manifold.

I. I NTRODUCTION
The research on physical layer security has been drawing
great attentions with various wireless technologies moving
forward. This protection technique, by exploiting the wireless
channel variations, can enhance the information secrecy of
network which is conventionally protected by the cryptography in the upper layers of network protocol stack. The initial
research on the physical layer security refers to the area of
information-theoretic secrecy in the wiretap channel which
consists of a source, a destination, and an eavesdropper that
attempts to intercept the communication between the source
and the destination [1]. The authors in [2] investigated a
fundamental secrecy measure called secrecy capacity which
is defined as the maximum achievable secrecy rate (MASR)
between the source and the destination while ensuring that
no information can be inferred by the eavesdropper. It was
shown that a non-zero secrecy capacity can be achieved
between the source and the destination if the channel to the
destination is better than that to the eavesdropper. Otherwise,
the temporal variations of the channel and the additional
degrees of multi-antennas have to be exploited to maintain a
positive secrecy rate [3], [4]. The key point is that the perfect
knowledge of channel state information (CSI) of the main

and eavesdropper channel is required at the source, which
however is an unpractical assumption [5].
Therefore, large amounts of research have been concentrated on the secure transmission under imperfect acquisition
of eavesdropper’s CSI at the source. Among those work,
artificial noise (AN), being emitted on top of the informationbearing signal to disrupt the reception at the eavesdropper,
gradually comes to be the commonsense of guaranteeing high
secrecy rate [6]. With the aid of multi-antenna channels, AN
can be placed in the dimensions that cause least interference
at the destination but engender dramatic difference between
the signal qualities at the destination and the eavesdropper.
There exist huge number of AN-based transmission strategies, such as the precoder design and power allocation mechanisms [7]–[10]. In a multiple-input-single-output-multipleantenna eavesdropper (MISOME) system where eavesdroppers are equipped with less antennas than the source, authors in [7] gave an analytical closed-form expression of an
achievable secrecy rate and determined an optimal transmit
power allocation between the legitimate signal and the AN
to maximize the secrecy rate. Authors in [8] studied the
AN based scheme in MIMO wiretap channel scenario and
presented that the achievable secrecy rate can however be arbitrarily far from the secrecy capacity if the eavesdropper has
more antennas than the source and destination. Authors in [9]
investigated the optimal physical-layer secure transmission
with artificial noise in the wiretap channel and analyzed the
impact of the number of transceiver antennas on the secrecy
rate. Authors in [10] considered secure downlink transmission in an AN-aided multicell massive MIMO system with a
passive multi-antenna eavesdropper. It shows that even with
AN assistance, secure transmission can not be guaranteed if
the number of eavesdropper antennas is too large. The above
AN based schemes assumed that the eavesdropper usually
adopt a theoretically capacity-achievable receiver to combat
AN. Note that this type of receiver is originally designed
without considering the artificial interference. However, there
are few literatures discussing the effect of receiver design on
the AN based schemes, especially from an eavesdropping
perspective. The resulted eavesdropper is therefore underestimated and mistaken to have to eliminate AN interference
completely by consuming large antenna resources.
To give a more comprehensive understanding of the functionality of AN mechanism, we in this paper first introduce
an optimal Grassmann manifold (OGM) receiver at the eavesdropper which can exploit the statistical property of received

data to combat AN. We can show that secrecy protection
usually achieved by AN can be completely broken down by
the eavesdropper with only two receive antennas, no matter
how many antennas have been equipped at the source. Our
contributions are detailed as follows:
1) Based on the covariance of received data, a whitening
operation is performed on the received data to eliminate the power influence of AN. Thereafter, a vectorbased projector is derived so that the eavesdropper can
identify the phase information of secrecy information
symbols from the whitened data. Finally, an explicit
expression of recovered data is presented but subjected
to an unknown filtering matrix.
2) Based on the calculation of the mean-squared error
(MSE) of estimated symbols, an optimization problem
of minimizing the MSE can be formulated in which the
filter matrix serves as the optimized variable. Particularly, this problem can be cast as a convex semidefinite
program (SDP) and solved with a closed-form optimal
solution. Interestingly, the solution includes a series of
filters which are verified to lie on a complex Grassmann
manifold.
3) Based on the optimal filter structure, the novel expression of MASR is derived. In the noiseless case,
the optimal power strategy of achieving MASR is
transformed into no power allocation for AN and zero
secrecy rate can be always induced. This security
disaster is further confirmed through simulations in a
wide range of node locations and under a large number
of transmit antennas. In the noisy case, an expression
of achievable variable region (AVR) is derived and
essentially constituted by several factors, such as, a
controllable unitary matrix, the eavesdropper’s noise
level and its distance to the source. To be worse, the
eavesdropper can control AVR and then cause zero
secrecy rate no matter how many antennas are utilized
at the source. We also simulate the AVR and confirm
its existence even when the legitimate destination is
located in various regions.
The remainder of this paper is structured as follows. Section II presents the system model overview. A novel eavesdropping threat and its technical modeling is given in Section III. An optimal grassmann eavesdropping manifold is
constructed in Section IV. Secrecy performance analysis is
performed in Section V. Simulation results are presented in
Section VI. Finally, we conclude our work in Section VII.
Notation: Boldface is used for vector a and matrix A.
AH respectively denotes the conjugate transpose of matrix
A. A (:, n) represents the n-th column of A. k·k denotes
the Euclidean norm of a vector or a matrix. E {·} is the
expectation operator. Re {·} and |·| respectively represent the
real part and the modulus of a complex number.
II. S YSTEM D ESCRIPTION
We consider a M -1-2 wiretap channel where a transmitter
Alice with M antennas communicates with a single-antenna
legitimate receiver Bob and is also eavesdropped by an
eavesdropper Eve with two antennas satisfying 2 < M .
We denote the i-th transmitted symbol at Alice as si ∈
C M×1 , i = 1, . . . , T . T represents the total number of
symbols (or channel uses) within each coherence interval.

$OLFH

%RE
M

0HVVDJH
RI%RE

(QFRGHU

3UHFRGHU Z

$UWLILFLDO
QRLVH

(QFRGHU

3UHFRGHU :⊥

&$&

α

"
'HFRGHU
0HVVDJHRI
%RE

− α

(YH
$GYDQFHG
ILOWHU
'HFRGHU
0HVVDJHRI
%RE

Fig. 1. Illustration of the security threat in artificial-noise-aided M -1-2
wiretap channels: An eavesdropper intends to exploit advanced receiver
filters to enhance the interception of information belonging to Bob.

The symbols received at Bob and Eve for i = 1, . . . , T are
respectively given by:
yB,i = hB si + nB,i
yE,i = HE si + nE,i

(1)

where hB ∈ C1×M denotes the channel from Alice to Bob.
HE ∈ C2×M denotes the channel from Alice to Eve. The
elements of hB and HE are assumed to be independent zeromean complex Gaussian random variables with unit variance.
The components of nB,i and nE,i are the equivalent noise
2
2
with power σB
and σE
, respectively. We assume nB,i =
−1/2
−1/2
e E,i where βB and βE are path
e B,i and nE,i = βE n
βB n
e B,i
loss factors respectively from Alice to Bob and Eve. n
e E,i are i.i.d. additive white Gaussian noise (AWGN)
and n
2
2
samples with variance σ
eB
and σ
eE
, respectively. That’s to say,
−1 2
2
2
2
there exists σB =βE σ
eB and σE = βE−1 σ
eE
. Also we have the
following assumption:
1) Channels obey the block-fading model where the channel state remains quasi-static over each coherence interval (or channel block), but becomes independent across
a different fading block.
2) T within each coherence interval is large enough to
allow for invoking random coding arguments [3].
3) hB is accurately estimated by Bob and is also known by
Alice using a noiseless feedback link from Bob and the
knowledge of both hB and HE is available at Eve [6].

As shown in Fig. 1, the key idea of AN proposed in [6] is that
Alice combines the information-bearing symbols intended for
Bob with the AN symbols which are generated into the null
space of Bob’s channel. Thanks to AN, the signal reception of
Eve can be disturbed while Bob is not affected. Thus positive
secrecy capacity can be achieved and huge secrecy rate gains
can be maintained. In this case, the transmitted signal vector
si at Alice is represented by si = vi +ni , i = 1, . . . , T where
vi ∈ CM×1 is the transmitted signal vector intended for Bob
and ni ∈ CM×1 is the AN vector. In particular, vi satisfies
vi = wxi where w ∈ CM×1 is the beamforming vector and
xi is the the information bearing symbol. AN, independent of
vi , satisfies ni = W⊥ ai where W⊥ ∈ CM×(M−1) lies in the
null space of HB . It is assumed that xi and elements of ai are
complex Gaussian distributed and independently transmitted
in time domain, with variance σx2 and σa2 respectively. Then
the symbols received at Bob and Eve respectively become
yB,i = hB wxi + nB,i , i = 1, . . . , T
yE,i = HE wxi + HE W⊥ ai + nE,i , i = 1, . . . , T

(2)

We consider that the total power per transmission denoted
by P satisfies P = σx2 + (M − 1) σa2 . We also denote the

fraction of total power allocated to the information bearing
signal as α and have:
σx2 = αP
σa2 = (1 − α) P /(M − 1), α ∈ [0, 1]

A. What We Originally Thought: Eavesdropper Suffers from
AN Interference
To begin with, let us focus on the traditional definition
of secrecy capacity which is based on the maximization
of mutual information difference. Note that the capacityachievable combiner (CAC) at Eve is not well specified.
When AN is introduced for Eve, the same methodology for
secrecy capacity is followed since Eve does not know the
specific value of AN and can deem AN as a colored noise
equivalently. In this context, the secrecy capacity and its
lower bound can be respectively represented by [6]:
σx ,σa

(4)

σx ,σa

+

where [x] = max {0, x}, and


σ2
2
CB = log2 1 + 2x khB k ,
σB


−1
CE = log2 1 + σx2 wH HH
E KE,1 HE w ,
CE,upper

where U ∈ C
is the unitary matrix and can be known and
arbitrarily configured by Eve. We define U as the transform
matrix. Then we can rewrite the signal model under α ∈
(0, 1) as follows:
YE = HS + NE




M − 1 H H −1
= log2 1 + −1
w HE KE,2 HE w
α −1

(5)
(6)

(7)

where w is the beamformer matrix satisfying w = hB /khB k.
H H
KE,1 = σa2 HE W⊥ W⊥
HE + I2 is derived under the noisy
H H
Eve case while KE,2 =HE W⊥ W⊥
HE is formulated in the
case of a noiseless eavesdropping environment which creates
an lower bound on the secrecy capacity [7].
However, the continual utilization of CAC is not feasible
for Eve because it can exploit the statistical property of
received data, not even necessarily distinguish between signals, and enhance the decoding efficiency of the information
symbols that was intercepted.


∆
σa UHE W⊥ , S =

σx UHE w

2
bS = R
b
R
Y E − σE I2

YE = HE wx + HE W⊥ A + NE

(8)

where YE = [yE,i∈N ] ∈ C2×N , x = [xi∈N ] ∈ C1×N ,
A = [ai∈N ] ∈ C(M−1)×N , NE = [nE,i∈N ] ∈ C2×N . N rep-

(10)

(11)
2×2

The whitening operation, defined as Q ∈ C , is performed
on Y E to eliminate the second-order statistical information,
which is given as follows:
b S QH
I2 =QR

(12)

After performing singular value decomposition (SVD) on
b S , we have R
b S = UΣUH . Based on equation (12), we
R
have:
(13)
Q = XΣ−1/2 UH , XXH = I2
where X ∈ C2×2 is an unknown matrix for further optimization. Then the signal after whitening is given as:
∆

(14)
Y∆ = QY=XVS+QNE


where V satisfies V = Σ−1/2 Σ1/2 0 VH . VH
is the right eigenmatrix
satisfying the matrix SVD with

H=U Σ1/2 0 VH . As we can see, any replacement
for the matrix X with other matrices satisfying equation (14)
leaves the covariance of Y∆ unchanged, which means that
the power influence of AN is removed. The same happens
when any replacement for unitary matrices V with other
H
unitary matrix. However, XV causes a phase error on the
symbol estimation of S at Eve.
2) Projecting the Processed Data onto a Basis: To eliminate the phase error, Eve is designed to project the whitened
H
data onto XV (:, 1) and to estimate the information bearing
symbols intended for Bob. We denote the projector as
H

In this section, we introduce the concept of OGM eavesdropping and show how Eve can exploit the statistical information of received signals to devise the advanced filter. Let
us consider the received symbols of length N (N ≤ T ) in
one channel block for Eve:



1) Whitening Data: We define the estimation
of covari.
H
∆
b
ance matrix of YE as RYE = YE Y E N and derive the
noiseless version as follows:

q = XV (:, 1) = QH (:, 1)
B. What Eve Can Actually Do: Introducing Statistical Filter
to Combat AN Interference



x
and
A
NE = UNE . Each of elements in x and A are respectively
power-normalized version of that in x and A. Based on this
model, we give the following steps regarding the novel OGM
filter design:
∆

where H =

+

CS,lower = max
[CB − CE,upper]+
2
2

(9)

2×2

Based on above AN based context, we in this section
introduce a novel statistical eavesdropping threat and give the
specific modeling details for this threat, following the analysis of secrecy capacity under traditional receiver assumption
for Eve.

and

YE =UYE

(3)

III. N OVEL E AVESDROPPING T HREAT AND I TS
T ECHNICAL M ODELING

CS = max
[CB − CE ]
2
2

∆

resents the time sample set defined as N = {t |1 ≤ t ≤ N }.
We consider a transformation satisfying:

(15)

2

It is obviously that there exists kqk ≤ 1. Based on the
overall two steps, we can have the following proposition for
the symbol-level filtering.
Proposition 1. Given the first column of matrix H, the
estimated version of the symbol vector x under the OGM
filter with the region α ∈ (0, 1) can be derived as follows:
b = qH QYE
x

(16)

The overall serial filtering process at Eve can be shown in
Fig. 2.

 H −1/2 H
H
H
2 −1
NMSE = H(:, 1) UΣ−1/2 Z I2 +σE
Σ
Z Σ
U H (:, 1) − 2H(:, 1) UΣ−1/2 ZH Σ−1/2 UH H (:, 1) +1

(19)

o
n
 H
2 −1
Z − 2Σ−1/2 UH H (:, 1) H(:, 1)H UΣ−1/2 ZH
L (Z, λ, µ, Ψ) = Tr Σ−1/2 UH H (:, 1) H(:, 1)H UΣ−1/2 Z I2 +σE
Σ
o o
n n
 

H
(21)
− λ Tr Σ−1/2 UH H (:, 1) H(:, 1) UΣ−1/2 ZH −1 − µ Tr ZH − 2 − Tr ΨZH
λ∗ =




H
H
2 −1 −1 −1/2 H
1 − H(:, 1) UΣ−1/2 Γ Σ−1/2 UH H (:, 1) H(:, 1) UΣ−1/2 I2 + σE
Σ
Σ
U H (:, 1)
H

2 Σ−1 ]
H(:, 1) UΣ−1/2 [I2 + σE

−1

Σ−1/2 UH H (:, 1)

IV. C ONSTRUCTION OF O PTIMAL G RASSMANN
E AVESDROPPING M ANIFOLD

−2

(23)

3DUDPHWHUFRQWUROOLQN
,QIRUPDWLRQUHFRYHU\OLQN

V (  8

$95FRQWUROOHU

In this section, we formulate an optimization problem of
minimizing MSE on the variable matrix X and derive an
optimal Grassmann manifold by solving this problem. Not
that we only consider the case where the power ratio satisfies
0 < α < 1 in the following. If AN does not exist (α = 1),
the conventional CAC receiver can be utilized at Eve. The
detection of whether AN happens can be based on the rank
b S . We do not specify the
detection of the covariance matrix R
details of detection but focus on the following filter design.

&6,SUHFRGHU
+ (  Z :A
V (

,QSXW

7UDQVIRUP

8

0DQLIROG
ILOWHU

Ȉ   8 +

4+

+ +( 

;

4

T+

Fig. 2. Architecture of the proposed OGM filter at Eve.

are given by:
H

2 −1
Σ−1/2 UH H (:, 1) H(:, 1) UΣ−1/2 Z I2 + σE
Σ
H



− (λ + 2) Σ−1/2 UH H (:, 1) H(:, 1) UΣ−1/2

A. Optimization Formulation
b and give the
Consider the MSE in estimating symbols x
symbol estimation error as follows:
∆

b − x=qH QY E − S (1, :)
∆x = x

(17)

with the NMSE defined as:

. o
n
∆
2
NMSE = E k∆xk N

(18)

After simplification, the NMSE can be derived as equation
(19) if we define Z=XH X. The optimization problem of
minimizing NMSE is built up as follows:

 H
2 −1
min Tr TZ I2 +σE
Σ
Z − 2TZH
Z

s. t.

2XWSXW

H

T = Σ−1/2 UH H (:, 1) H(:, 1) UΣ−1/2
H

H(:, 1) UΣ−1/2 ZH Σ−1/2 UH H (:, 1) − 1 ≤ 0,
Tr {Z} =2,
Z  0.

(20)
In this optimization, the second constraint is constructed
2
according to the principle of kqk ≤ 1. The third and fourth
constraint mean that matrix Z should satisfy the same rank
requirements as XXH .

B. Optimal Solution
We can easily prove that the above optimization is a
convex problem. Besides, the set of constraint functions is
convex and the Slater condition is satisfied. Therefore, the
KKT conditions are sufficient and necessary for the optimum
solution. Then we build up the Lagrangian as the equation
(21) and the KKT conditions for the optimization problem

−µI2 − Ψ = 0 (22 a)
n
o
H
−1/2 H −1/2 H
λ H(:, 1) UΣ
Z Σ
U H (:, 1) − 1 = 0 (22 b)
H

H(:, 1) UΣ−1/2 ZH Σ−1/2 UH H (:, 1) − 1 ≤ 0

Tr ZH − 2 = 0

Tr ΨZH = 0
Z0

(22 c)

(22 d)
(22 e)
(22 f)

Ψ  0, λ ≥ 0, µ ≥ 0 (22 g)

According to the equation (22 d) and (22 e), the solution
Ψ∗ should be equal to be zero matrix. Considering the rank
constraints on both sides of the equation (22 a), we can obtain
the solution µ∗ =0. Then we can get the closed form of λ∗
in equation (23) and then derive the solution Z∗ as follows:


2 −1 −1
(24)
Z∗ = {Γ+ (λ∗ + 2) ⊗ I} I2 + σE
Σ

where
Γ
is
the
null
space
of
matrix
H
Σ−1/2 UH H (:, 1) H(:, 1) UΣ−1/2 . Based on the equation
(13) and (24), a Grassmann manifold G (2, 2) can be thus
constructed as the following:

(25)
G (2, 2) = X ∈ C2×2 : XXH = I2 , XH X = Z∗

As a special case where the null space is a zero matrix, we
can derive a simplified version of Z∗ as follows:


2 −1 −1
I2 + σE
Σ
∗
Z =
H
2 Σ−1 ]−1 Σ−1/2 UH H (:, 1)
H(:, 1) UΣ−1/2 [I2 + σE
(26)
V. S ECRECY P ERFORMANCE A NALYSIS
In this section, we firstly derive the exact expression of
SINR in a closed form for Eve under the OGM filter. Then
we analyse the MASR under different noise level of Eve and

2
4
2
Ψ1 = σx2 σa2 A + σx2 σE
B, Ψ2 = σx2 σa4 C,Ψ3 = 2σx2 σE
B + 2σx2 σa2 σE
D,
 H
2
2
2
2
2
2
H
H
A = |h1 | kh4 k + |h2 | kh3 k − 2Re
h
h
h
h
,
B
=
|h
|
+
|h
2
3
1
1
4
2 ,
 2 | − 2Re h1 h



2
2
2
2
H
kh3 k kh4 k − 2 kh3 k + kh4 k Re hH
1 h 2 h4 h3 ,






2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
H
H
D = |h1 | kh4 k + |h2 | kh3 k − 2Re{hH
h
h
h
}
+
|h
|
+
|h
|
Re
h
h
−
kh
k
+
kh
k
Re hH
1
2
3
4
1 2 4 3
4 3
1 h2 .
(30)
4

2

4

2

2

C = kh4 k |h1 | + kh3 k |h2 | + |h1 | + |h2 |

2

show how Eve can achieve the eavesdropping disaster: zero
MASR.
A. Closed Form of SINR Expression
Theoretically, we assume the data length is enough large
b S can be precisely approximated
and the covariance matrix R
H
as HH . By using the OGM filter, the SINR of Eve can be
derived as the following:
i2
h
−1
2
H (:, 1)
H(:, 1)H HHH + σE
I2
SINRE =
(27)
2 H(:, 1)H (HHH + σ 2 I )−2 H (:, 1)
σE
E 2
For simplicity, we define the following equation:
∆

∆

h1 = U (1, :) HE w, h2 = U (2, :) HE w
∆

∆

h3 = U (1, :) HE W⊥ , h4 = U (2, :) HE W⊥

(28)

Then the exact expression of SINR at Eve can be expressed
as:
Ψ21
SINRE = 2
(29)
σE (Ψ2 + Ψ3 )
where Ψ1 , Ψ2 and Ψ3 can be shown in equation (30). Based
on this equation, we propose the following theorem:
Theorem 1. For the M -1-2 Gaussian wiretap channel, the
MASR is given by:
max

min CS

(31)

0 < σx2 < P
= 0 or σx2 = P

(32)

2 ,σ 2 ,σ 2
2
σx
a B σE ,U

where
CS =
with
CS−



CS−
CS+



σx2


= log2 

1+

2
2
σx
2 khB k
σB

1 + SINRE

+


(33)

and




CS+ = log2 

1+
1+

2
σx
2
2 khB k
σB

2
σx
2
2 kHE hB /khB kk
σE

+


(34)

When AN exists or equivalently 0 < α < 1, OGM filter
can be generated as shown in the above section. In this case,
the achievable secrecy rate can be easily expressed as CS− .
Otherwise, Eve adopts the conventional CAC receiver and
the achievable secrecy rate can be expressed as CS+ . Note
2
that the minimization operation is considered since σE
, U
can be optimized by Eve to reduce the secrecy rate. In what
follows, we will discuss the effect of equivalent noise levels
at Eve on the MASR performance.
B. Noiseless Case
In this case, the equivalent noise level is arbitrary small.
An intuitive interpretation is that Bob or Eve is much closer
to Alice [6] and/ or have very low noise level. In this context,
we have the following theorem:

2
Theorem 2. With σE
→ 0, the MASR is equal to zero.

Proof. let us consider the case where 0 < σx2 < P . The SINR
of Eve will satisfy :
2
SINRE σE
A2
→
σx2
C

(35)

The secrecy rate is given by:

+

σ2
2
1 + σ2x khB k
B

CS− = log2 
σ2 2
1 + σ2x AC
E

,

(36)

2 <P
0<σx

CS−
A2
2C,
σE

Note that
increases monotonically with σx2 when
khB k2
>
and decreases monotonically, otherwise.
2
σB
Therefore, the MASR is achieved at σx2 = P . At this
point, the achievable secrecy rate is transformed into CS+ .
2
Obviously, CS+ is equal to be zero when σE
→ 0. The proof
is completed.

C. Noisy Case
In this situation, the equivalent noise can not be ignored at
both Bob and Eve whose noise level and distance to Alice can
be arbitrarily managed. Besides, it is noted that the variables,
such as h1 ,h2 ,H3 , and H4 , in CS− , depend on Eve’s CSI,
Alice’s beamformer and U. As a feasible assumption, Eve is
2
enabled to obtain those available information. Especially, σE
and U are both controllable by Eve. Therefore, the resulted
SINR of Eve can be modified and redesigned by itself. Then,
we have the following proposition:
Proposition 2. Given perfect CSI and Alice’s beamformer
2
at noisy Eve, there always exist variables σE
, U such that
−
CS can be restricted to be zero; Particularly, CS− at high
SINR is equal to zero ∀P ∈ (0, ∞) if the following sufficient
condition is satisfied:



 2
B
B
2B
D
D
B
2
≤
2
, < ,
−
−
(37)
σE
A2
C
A
C
A
C

2
2
H E hH
σE
B khB k
(38)
2 <
σB
khB k2
whichs make log function to be monotonically increasing with
σx2 , or
 2



B
B
B
2B
D
D
2
σE
≥2
, >
−
−
(39)
2
A
C
A
C
A
C

which makes log function to be monotonically decreasing
with σx2 , or
2
khB k D
B
A2
≥
,
=
(40)
2C
2
σE
σB
C
A
which makes log function to be irrelevant with the transmission power. The values of A, B, C, D can be shown in
equation (30).




0.60 − 0.80i
0.06 + 0.61i 1.05 − 0.28i −0.49 + 0.16i
HE =
−0.36 + 0.47i −0.42 + 0.29i 0.09 + 1.53i 0.10 − 0.59i
√
 √


 ∗
−√0.2257 −√ 0.7743
HL = −0.71 + 0.12i 0.41 + 0.94i 0.20 + 0.91i −1.44 + 1.49i , U =
− 0.7743
0.2257
TABLE I
S IMULATION PARAMETERS AND VALUES

(43)
(44)

Simulation Parameters

Values

Path-loss model
Small-scale fading model
Length N of data
Noiseless case: dB , dE
Noisy case: available region of x, y, z
Maximum transmit power P
2 (10MHZ bandwidth)
Noisy case: noise power σ
eB

Eq. (26)
CN (0, IM )
200
 (symbols)

0, 104 (m)
(−∞, 0], [0, ∞), [0, 4]
35 (dBm)
−102 (dBm)

Proof. Let us focus on the monotonicity of the inner log
function in CS− . According to its high-order derivative, we
2
can prove that there exists available variables σE
, U such
that the log function is monotone. However, it is exhausting
to obtain a sufficient and necessary condition in the form
of an explicit expression of those variables. Particularly in
high SINR and 0 < α < 1, we transform the original CS−
 2
h
i+
4
2 2
4
σ
σa
C−2σa
σE D+2σE
B
into CS− = log2 σE2 khB k2 σ4 A
. Now
2
4
2 −2σ ABσ 2 +σ B 2
a
a
B
E
E
we introduce the sufficient condition to achieve zero secrecy
rate.
When the log function is controlled by Eve to be monotonically increasing with α, the condition (37), (38) has to
be satisfied. In this situation, the achievable secrecy rate
is gradually increased with the increase of transmission
power allocated for information bearing signals and the
maximum
will be achieved at α = 1. Thus the condition
2
σE
kHE hB /khB kk2
should be further satisfied to make
<
2
σB
khB k2
+
CS |α=1 zero.
Otherwise, in order to make the log function monotonically
decrease, we determine that the condition (39) should be
satisfied so that the maximum is achieved at α = 0.
Obviously, α = 0 means that there is no transmission process
and naturally indicates that the available secrecy rate is equal
to zero.
Finally, if log function in 0 < α < 1 is a constant with
the variable α, we determine the condition (40) to make CS−
zero. The proof is completed.

2
Moreover, we define the available variable pair as σE
,U
and collect those pairs that satisfy the above proposition
to construct an achievable variable region (AVR) for Eve.
Therefore, we have the following theorem.
Theorem 3. In noisy case, there always exists an AVR such
that MASR is equal to zero.
It is a natural result from the Proposition 2 since the CS−
can be reduced to be zero when 0 < α < 1 and otherwise the
CS+ can be controlled to be zero by Eve through a suitable
2
configuration of σE
.
VI. S IMULATION R ESULTS
In this section, we evaluate the secrecy performance of
M -1-2 wiretap channel model in the context of AN-based
transmission mode at Alice. We consider the average MASR

Average secrecy rate (bit/s/Hz)

12

10

AN under CAC receiver
AN under OGM receiver
8

MASR loss

6

Without using AN
4

2

0
0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

α
Fig. 3. Average secrecy rate versus the power ratio of α under two types
of receivers in the noisy environment.

performance under ergodic scenario and also determine a operation region achieving zero secrecy rate under one channel
block. Generally, the path loss expressed in decibels satisfies
the following:
 
d
P L (d) = P L (d0 ) + 10nlog10
(41)
d0
where d0 is the reference point at 1 km and n is known as
the path loss exponent. In this paper, we consider a practical
3GPP urban model where P L (d0 ) = 148.1 and n = 3.76.
βB and βE can be derived from dB and dE based on equation
(41). To better characterize the operation region of noisy Eve,
we define several metrics as follows:
 2 ∆
∆
∆
2
x = log10 σ
σ
eB , y = log10 (βE /βB ) , z = log10 (dB )
eE
(42)
When Bob is located in different regions z, x and y represent
the measures that noisy Eve could take to reduce the secrecy
rate to be zero. The detailed simulation parameters can be
shown in Table I.
Fig. 3 shows the average secrecy rate versus the power
ratio of α under different receivers at Eve. In this example,
the number of transmit antennas satisfies M = 10 and the
equivalent noise level of Bob is assumed to be equal to that
2
2
2
of Eve, that’s to say, σB
= σE
. We also fix the SNR P σB
at 30 in dB. As we can see, the average secrecy rate under
OGM filter increases with α and achieves the maximum at
α = 1 whereas the MASR under traditional CAC receiver
is achieved around at α = 0.5. Basically, the MASR under
OGM receiver is equal to that without using AN at Alice,
which means that the AN scheme is completely broken down
by Eve. This phenomenon in high SNR is in accord with the
result shown in the equation (36). The MASR loss can be as
far as 8 bit/s/Hz.
In Fig. 4, we present the operation region (x, y, z) which
is available for noisy Eve to cause zero secrecy rate. Alice
adopts the maximum transmission power shown in Table I.
For clarity, we consider one-time channel realization and

Average MASR (bit/s/Hz)

30

Under traditional CAC-based Eve
25
20
15
10

Under proposed OGM-based Eve

5

0
10000
5000

dL (m)

Fig. 4. Operation region (x, y, z) of noisy Eve under the channel model
∗
in equation (43) and (44) with the transform matrix U . Our strategy is to
achieve the condition (37) and (38).

Under traditional CAC-based Eve

Average MASR (bit/s/Hz)

25
20
15

Under proposed OGM-based Eve

10

10000

5

0
10000

8000

5000
dE
6000

4000

dL (m)

2000

0

(m)

0

Fig. 5. Average MASR versus the distance dB and dE in the noiseless case:
2 = σ 2 → 0.
σB
E

focus on arbitrary channel matrices. As an example, the simulated channel matrices and the generated transform matrix
are shown in equation (43) and (44). Note that the transform
matrix is always available and can be optimized based on the
channel matrices and precoders at Eve. As we can see, the
operation region is extensive. Especially, OGM based Eve
can achieve
 zero
 secrecy rate when z ∈ [0, 4] or equivalently
dB ∈ 1, 104 , by flexibly controlling its path loss and
reducing the noise level so that there exist y ∈ [0.5, 5.3]
and x ∈ [−13, 0].
Fig. 5 demonstrates the average MASR performance versus
the distance measure dB and dE . Alice adopts the maximum
transmission power shown in Table I. The power allocation
ratio in traditional AN based scheme is configured to be
0.5 [7] and the number of antennas is set to be M = 10.
In this case we assume that Bob has same noise level of Eve
and the noise level can approach zero. We can see that the
secrecy rate, even under the scenario where Bob tries its best
to reduce noise, has to be zero and becomes irrelevant to the
distances when the OGM-based Eve occurs. Therefore, the
traditional expression of secrecy rate under AN-based scheme
comes to be imprecise and the CAC receiver assumption for
Eve actually causes a huge security for the system.
Fig. 6 shows the average MASR performance under var-

0

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

M

Fig. 6. Average MASR versus the distance dB and M in the noiseless
2 = σ 2 → 0.
case: σB
E

ious dB and M in the noiseless Eve. Alice adopts the
maximum transmission power shown in Table I. In terms of
traditional AN based simulations, the location of Eve is fixed
at dE = 1000 and the power ratio is fixed at α = 0.55 which
is verified to be optimal in [7]. As we can see, the MASR
under traditional AN based scheme is gradually enhanced
with the increase of dB and M . However, the MASR under
OGM-based Eve is always equal to be zero. This result is
irrelevant to the variation of dB and the increase of M . This
is because the high-SINR level induced by the OGM filter can
suppress the high array gains which are brought by Alice for
Bob and usually guaranteed by very large number of transmit
antennas.
VII. C ONCLUSIONS
In this paper, we introduced a novel eavesdropping behavior which is targeted for AN based secure transmission. We
demonstrated how Eve utilized a series of optimal filters to
combat the influence of AN and proved that the maximum
achievable secrecy rate which is subjected to this advanced
eavesdropper was compelled to be zero in the case of both
noiseless and noisy case. Simulation results showed that both
the distance measure, either from Alice to Bob or to Eve,
actually could not eliminate or reduce this disaster impact.
This terrible phenomenon also occurred even though the
number of transmit antennas is increased significantly.
R EFERENCES
[1] A. D. Wyner, “The wire-tap channel,” Bell Sys. Tech. J., vol. 54, pp.
1355-1387, Oct. 1975.
[2] S. Leung-Yan-Cheong and M. Hellman, “The Gaussian wire-tap channel,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 451-456, July, 1978.
[3] Y. Liang, H. V. Poor, and S. Shamai, “ Secure communications over
fading channels,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 54, no. 6, pp. 24702492, Jun. 2008.
[4] A. Mukherjee, S. A. Fakoorian, J. Huang, and A. L. Swindlehurst,
Principles of physical layer security in multiuser wireless networks: A
survey,” IEEE Commun. Surveys Tuts., vol. 16, no. 3, pp.1550-1573,
Mar. 2014.
[5] A. Khisti and G. Wornell, “Secure transmission with multiple antennas
I: The MISOME wiretap channel,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 56,
no. 7, pp. 3088-3104, Jul. 2010.
[6] R. Negi and S. Goel, “Guaranteeing secrecy using artificial noise,”
IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 7, no. 6, pp. 2180-2189, Jun.
2008.
[7] X. Zhou and M. R. McKay, “Secure transmission with artificial noise
over fading channels: Achievable rate and optimal power allocation,”
IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 59, no. 8, pp. 3831-3842, Oct. 2010.

[8] A. Khisti and G. W. Wornell, “Secure transmission with multiple
antennasłPart II: The MIMOME wireltap channel,” IEEE Trans. Inf.
Theory, vol. 56, no. 11, pp. 5515-5532, Nov. 2010.
[9] N. Yang, M. Elkashlan, T. Q. Duong, J. Yuan, and R. Malaney, “Optimal transmission with artificial noise in MISOME wiretap channels,”
IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 65, no. 4, pp. 2170-2181, Apr. 2016.
[10] J. Zhu, R. Schober, and V. K. Bhargava, “Secure transmission in
multicell massive MIMO systems,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun.,
vol. 13, no. 9, pp. 4766-4781, Sep. 2014.

