1. Rating Technical quality 4: Contents are mostly correct. Some improvements suggested below. Originality 3: No significantly new ideas, but good analysis of current state Editorial quality 5: Clear, understandable and easy to read Overall grade (overall, how do you rate this paper?) 4: Very good Confidence (how confident are you about this review?) 1: This is a completely new subject to me; I made educated guesses 2. Detailed comments 2a. Technical quality In this paper are examined the differences of ad-hoc wireless network and the problems occuring during the initial setup of a security association. In addition, paper provides a method called "Physical Contact" to guarantee the reliable first connect between two devices for subsequent secure communication. Questions considered are how to indetify other peers and authenticate their claims, how can be trusted the strangers and how to build up the basic trust and exchange secrecy for subsequent secure communication in an open envi- ronment. Strengths of the paper are that it is easy to read and it gives a good introduction to the central concepts of the topic. Weakness of the paper is that it is quite short-spoken. The topic is such practical that it would not be difficult to add few more detailed examples. Paper provides a good survey of the state of the art at the topic of physical contact in ad-hoc wireless networks. 2b. Originality I think that some of the ideas presented in the paper are new. 2c. Editorial quality Abstract describes the contents of the paper well. The Introduction section gives a practical example of the topic and introduces the questions that arises from that. It also explains well the contents of the paper. -(section 2, Demonstrative Identification) "callee" ? -Only picture provided is about very general and know concept but nothing is shown in pictures about the solutions that are examined in the paper. -Three and a half pages is a bit shortish survey.