KALwEN: a new practical and interoperable key management scheme for body sensor networks

Key management is the pillar of a security architecture. Body sensor networks (BSNs) pose several challenges–some inherited from wireless sensor networks (WSNs), some unique to themselves–that require a new key management scheme to be tailor-made. The challenge is taken on, and the result is KALwEN, a new parameterized key management scheme that combines the best-suited cryptographic techniques in a seamless framework. KALwEN is user-friendly in the sense that it requires no expert knowledge of a user, and instead only requires a user to follow a simple set of instructions when bootstrapping or extending a network. One of KALwEN's key features is that it allows sensor devices from different manufacturers, which expectedly do not have any pre-shared secret, to establish secure communications with each other. KALwEN is decentralized, such that it does not rely on the availability of a local processing unit (LPU). KALwEN supports secure global broadcast, local broadcast, and local (neighbor-to-neighbor) unicast, while preserving past key secrecy and future key secrecy (FKS). The fact that the cryptographic protocols of KALwEN have been formally verified also makes a convincing case. With both formal verification and experimental evaluation, our results should appeal to theorists and practitioners alike

Dynamic resiliency analysis of key predistribution in wireless sensor networks

Wireless sensor networks have been analyzed for more than a decade from operational and security points of view. Several key predistribution schemes have been proposed in the literature. Although valuable and state-of-the-art proposals have been made, their corresponding security analyses have not been performed by considering the dynamic nature of networking behavior and the time dimension. The sole metric used for resiliency analysis of key predistribution schemes is "fraction of links compromised" which is roughly defined as the ratio of secure communication links that the adversary can compromise over all secure links. However, this metric does not consider the dynamic nature of the network; it just analyzes a snapshot of the network without considering the time dimension. For example, possible dead nodes may cause change of routes and some captured links become useless for the attacker as time goes by. Moreover, an attacker cannot perform sensor node capturing at once, but performs over time. That is why a methodology for dynamic security analysis is needed in order to analyze the change of resiliency in time a more realistic way. In this paper, we propose such a dynamic approach to measure the resiliency of key predistribution schemes in sensor networks. We take the time dimension into account with a new performance metric, "captured message fraction". This metric is defined as the percentage of the messages generated within the network to be forwarded to the base station (sink) that are captured and read by the attacker. Our results show that for the cases where the static fraction of links compromised metric indicates approximately 40% of the links are compromised, our proposed captured message fraction metric shows 80% of the messages are captured by the attacker. This clearly proves the limitations of the static resiliency analysis in the literature

A Framework for Secure and Survivable Wireless Sensor Networks

Wireless sensor networks increasingly become viable solutions to many challenging problems and will successively be deployed in many areas in the future. A wireless sensor network (WSN) is vulnerable to security attacks due to the insecure communication channels, limited computational and communication capabilities and unattended nature of sensor node devices, limited energy resources and memory. Security and survivability of these systems are receiving increasing attention, particularly critical infrastructure protection. So we need to design a framework that provide both security and survivability for WSNs. To meet this goals, we propose a framework for secure and survivable WSNs and we present a key management scheme as a case study to prevent the sensor networks being compromised by an adversary. This paper also considers survivability strategies for the sensor network against a variety of threats that can lead to the failure of the base station, which represents a central point of failure.key management scheme, security, survivability, WSN

A Survey on Wireless Sensor Network Security

Wireless sensor networks (WSNs) have recently attracted a lot of interest in the research community due their wide range of applications. Due to distributed nature of these networks and their deployment in remote areas, these networks are vulnerable to numerous security threats that can adversely affect their proper functioning. This problem is more critical if the network is deployed for some mission-critical applications such as in a tactical battlefield. Random failure of nodes is also very likely in real-life deployment scenarios. Due to resource constraints in the sensor nodes, traditional security mechanisms with large overhead of computation and communication are infeasible in WSNs. Security in sensor networks is, therefore, a particularly challenging task. This paper discusses the current state of the art in security mechanisms for WSNs. Various types of attacks are discussed and their countermeasures presented. A brief discussion on the future direction of research in WSN security is also included.Comment: 24 pages, 4 figures, 2 table

KALwEN: A New Practical and Interoperable Key Management Scheme for Body Sensor Networks

Key management is the pillar of a security architecture. Body sensor networks(BSNs) pose several challenges -- some inherited from wireless sensor networks(WSNs), some unique to themselves -- that require a new key management scheme to be tailor-made. The challenge is taken on, and the result is KALwEN, a new lightweight scheme that combines the best-suited cryptographic techniques in a seamless framework. KALwEN is user-friendly in the sense that it requires no expert knowledge of a user, and instead only requires a user to follow a simple set of instructions when bootstrapping or extending a network. One of KALwEN's key features is that it allows sensor devices from different manufacturers, which expectedly do not have any pre-shared secret, to establish secure communications with each other. KALwEN is decentralized, such that it does not rely on the availability of a local processing unit (LPU). KALwEN supports global broadcast, local broadcast and neighbor-to-neighbor unicast, while preserving past key secrecry and future key secrecy. The fact that the cryptographic protocols of KALwEN have been formally verified also makes a convincing case

Resilient networking in wireless sensor networks

This report deals with security in wireless sensor networks (WSNs), especially in network layer. Multiple secure routing protocols have been proposed in the literature. However, they often use the cryptography to secure routing functionalities. The cryptography alone is not enough to defend against multiple attacks due to the node compromise. Therefore, we need more algorithmic solutions. In this report, we focus on the behavior of routing protocols to determine which properties make them more resilient to attacks. Our aim is to find some answers to the following questions. Are there any existing protocols, not designed initially for security, but which already contain some inherently resilient properties against attacks under which some portion of the network nodes is compromised? If yes, which specific behaviors are making these protocols more resilient? We propose in this report an overview of security strategies for WSNs in general, including existing attacks and defensive measures. In this report we focus at the network layer in particular, and an analysis of the behavior of four particular routing protocols is provided to determine their inherent resiliency to insider attacks. The protocols considered are: Dynamic Source Routing (DSR), Gradient-Based Routing (GBR), Greedy Forwarding (GF) and Random Walk Routing (RWR)