24,780 research outputs found

    Denial of service mitigation approach for IPv6-enabled smart object networks

    Full text link
    Denial of service (DoS) attacks can be defined as any third-party action aiming to reduce or eliminate a network's capability to perform its expected functions. Although there are several standard techniques in traditional computing that mitigate the impact of some of the most common DoS attacks, this still remains a very important open problem to the network security community. DoS attacks are even more troublesome in smart object networks because of two main reasons. First, these devices cannot support the computational overhead required to implement many of the typical counterattack strategies. Second, low traffic rates are enough to drain sensors' battery energy making the network inoperable in short times. To realize the Internet of Things vision, it is necessary to integrate the smart objects into the Internet. This integration is considered an exceptional opportunity for Internet growth but, also, a security threat, because more attacks, including DoS, can be conducted. For these reasons, the prevention of DoS attacks is considered a hot topic in the wireless sensor networks scientific community. In this paper, an approach based on 6LowPAN neighbor discovery protocol is proposed to mitigate DoS attacks initiated from the Internet, without adding additional overhead on the 6LoWPAN sensor devices.This work has been partially supported by the Instituto de Telecomunicacoes, Next Generation Networks and Applications Group (NetGNA), Portugal, and by National Funding from the FCT - Fundacao para a Ciencia e Tecnologia through the Pest-OE/EEI/LA0008/2011.Oliveira, LML.; Rodrigues, JJPC.; De Sousa, AF.; Lloret, J. (2013). Denial of service mitigation approach for IPv6-enabled smart object networks. Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience. 25(1):129-142. doi:10.1002/cpe.2850S129142251Gershenfeld, N., Krikorian, R., & Cohen, D. (2004). The Internet of Things. Scientific American, 291(4), 76-81. doi:10.1038/scientificamerican1004-76Akyildiz, I. F., Su, W., Sankarasubramaniam, Y., & Cayirci, E. (2002). Wireless sensor networks: a survey. Computer Networks, 38(4), 393-422. doi:10.1016/s1389-1286(01)00302-4Karl, H., & Willig, A. (2005). Protocols and Architectures for Wireless Sensor Networks. doi:10.1002/0470095121IEEE Std 802.15.4-2006 Part 15.4: wireless medium access control (MAC) and physical layer (PHY) specificationsfor low-rate wireless personal area networks (LR-WPANs) 2006ZigBee Alliance ZigBee Specification 2007WirelessHARThomepage 2012 http://www.hartcomm.org/Hui, J. W., & Culler, D. E. (2008). Extending IP to Low-Power, Wireless Personal Area Networks. IEEE Internet Computing, 12(4), 37-45. doi:10.1109/mic.2008.79Kushalnagar N Montenegro G Schumacher C IPv6 over Low-Power Wireless Personal Area Networks (6LoWPANs): Overview, Assumptions, Problem Statement, and Goals 2007Montenegro G Kushalnagar N Hui J Culler D Transmission of IPv6 Packets over IEEE 802.15.4 Networks 2007Shelby Z Thubert P Hui J Chakrabarti S Bormann C Nordmark E 6LoWPAN Neighbor Discovery 2011Zhou, L., Chao, H.-C., & Vasilakos, A. V. (2011). Joint Forensics-Scheduling Strategy for Delay-Sensitive Multimedia Applications over Heterogeneous Networks. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 29(7), 1358-1367. doi:10.1109/jsac.2011.110803Roman, R., & Lopez, J. (2009). Integrating wireless sensor networks and the internet: a security analysis. Internet Research, 19(2), 246-259. doi:10.1108/10662240910952373Wang, Y., Attebury, G., & Ramamurthy, B. (2006). A survey of security issues in wireless sensor networks. IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, 8(2), 2-23. doi:10.1109/comst.2006.315852Xiaojiang Du, & Hsiao-Hwa Chen. (2008). Security in wireless sensor networks. IEEE Wireless Communications, 15(4), 60-66. doi:10.1109/mwc.2008.4599222Pelechrinis, K., Iliofotou, M., & Krishnamurthy, S. V. (2011). Denial of Service Attacks in Wireless Networks: The Case of Jammers. IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, 13(2), 245-257. doi:10.1109/surv.2011.041110.00022Zhou, L., Wang, X., Tu, W., Muntean, G., & Geller, B. (2010). Distributed scheduling scheme for video streaming over multi-channel multi-radio multi-hop wireless networks. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 28(3), 409-419. doi:10.1109/jsac.2010.100412Lin, K., Lai, C.-F., Liu, X., & Guan, X. (2010). Energy Efficiency Routing with Node Compromised Resistance in Wireless Sensor Networks. Mobile Networks and Applications, 17(1), 75-89. doi:10.1007/s11036-010-0287-xLi, H., Lin, K., & Li, K. (2011). Energy-efficient and high-accuracy secure data aggregation in wireless sensor networks. Computer Communications, 34(4), 591-597. doi:10.1016/j.comcom.2010.02.026Oliveira, L. M. L., de Sousa, A. F., & Rodrigues, J. J. P. C. (2011). Routing and mobility approaches in IPv6 over LoWPAN mesh networks. International Journal of Communication Systems, 24(11), 1445-1466. doi:10.1002/dac.1228Narten T Nordmark E Simpson W Soliman H Neighbor Discovery for IP version 6 (IPv6) 2007Singh H Beebee W Nordmark E IPv6 Subnet Model: The Relationship between Links and Subnet Prefixes 2010Roman, R., Lopez, J., & Gritzalis, S. (2008). Situation awareness mechanisms for wireless sensor networks. IEEE Communications Magazine, 46(4), 102-107. doi:10.1109/mcom.2008.4481348Sakarindr, P., & Ansari, N. (2007). Security services in group communications over wireless infrastructure, mobile ad hoc, and wireless sensor networks. IEEE Wireless Communications, 14(5), 8-20. doi:10.1109/mwc.2007.4396938Tsao T Alexander R Dohler M Daza V Lozano A A Security Framework for Routing over Low Power and Lossy Networks 2009Karlof C Wagner D Secure Routing in Wireless Sensor Networks: Attacks and Countermeasures First IEEE International Workshop on Sensor Network Protocols and Applications 2003 113 127 10.1109/SNPA.2003.1203362Hui J Thubert P Compression Format for IPv6 Datagrams in 6LoWPAN Networks 2009Elaine Shi, & Perrig, A. (2004). Designing Secure Sensor Networks. IEEE Wireless Communications, 11(6), 38-43. doi:10.1109/mwc.2004.1368895Akkaya, K., & Younis, M. (2005). A survey on routing protocols for wireless sensor networks. Ad Hoc Networks, 3(3), 325-349. doi:10.1016/j.adhoc.2003.09.01

    A Review of the Energy Efficient and Secure Multicast Routing Protocols for Mobile Ad hoc Networks

    Full text link
    This paper presents a thorough survey of recent work addressing energy efficient multicast routing protocols and secure multicast routing protocols in Mobile Ad hoc Networks (MANETs). There are so many issues and solutions which witness the need of energy management and security in ad hoc wireless networks. The objective of a multicast routing protocol for MANETs is to support the propagation of data from a sender to all the receivers of a multicast group while trying to use the available bandwidth efficiently in the presence of frequent topology changes. Multicasting can improve the efficiency of the wireless link when sending multiple copies of messages by exploiting the inherent broadcast property of wireless transmission. Secure multicast routing plays a significant role in MANETs. However, offering energy efficient and secure multicast routing is a difficult and challenging task. In recent years, various multicast routing protocols have been proposed for MANETs. These protocols have distinguishing features and use different mechanismsComment: 15 page

    Resilient networking in wireless sensor networks

    Get PDF
    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)

    Talk More Listen Less: Energy-Efficient Neighbor Discovery in Wireless Sensor Networks

    Full text link
    Neighbor discovery is a fundamental service for initialization and managing network dynamics in wireless sensor networks and mobile sensing applications. In this paper, we present a novel design principle named Talk More Listen Less (TMLL) to reduce idle-listening in neighbor discovery protocols by learning the fact that more beacons lead to fewer wakeups. We propose an extended neighbor discovery model for analyzing wakeup schedules in which beacons are not necessarily placed in the wakeup slots. Furthermore, we are the first to consider channel occupancy rate in discovery protocols by introducing a new metric to trade off among duty-cycle, latency and channel occupancy rate. Guided by the TMLL principle, we have designed Nihao, a family of energy-efficient asynchronous neighbor discovery protocols for symmetric and asymmetric cases. We compared Nihao with existing state of the art protocols via analysis and real-world testbed experiments. The result shows that Nihao significantly outperforms the others both in theory and practice.Comment: 9 pages, 14 figures, published in IEEE INFOCOM 201

    CODE: description language for wireless collaborating objects

    Get PDF
    This paper introduces CODE, a Description Language for Wireless Collaborating Objects (WCO), with the specific aim of enabling service management in smart environments. WCO extend the traditional model of wireless sensor networks by transferring additional intelligence and responsibility from the gateway level to the network. WCO are able to offer complex services based on cooperation among sensor nodes. CODE provides the vocabulary for describing the complex services offered by WCO. It enables description of services offered by groups, on-demand services, service interface and sub-services. The proposed methodology is based on XML, widely used for structured information exchange and collaboration. CODE can be directly implemented on the network gateway, while a lightweight binary version is stored and exchanged among sensor nodes. Experimental results show the feasibility and flexibility of using CODE as a basis for service management in WCO

    IETF standardization in the field of the Internet of Things (IoT): a survey

    Get PDF
    Smart embedded objects will become an important part of what is called the Internet of Things. However, the integration of embedded devices into the Internet introduces several challenges, since many of the existing Internet technologies and protocols were not designed for this class of devices. In the past few years, there have been many efforts to enable the extension of Internet technologies to constrained devices. Initially, this resulted in proprietary protocols and architectures. Later, the integration of constrained devices into the Internet was embraced by IETF, moving towards standardized IP-based protocols. In this paper, we will briefly review the history of integrating constrained devices into the Internet, followed by an extensive overview of IETF standardization work in the 6LoWPAN, ROLL and CoRE working groups. This is complemented with a broad overview of related research results that illustrate how this work can be extended or used to tackle other problems and with a discussion on open issues and challenges. As such the aim of this paper is twofold: apart from giving readers solid insights in IETF standardization work on the Internet of Things, it also aims to encourage readers to further explore the world of Internet-connected objects, pointing to future research opportunities

    Security and Privacy Issues in Wireless Mesh Networks: A Survey

    Full text link
    This book chapter identifies various security threats in wireless mesh network (WMN). Keeping in mind the critical requirement of security and user privacy in WMNs, this chapter provides a comprehensive overview of various possible attacks on different layers of the communication protocol stack for WMNs and their corresponding defense mechanisms. First, it identifies the security vulnerabilities in the physical, link, network, transport, application layers. Furthermore, various possible attacks on the key management protocols, user authentication and access control protocols, and user privacy preservation protocols are presented. After enumerating various possible attacks, the chapter provides a detailed discussion on various existing security mechanisms and protocols to defend against and wherever possible prevent the possible attacks. Comparative analyses are also presented on the security schemes with regards to the cryptographic schemes used, key management strategies deployed, use of any trusted third party, computation and communication overhead involved etc. The chapter then presents a brief discussion on various trust management approaches for WMNs since trust and reputation-based schemes are increasingly becoming popular for enforcing security in wireless networks. A number of open problems in security and privacy issues for WMNs are subsequently discussed before the chapter is finally concluded.Comment: 62 pages, 12 figures, 6 tables. This chapter is an extension of the author's previous submission in arXiv submission: arXiv:1102.1226. There are some text overlaps with the previous submissio
    • …
    corecore