Network Forensics for detection of malicious packets in Internet of Things (IoT)

In the internet of things there are various devices which are interconnected to the other devices which share different technology and the different standards. The rise of new technology in various fields it also makes rise to the new challenges in the area of the forensic investigation. As there will be many new challenges to the forensic investigators. The recent tools and the process flow carried out will not meet the highly distributed and current infrastructure of the IoT. Forensic researcher will have a lot of challenges to face in collecting the piece of evidence from the infected component in the IoT Environment and also will face complication to analyze those evidence. In this paper, we will do the network forensics on the simulated IoT Environment and we will carry out the forensics investigation in the simulated environment

Responsibility and non-repudiation in resource-constrained Internet of Things scenarios

The proliferation and popularity of smart autonomous systems necessitates the development of methods and models for ensuring the effective identification of their owners and controllers. The aim of this paper is to critically discuss the responsibility of Things and their impact on human affairs. This starts with an in-depth analysis of IoT Characteristics such as Autonomy, Ubiquity and Pervasiveness. We argue that Things governed by a controller should have an identifiable relationship between the two parties and that authentication and non-repudiation are essential characteristics in all IoT scenarios which require trustworthy communications. However, resources can be a problem, for instance, many Things are designed to perform in low-powered hardware. Hence, we also propose a protocol to demonstrate how we can achieve the authenticity of participating Things in a connectionless and resource-constrained environment

A Holistic Analysis of Internet of Things (IoT) Security : Principles, Practices, and New Perspectives

Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Network Forensics of RPL-Based Attacks

IoT devices, which are increasing in highly manner day by day, are now in everywhere in our life. WSNs are used together with IoT devices to monitor real environments. In this study, attacks against WSNs were carried out. The attack chosen for this study is a flood attack. In addition, solution suggestions for this attack are presented. In this context, firstly reference and attack packages have been collected, and then the collected packages have been compared with the reference packages and forensic investigations have been carried out. The result of the evaluation has shown the importance continuous monitoring on 24/7 basis and detecting abnormal behaviors in IoT traffic with forensics analysis for preventing attacks

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

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 Novel Architectural Framework on IoT Ecosystem, Security Aspects and Mechanisms: A Comprehensive Survey

For the past few years, the Internet of Things (IoT) technology continues to not only gain popularity and importance, but also witnesses the true realization of everything being smart. With the advent of the concept of smart everything, IoT has emerged as an area of great potential and incredible growth. An IoT ecosystem centers around innovation perspective which is considered as its fundamental core. Accordingly, IoT enabling technologies such as hardware and software platforms as well as standards become the core of the IoT ecosystem. However, any large-scale technological integration such as the IoT development poses the challenge to ensure secure data transmission. Perhaps, the ubiquitous and the resource-constrained nature of IoT devices and the sensitive and private data being generated by IoT systems make them highly vulnerable to physical and cyber threats. In this paper, we re-define an IoT ecosystem from the core technologies view point. We propose a modified three layer IoT architecture by dividing the perception layer into elementary blocks based on their attributed functions. Enabling technologies, attacks and security countermeasures are classified under each layer of the proposed architecture. Additionally, to give the readers a broader perspective of the research area, we discuss the role of various state-of-the-art emerging technologies in the IoT security. We present the security aspects of the most prominent standards and other recently developed technologies for IoT which might have the potential to form the yet undefined IoT architecture. Among the technologies presented in this article, we give a special interest to one recent technology in IoT domain. This technology is named IQRF that stands for Intelligent Connectivity using Radio Frequency. It is an emerging technology for wireless packet-oriented communication that operates in sub-GHz ISM band (868 MHz) and which is intended for general use where wireless connectivity is needed, either in a mesh network or point-to-point (P2P) configuration. We also highlighted the security aspects implemented in this technology and we compare it with the other already known technologies. Moreover, a detailed discussion on the possible attacks is presented. These attacks are projected on the IoT technologies presented in this article including IQRF. In addition, lightweight security solutions, implemented in these technologies, to counter these threats in the proposed IoT ecosystem architecture are also presented. Lastly, we summarize the survey by listing out some common challenges and the future research directions in this field.publishedVersio