Loading in 2 Seconds...
Loading in 2 Seconds...
Distributed Detection of Node Replication Attacks in Sensor Networks ∗ Parno , B.; Perrig , A.; Gligor , V., "Distributed detection of node replication attacks in sensor networks," Security and Privacy, 2005 IEEE Symposium on , vol., no., pp.49,63, 8-11 May 2005. Sree Harsha Konduri
Distributed Detection of Node Replication Attacksin Sensor Networks∗Parno, B.; Perrig, A.; Gligor, V., "Distributed detection of node replication attacks in sensor networks," Security and Privacy, 2005 IEEE Symposium on , vol., no., pp.49,63, 8-11 May 2005.
Tiksha Milan Choksi
Consists of hundreds, or even thousands, of small, low-cost nodes distributed over a wide area
We assume that the adversary has the ability to capture a limited number of legitimate sensor nodes
attempting to avoid detectionAdversary Model
Each node sends a list of its neighbors and their claimed locations to the Base Station
Try Node-Network Broadcast: Uses a simple broadcast protocolwhere each node floods the network with its location.
then is computed where w1,w2,….wg are the set of witness nodes and F maps each node ID
in the set of possible node IDs, S, to a set of g node IDs:
Analysis: For communication, assuming α’s neighbors do not collaborate, we will need each of α’s neighbors to probabilistically decide which of the witnesses to inform. If each node selects (g lng)/d random destinations from the set of possible witnesses then the coupon collector’s problem assures us that each of the witnesses will receive at least one of the location claims. Assuming an average network path length of O(√n) nodes, this results in O( (g ln g√n)/d ) messages sent per node.
Idea: Improve on Deterministic Multicast and instead of choosing witnesses deterministically, choose them randomly. Neighboring nodes send location claim to a set of randomly chosen witnesses.
The Protocol: Formally each node α broadcasts location claim to a set o f neighbors βi in the format where lα is the location information. Upon receiving a location claim β verifies α’s signature and with probability p, each neighbor selects g random locations within the network and uses geographic routing forwards α’s location claim.
Since the neighbors choose their destinations independently, we have:Randomized Multicast cont…
We can improve on the costs of Randomized multicast by using some other schemes to detect conflicting location claims.
Analysis: Protocol draws line-segments, probability of intersection of line-segments can be found using the solution of Sylvester’s Four-Point Problem.
Deploy n nodes uniformly within a 500 x 500 square, n between 1,000 and 10,000.
=> 63% probability to detectreplication
=> each location claim creates 6 line segmentsSimulations
Probability of Detection
HIGH NOON: Detection happens only during a fixed length of time t for every T units of time, rest of the time (T-t) nodes can utilize their entire memory for non-detection purposes.
Eschenauer and Gligor => Centralized node revocation in sensor networks
The nodes controlled by the adversary are assumed to follow the protocols.
Centralized algorithms place excessive trust in base station and excessive load on nodes near it. Local voting techniques are not useful for detecting distributed node replication.