Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
2Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Security Implications of Ad-hoc Routing Protocols against Wormhole Attack using Random Waypoint Mobility Model in Wireless Sensor Network

Security Implications of Ad-hoc Routing Protocols against Wormhole Attack using Random Waypoint Mobility Model in Wireless Sensor Network

Ratings: (0)|Views: 83 |Likes:
Published by ijcsis
A Wireless Sensor Network (WSN) is a network consisting of spatially distributed autonomous devices using sensors to cooperatively monitor physical or environmental conditions such as temperature, sound, vibration, pressure, motion or pollutants, at different locations.WSN is highly vulnerable to attacks because it consists of various resource-constrained devices with their low battery power, less memory, and associated low energy. Sensor nodes communicate among themselves via wireless links. However, there are still a lot of unresolved issues in wireless sensor networks of which security is one of the hottest research issues. The focus, however, has been given to the routing protocols which might differ depending on the application and network architecture. In this paper we have evaluated the affects of wormhole attack on performance of AODV and DSR routing protocols on varying node mobility. WSN’s protocol has different security flaws and using these flaws many kind of attack possible on wireless sensor -network. Wormhole is one of these attacks. Wormhole attack causes serious affect on performance of the WSN protocol and preventing the attack has proven to be very difficult. In wormhole attack attacker place some malicious node in the network. A malicious node captures data packets from one location in the network and tunnels them to another malicious node at distinct location, which replays them locally. These tunnels works like shorter link in the network and so act as benefit to unsuspecting network nodes which by default seek shorter routes. This paper illustrates how wormhole attack affects performance of routing protocol in wireless sensor network using random waypoint mobility model with varying node mobility. We also analyze the effectiveness of WEP and CCMP security protocol against wormhole using DSR and AODV protocol.
A Wireless Sensor Network (WSN) is a network consisting of spatially distributed autonomous devices using sensors to cooperatively monitor physical or environmental conditions such as temperature, sound, vibration, pressure, motion or pollutants, at different locations.WSN is highly vulnerable to attacks because it consists of various resource-constrained devices with their low battery power, less memory, and associated low energy. Sensor nodes communicate among themselves via wireless links. However, there are still a lot of unresolved issues in wireless sensor networks of which security is one of the hottest research issues. The focus, however, has been given to the routing protocols which might differ depending on the application and network architecture. In this paper we have evaluated the affects of wormhole attack on performance of AODV and DSR routing protocols on varying node mobility. WSN’s protocol has different security flaws and using these flaws many kind of attack possible on wireless sensor -network. Wormhole is one of these attacks. Wormhole attack causes serious affect on performance of the WSN protocol and preventing the attack has proven to be very difficult. In wormhole attack attacker place some malicious node in the network. A malicious node captures data packets from one location in the network and tunnels them to another malicious node at distinct location, which replays them locally. These tunnels works like shorter link in the network and so act as benefit to unsuspecting network nodes which by default seek shorter routes. This paper illustrates how wormhole attack affects performance of routing protocol in wireless sensor network using random waypoint mobility model with varying node mobility. We also analyze the effectiveness of WEP and CCMP security protocol against wormhole using DSR and AODV protocol.

More info:

Published by: ijcsis on Feb 19, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

06/07/2014

pdf

text

original

 
 
1
 
Security Implications of Ad-hoc Routing Protocolsagainst Wormhole Attack using Random WaypointMobility Model in Wireless Sensor Network 
Varsha SahniComputer Science and EngineeringGuru Nanak Dev Engineering CollegeLudhiana, India.barkhabright@gmail.comVivek ThaparComputer Science and EngineeringGuru Nanak Dev Engineering CollegeLudhiana, India.vivek thapar_engg@yahoo.comBindiya JainElectronics & CommunicationEngineering, DAV Institute of Engineering & Technology, Jalandhar.bindiyajain29@gmail.com
 Abstract--
A
 
Wireless Sensor Network (WSN) is a networkconsisting of spatially distributed autonomous devices usingsensors to cooperatively monitor physical or environmentalconditions such as temperature, sound, vibration, pressure,motion or pollutants, at different locations.WSN is highlyvulnerable to attacks because it consists of various resource-constrained devices with their low battery power, lessmemory, and associated low energy. Sensor nodescommunicate among themselves via wireless links. However,there are still a lot of unresolved issues in wireless sensornetworks of which security is one of the hottest researchissues. The focus, however, has been given to the routingprotocols which might differ depending on the applicationand network architecture.
 
In this paper we have evaluatedthe affects of wormhole attack on performance of AODV andDSR routing protocols on varying node mobility. WSN’sprotocol has different security flaws and using these flawsmany kind of attack possible on wireless sensor -network.Wormhole is one of these attacks. Wormhole attack causesserious affect on performance of the WSN protocol andpreventing the attack has proven to be very difficult. Inwormhole attack attacker place some malicious node in thenetwork. A malicious node captures data packets from onelocation in the network and tunnels them to anothermalicious node at distinct location, which replays themlocally. These tunnels works like shorter link in the networkand so act as benefit to unsuspecting network nodes which bydefault seek shorter routes. This paper illustrates howwormhole attack affects performance of routing protocol inwireless sensor network using random waypoint mobilitymodel with varying node mobility. We also analyze theeffectiveness of WEP and CCMP security protocol againstwormhole using DSR and AODV protocol
.
 
 Key words:
WEP, CCMP, WSN, AODV, DSR, IMPORTANT, CBR, Random Waypoint Mobility Model 
I.
 
I
NTRODUCTION
 Wireless Sensor Networks (WSN) is a special class of adhoc wireless network that are used to provide a wirelesscommunication infrastructure that allows us to instrument,observe and respond to phenomena in the naturalenvironment and in our physical and cyber infrastructure.Sensor network [4, 6] initially consists of small or largenodes called as sensor nodes. These nodes are varying insize and totally depend on the size because different sizesof sensor nodes work efficiently in different fields.Figure-1 Wireless Sensor Network 
(IJCSIS) International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security,Vol. 9, No. 11, November 2011138http://sites.google.com/site/ijcsis/ISSN 1947-5500
 
 Wireless sensor networking have such sensor nodes whichare specially designed in such a typical way that they havea microcontroller which controls the monitoring, a radiotransceiver for generating radio waves, different type of wireless communicating devices and also equipped with anenergy source such as battery. The entire network workedsimultaneously by using different dimensions of sensors[6] and worked on the phenomenon of multi routingalgorithm [2] which also termed as wireless ad hocnetworking.In a wormhole attack, an attacker receives packets atone point in the network, “tunnels” them to another pointin the network, and then replays them into the network from that point. For tunneled distances longer than thenormal wireless transmission range of a single hop, it issimple for the attacker to make the tunneled packet arrivewith better metric than a normal multihop route.The paper is organized as follows. In the section 2, weexplain the brief description of Random waypoint MobilityModel. In section 3, we explain the working of WEP andCCMP security protocols in Wireless Sensor Network.Section 4, give introduction of AODV and DSR routingprotocol. Section 5, describes the security in WirelessSensor Network. In section 6, we cover operation of wormhole attack in DSR and AODV protocols. Section 7,we discuss about the simulation setup and result of simulation and at the end in section 8, we draw theconclusion of simulation scenarios.II.
 
R
ANDOM WAYPOINT
M
OBILITY
M
ODEL
 Random waypoint model is a random-based mobilitymodel used in mobility management schemes for mobilecommunication systems. This designed to describe themovement pattern of mobile user which include how theirlocation, mobility and acceleration change over time. TheRandom waypoint model, first proposed by Johnson andMaltz [17], soon became a "benchmark" mobility model[20] to evaluate the Wireless Sensor Network (WSN)routing protocols, because of its simplicity and wideavailability.III.
 
D
ESCRIPTION OF
S
ECURITY
P
ROTOCOL
 
 A. Wired Equivalent Privacy (WEP)
WEP (Wired Equivalent Privacy) was the defaultencryption protocol introduced in the first IEEE 802.11standard back in 1999. It is based on the RC4 encryptionalgorithm, with a secret key of 40 bits or 104 bits beingcombined with a 24-bit Initialization Vector (IV) toencrypt the plaintext message M and its checksum – theICV (Integrity Check Value). The encrypted message Cwas therefore determined using the following formula:
= [
|| ICV(
) ] + [ RC4(
|| IV) ]
where || is a concatenation operator and + is a XORoperator. Clearly, the initialization vector is the key toWEP security, so to maintain a decent level of security andminimize disclosure the IV should be incremented for eachpacket so that subsequent packets are encrypted withdifferent keys. Unfortunately for WEP security, the IV istransmitted in plain text and the 802.11 standard does notmandate IV incrimination, leaving this security measure
 
Figure 1. WEP encryption protocolParticular wireless terminal (access point or wireless card)implementations.
 B. Counter Mode with Cipher Block Chaining Message Authentication Code Protocol (CCMP)
Counter Mode with Cipher Block Chaining MessageAuthentication Code Protocol (CCMP) is an encryptionprotocol [22][23][24]. CCMP offers enhanced securitycompared with similar technologies such as Temporal KeyIntegrity Protocol (TKIP). CCMP employs 128-bit keysand a 48-bit initialization vector that minimizes thevulnerability of attack. CCMP is a robust security network association (RSNA) data confidentiality and integrityprotocol. CCMP is based on the Counter Mode with CBC-MAC (CCM) of the AES encryption algorithm. CCM is ageneric authenticate and encrypt block cipher mode. Aunique temporal key (for each session) and a unique noncevalue (a value that’s used only once for each frame) arerequired for protecting the Medium Access ControlProtocol Data Unit (MPDU). Figure3 shows CCMPencapsulation block diagram. CCMP uses a 48-bit PacketNumber (PN) to protect the MPDUs. CCMP encrypts thepayload of a plaintext MPDU and encapsulates theresulting cipher text using the following algorithm. Figure-2 shows CCMP encapsulation algorithm. CCMP decryptsthe payload of a cipher text MPDU and decapsulatesplaintext MPDU using the following algorithm. Figure 5show CCMP decapsulation Block Diagram. Figure 4shows CCMP decapsulation algorithm.
(IJCSIS) International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security,Vol. 9, No. 11, November 2011139http://sites.google.com/site/ijcsis/ISSN 1947-5500
 
 The decapsulation process succeeds when the calculatedMessage Integrity Code (MIC) matches the MIC valueobtained from decrypting the received encrypted MPDU.The original MPDU header is concatenated with theplaintext data resulting from the successful CCM recipientProcessing to create the plaintext MPDU.
Figure 2 : CCMP encapsulation algorithmFigure 3: CCMP encapsulation Block DiagramFigure 4 : CCMP decapsulation algorithm.
 
Figure 5 : CCMP decapsulation Block Diagram
 
(IJCSIS) International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security,Vol. 9, No. 11, November 2011140http://sites.google.com/site/ijcsis/ISSN 1947-5500

Activity (2)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->