See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/318410793

Cognitive radio network security status and

challenges

Conference Paper · March 2017

DOI: 10.1109/NTICT.2017.7976105

CITATIONS READS

0 254

2 authors:

Ameer Sameer Eng. Sattar B. Sadkhan

University of Babylon University of Babylon
29 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS 75 PUBLICATIONS 100 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Speech scrambling based on Hybrid Chaotic maps as key generator View project

Call for Special Session on International Conference ICCIIDT’2016 View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ameer Sameer on 12 February 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 ŶŶƵĂůŽŶĨĞƌĞŶĐĞŽŶEĞǁdƌĞŶĚƐŝŶ/ŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶΘŽŵŵƵŶŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐdĞĐŚŶŽůŽŐLJƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐͲ;Ed/dΖϮϬϭϳͿ
ϳͲϵDĂƌĐŚϮϬϭϳ
Cognitive Radio Network Security Status and
Challenges
 Ameer Sameer Hamood
College of Information Technology
 Babylon University
Babylon, Iraq
 ameersameer.it@gmail.com
Abstract² One of the important trends which is supposed to have
more attention in the system of cognitive radio is wireless security
models. Security requirements for CRNs are the same as the
general wireless networks, taking into consideration that the
frequency band changes dynamically adding a specific feature
when we deal with security of CRNs. A new category of security
issues and challenges have been introduced in the cognitive radio
systems, and providing security models to realize good and
reasonable protection must be one of the main researchers
interest.This paper addresses the literature review,thesecurity
models and requirements for CRNs, layered and cross-layers
attacks against CRNs.
Keywords²Cognitive Radio (CR),Literature review, Layered
Attacks, Security Models.
I. INTRODUCTION
Recently, cognitive radio network has become one of the most
common research direction due to CR an enabling technology
for opportunistic spectrum access in wireless networks
area,cognitive radio is a certain extension ofsoftware radio
that's aware of its surrounding radio environments (RF stimuli)
to detect unused spectrum during cognitive cycle (spectrum
sensing, spectrum mobility, spectrum decision, spectrum
sharing) [1] .
Security issues are a very important aspect of cognitive radio
networks. Behavior of the Network Attackersfor
example(malicious,ƐĞůĨŝƐŚ, misbehave,etc.) Leave adverse
effect on the performance of the network .On the other hand
there are many security requirements should investigate the
network to ensure communication security, so many security
models proposed in recent years to resolve the security issues
for such behaviors. In general, most of these models have
focused on the importance of security, regardless of the other
things such as energy or the complexity of the design model,
especially matters related to the sensors limitations. Result of
this CRNs has become a hot spot of researchers for continuous
development and providing a new model with specific feature
doesn't found in previous trend.
The paper is entirely sorted out as follows.In sectionII, we
summarizethe security CRs PhD thesis for the last five
yearsfrom the period (2011-2015). In section III,we discuss
different security models used as countermeasure to mitigate
security issues in CRNs, also in the same section we explain
 ϵϳϴͲϭͲϱϯϴϲͲϮϵϲϮͲϴͬϭϳͬΨϯϭ͘ϬϬΞϮϬϭϳ/


Prof.Dr. Sattar B. Sadkhan ±SMIEEE
 College of Information Technology
Babylon University
Babylon, Iraq
drengsattar@gmail.com
common security requirements in wireless network and specific
for cognitive radio networks. In Section IV, we point
outlayered attack in CRNs, moreover in the same sectionwe
explain cross-layers attacks. We conclude this paper in section
V.
II. LITERATURE REVIEW
In [2] the authordiscusses designing a novel framework
controllingon the requirements of heterogeneous sensor
networks to solve existing and new security threats. This
cognitive security framework measure effect of single or
combined denial of service attacks andpredict new attacks
under both collaborative and non-collaborative sensor nodes, to
provide secure and reliable system.
In [3] the author discussesqualitative analysis for existing
attacks and new potential threats and evaluates their impact on
CRNs performance, generally proposed different method to
deal with common attack such as Primary User Emulation
(PUE) attack and new cross-layer attack.
In [4]the authortakes advantage of "state-of-the-art" security
vulnerabilities in CRNs, trying toreduce attacks, protect the
communication in core wire networks, and wireless CRNsby
designing ( systematic passive monitoring framework,
SpecMonitor) whose basis is"machine learning" method to
detect malicious behaviors.
In [5]the author explains themain objective to study the impact
of CRNs threat in CWSNs with new methods especially in
physical layer. He develops security strategies against
PUE,eavesdropping attacks.
In [6]the author discussesthe impact of CR technology on
military applications as one of the important CRNs
applications, besideshe deals with jamming and anti-jamming
problems related to Radio Frequency (RF) based on SDR/CR
test bed architecture. Through development and testing of the
novel algorithms (Spectrum Intelligence for Interference
Mitigation algorithm) implemented on real-time monitoring.
The author proposed a game-theoretical framework to analyze
intelligent jamming and anti-jamming between CRs.
In TABLE 1 we illustrate the aim of previous researchers
trendsand what are simulation tools to achievetheir work.
Still open problems in theseliterature review are design
protocols that enable detection malicious activity while
minimizing the message exchanges and delay which are the
result of protocol running in distributed model, reliable
ŶŶƵĂůŽŶĨĞƌĞŶĐĞŽŶEĞǁdƌĞŶĚƐŝŶ/ŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶΘŽŵŵƵŶŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐdĞĐŚŶŽůŽŐLJƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐͲ;Ed/dΖϮϬϭϳͿ
ϳͲϵDĂƌĐŚϮϬϭϳ


spectrum sensing by control on malicious behavior, spectrum (DSSS) ),Asymmetric-key algorithm as (digital sing)
enhancement security and privacy to eliminate risks that related [5] to detect PUE attack, besides he studies the impacts of
to the patient health within CWSNs healthcare,design power cognitive radio technology on tactical battlefield solutions
saving model and less as possible power consumption in ,also study the principles and practical solution related to
cognitive wireless sensor networks environment. Radio Frequency (RF) jamming and anti-jamming problems,
proposes a game-theoretical framework[6]. In [11]discussed
TABLE I :AIM OF RESEARCHERs AND THEIR SIMULATION TOOLS the possibility of secure CR by using thecombinations of
Aim of the work Simulation tool encryption algorithms (Symmetric-key Algorithms,
Solve existing and predict new attacks to
MONTE CARLO Asymmetric Key Algorithms) such as (Rivest-Shamir-
 and Adleman, Elliptic, Secure Hash Algorithm , DigitalSignature,
provide secure and reliable system
 MATLAB
Measure how can attacks influence on  MATLAB
etc.) and spread spectrum modulation for mitigate different
CRNs performance, detect PUE and new and type of layeredattack, alsoKerberos algorithm for reliable
cross-layer attack  NS-2 session establishment by limited shared keys through prevent
Reduce attacks and protect the attacker from creating thesession key to access for highly
communication in core wire networks and MATLAB
wireless CRNs
secure communication. in [12]dynamic frequency hopping
Study the impact of CRNs threat in (DFH) is proposed for WRAN data transmission, meanwhile
CWSNs, develop security strategies against NS-2 reliable spectrum sensing and efficient channel usage in
PUE , eavesdropping attacks. parallel. In[13]spread spectrum strategies are procedures:
Study the impact of CR technology on
OMNEST , OPNET,
DSSS (Direct Succession Spread Range) and FHSS
military applications, analyze intelligent (Frequency Hopping Spread Spectrum)inCRNs under the
 NS-3 and QUALNET
jamming and anti-jamming between CRs
parameters of Data Drop Rate, Detection Time and
III. SECURITY MODELSAND REQUIREMENTS Throughput , also as a supporting methods for security model
FOR CRNs deals with interference in cognitive radio network. In [14]
Security model is a protection scheme has a different security different types of multi carrier modulation schemes and spread
services to protect network informationagainst malicious nodes spectrum techniques proposed like Direct Sequence Code
threats.Its aim to specify and enforce security policies, access Division Multiple Access (DS-CDMA),Multicarrier Code
rights or any encryption algorithm in the network. There are Division Multiple Access (MC-CDMA).They are use various
several cryptography methods and modulation techniques on types of enhancement models to mitigate from Inter Symbol
different locations within the security of communications Interference (ISI), multiuser interference (MUI) and robustness
system use to protect entirely network transmission. In this against narrowband interference (NBI).
paper we have make a survey on security models used in See in figure one we show security scheme block diagram for a
CRNs. In [7]the author talked about use of the different group of thesis and papers deals with security of cognitive
security ways and their effectiveness in cognitive security for radio network.
example (Symmetric-key Algorithm: RC5 [block], Main challenges in these models are (power consumption, less
Asymmetric Key Algorithms: Elliptic Curve Cryptography complexity, reliable spectrum sensing, reliability module CR
[ECC] ), aimed to solve existing and new security threats in a communications, and optimal allocation of radio resources).
heterogeneous communication network. In [8][9]security
module are (Symmetric-key Algorithm: AES (block cipher), Cryptography
RC4 (stream cipher),Asymmetric-key Algorithm, Hash
Functions ),aimed to identify a new potential threats. Most of
the attacks that make use of one of the inherent properties of Encryptionalgorithm
cognitive radio and evaluate their impact on CRNs
performance within their applications in mobile and sensor
networks. In [10] focus on security of the main critical CRNs Pass band Symmetric- Asymmetric- Hash
applications like battlefield applications by generate a cyber-  Modulation  key
algorithm  key
algorithm  Function
security architecture, through taking into consideration the
finding weaknesses and decrease security vulnerabilities by
enhance security of tactical military networks. In [6]discuss the FHSS,DS RC4,A5, Si
RSA,ECC,
security and protection for related topics with cognitive radio SS,DFH, AES,RC5,Sk ng
SHA,Digital
such as wireless systems, Software Defined Radio. They are OFDM, ipjack,KAS  signature le
PSK,DS-  UMI sc
different security models in this topic(Symmetric-key CDMA,M he
algorithm, A5 (stream cipher), KASUMI (block cipher), Wired C-CDMA  me
Equivalent Privacy (WEP) :Rivest Cipher4 (stream cipher),
Wi-Fi Protected Access (WPA) based Temporal Key Integrity
Protocol (TKIP), WPA2 based Advanced Encryption Standard
(AES),Spread spectrum techniques like direct-sequence spread
ŶŶƵĂůŽŶĨĞƌĞŶĐĞŽŶEĞǁdƌĞŶĚƐŝŶ/ŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶΘŽŵŵƵŶŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐdĞĐŚŶŽůŽŐLJƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐͲ;Ed/dΖϮϬϭϳͿ
ϳͲϵDĂƌĐŚϮϬϭϳ
C The task of cognitive radio is the adaptive according to
o certain parameters in the environment, Radio parameters
 Symmetric-key algorithm + FHSS m includecenter frequency, bandwidth, power, modulation type,
po
un
DS-CDMA + OFDM d
sc
Fig 1: CRNs SECURITY SCHEME BLOCK DIAGRAM
IV. SECURITY REQUIREMENTSFOR CRNs
Cognitive radio networks such as any type of wireless network
have security issues. Moreover, the open-air medium (wireless)
is a wide vulnerable to attack. Cognitive radio networks have
some special characteristics for example(high sensitivity to
weak PU signals,scarcity of common control channel,missing
PU receiver location, etc.). So attacker are trying to attack the
weaknesses of these characteristics and others on various
layers, protocols and associated technologies .Security
measurement and various evaluation policies should be applied
to reduce the probability of attack by malicious nodes in a
wireless network[15], however security requirements in CR
wireless network nodes are authentication , - Eavesdropping Attack
availability,confidentiality,integrity, authorization and non-
repudiation[16] .
V. LAYERED ANDCROSS-LAYERS ATTACKS AGAINST
CRNS
The risks in CRNs disaggregated by the target TCP/IP five
layers begin with: physical layer attacks and ends with
application layer attacks in addition to, Cross-Layers attack in
case effected on any layer can arrive to another layer .
A. Physical Layer attacks
The basic platform layer of TCP/IP model it's the physical
medium of the channel that's establish connection between two
or more devices with each other for example the network cards,
cables, or the atmosphere as wireless networks. Cognitive radio
network is differ from traditional wireless networks because of
the cognitive radio uses dynamically Opportunistic Spectrum
Access while traditional wireless networks use fixed frequency
band. Spectrum sensing to access unallocated spectrum bands,
and open air medium as physical layer channelin CRNs are
vulnerable to many security issues that'smake the attacker
exploit them during spectrum sensing process [15].
These are a group of the most common attacks on CRNs
channel and prevent access to physical layer of the cognitive
radio network (Primary User Emulation (PUE) Attack,
Objective Function Attack (OFA), Jamming Attack,
Eavesdropping, Primary Users¶ Location Attack and Learning
Attack (LA) ) [17] .
- Primary User Emulation (PUE) attack
Malicious node hide themselves and change behavior to be
similar the PU behavior by transmitting special signals same
as using by legal primary user in the licensed band,and thus
lead to wrong sensing process by the secondary user and
make he believes in the presence of primary user [18].
- objective Function Attack (OFA)


codingrate, channel access protocol, encryption type, and
frame size[19]. cognitive engine work depends on these
parameters, the best choice according to the requirements
needed by the application and used to solving one or more
objective functions such asreduce power andmaximum
throughput,etc. Attacker tries to exploit the weaknesses of
the techniques for evaluating these parameters, manipulate
them and thus lead to undesirable results to calculate the
value of objective function according to the requirements of
user applications to the network[20].
- Jamming attack
An attacker sends a packet during a connection to exploit and
reduce the signal , it's considered a familiar for denial of
service ,However, There are other cases caused a bottleneck
or congestion as a result of messages exchange between the
nodes will be affected on the signal quality .
Malicious node attempt to listening on communication
between the various legitimate reliable network devices even
base station,to get a useful information and launch further
attacks on the basis of these information as start point for
more harmful attack on the network [17].
- Primary Users¶ Location attack
Considered one of the most dangerous attack types because it
directly attacks on the devices after identify primary user
location, in CRN malicious node calculate distance between
itself and primary user by convert signal strength to distance
. When more than a malicious node estimated location of the
primary user based on this method, they can creation of
confluence or crossroads then get the original location and
doing physically attack on primary user [17].
- Learning Attack (LA)
in this type of attack Attacker announces the wrong messages
caused by the wrong process sensing and this false
information will be remaining during all next step after
spectrum sensing process in cognitive radio network[21].
B. Data Link Layer attacks
The data link layer is hides the details of underlying hardware
(physical medium),attacker in this layer exploit vulnerabilities
in MAC address Strategies [15].
- Spectrum Sensing Data Falsification
(Byzantine attack)
Malicious node will send falsified spectrum Sensing
information for misleading and manipulate the decision-
making process, prevent secondary users from using the
existing spectrum hole, bring them spectrum band to access
the channels and cause
ŶŶƵĂůŽŶĨĞƌĞŶĐĞŽŶEĞǁdƌĞŶĚƐŝŶ/ŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶΘŽŵŵƵŶŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐdĞĐŚŶŽůŽŐLJƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐͲ;Ed/dΖϮϬϭϳͿ
ϳͲϵDĂƌĐŚϮϬϭϳ
excessive interference or reduce throughput to legitimate
users in CRNs[19].
- Control Channel Saturation DoS Attack(CCSD)
Due to the distribution communication, process is necessary
to connect nodes with each other and multiple overlapping
manner in a multi-hop CRN, within data link layer MAC
control frames are exchanged to preserve the channel. such a
complex and multi-state connection, When many CRs want to
communicate at the same time, channel can only support a
particular number of synchronous data channels A result of
this common control channel becomes suffering from a
bottleneck. attacker exploits this status (distributed not
centralized CRN) by create a fake MAC control frames for
the purpose of saturating the control channel and thus
decreasing the network performance to deal with this huge
number of MAC control frames, the Control Channel
Saturation DoS Attack leaves the CRN with a near-zero
throughput [22][23].
- Selfish Channel Negotiation (SCN)
The most common applications of cognitive radio based on a
multi-hop routing, in this type of attack cognitive radio node
refuse to send the forward message to the next node in order to
preserve its own throughput which resulted from selfish
channel concealment [22].
C. Network Layer attacks
Cognitive radio has network topology like as in classic wireless
communication networks for example infrastructure-less (ad
hoc,mesh), infrastructure-based (mesh) and hybrid (Wireless
Sensor Network). Security threats in cognitive radio network
targeted routing function by sending the wrong paths to
building routing table and make collision leads to drop packets
in network layer,anyway there are three main attacks types in
this layerare Hello, sinkhole, and Sybil attacks [15].
- Hello attack
Because of the similarity and convergence in routing strategies
used in wireless sensor networks, this type of attack also
adversely effect on CRNs. Attacker use a high energy level in
order to broadcast message reaches all network nodes with a
good signal strength and make nodes illusion that the owner of
this message is a neighbor.as soon as these node forward
packets to the attacker and find themselves without
neighbors[24].
- Sinkhole Attack
Cognitive radio networks often use multi-hop routing. sinkhole
attack aimed to exploit this benefit and advertising itself as the
best route to a specific destination node,neighbor nodes helps to
spread this property in the network .and thus increase the
impact strength and conviction to choose this path .The attacker
can commits the selective redirectionattack such as forwarding,


dropping, modifying, or eavesdropping any packets pass
through it [25].
- Sybil attack
Each CRN nodes have a legitimate identity to communicate and
use the channel. Sybil attack exploits this feature by create a
large number of false identities that effects on results of
spectrum decision making process, prevent use of the channel
by legitimate users and opportunist overall control channel
transmission [26].
- Ripple effect attack
A special type of attacks to cognitive radio because of CR
ability to change the spectrum bands during the use of the
channel. The ripple effect is similar to the primary user
emulation orbyzantine attack in that the false sensing
information provided especially during any updating for new
network topology changes.
Malicious node for this attack affectedon the related
information for choice spectrum bands in the channel then
effect on throughput of the channel in the network .wrong
information will be pass hop by hop and make the network in
disruption state[27].
D. Transport Layer attacks
Attacker in Cognitive Radio Network (CRNs) trying to
exploit vulnerabilities during transmission session (establish
connection process) between nodes. They are different
attacks type in this layer for example (Key Depletion attack,
Jellyfish attack)[15].
- Key Depletion attack
Operation of generating encryption keys in transport layer
occur by private protocols such as The transport layer
security (TLS) and secure sockets layer (SSL). There are a
large number of sessions be established for the purposes of
communication initial between CRNs nodes, increase
opportunity in repeating the key with increasing establish the
connection process. On the other hand, There are some
protocols that have been proven to contain the weaknesses in
this area are the temporal key integrity protocol (TKIP) and
the wired equivalent privacy (WEP) which are implemented
in IEEE 802.11.Key depletion attacks are aimed to exploit
key session repeat through these weaknesses or doing to
increase the operations of established connection until it
reaches to this point or stops the system [25] [19].
- Jellyfish attack
Jellyfish attack is effect on behavior of Transmission Control
Protocol (TCP) in transport layer , moreover it performed on
the network layer before next step transmission in transport
layer [28].
- Lion attack
Lion attack has the ability to harm the transport layer for
example reduce throughput.Specifically, targets the TCP
connection by exploiting vulnerability [30].
E. Application Layer Attacks
ŶŶƵĂůŽŶĨĞƌĞŶĐĞŽŶEĞǁdƌĞŶĚƐŝŶ/ŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶΘŽŵŵƵŶŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐdĞĐŚŶŽůŽŐLJƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐͲ;Ed/dΖϮϬϭϳͿ
ϳͲϵDĂƌĐŚϮϬϭϳ


As a result, any attack on physical,data link,network or TABLE II :LAYERED AND CROSS-LAYERS ATTACK WITH THEIR
COMMON COUNTERMEASURE.
transport layers may have an adverse effect on the
application layer in Cognitive Radio Networks (CRNs). Attack
Targeted Common
F. CROSS-LAYERS ATTACKS layer Countermeasure
Cognitive radio network requires application-aware PUE Attack Cryptographic Authentication
Prior identification the threshold
communication protocols, protocol stacks that have large OFA Attack value[20],
memory footprints are not desirable. Researchers directions Intrusion Detection System (IDS)
to merge convergent layers as cross-layer design includes the Determine and keep track the location
functionalities of two or more layers in a single coherent identification of the primary
Jamming Attack
Physical user¶s,Frequency hopping spread
framework to reduce handoff (handover) latency, fitting the Layer spectrum Technique
requirements of many live streaming, interactive and reduce Eavesdropping
Encryption Techniques
unnecessary complexity. There is a need to be given Attack
individual attention for such attacks [15]. Primary Users¶ changing the density of signals
Location Attack irregularly
See in Figure 2 we presentinterconnection between layers as
Control Environment especially
cross-layer framework in the context of Cognitive Radio LA Attack during learning phase, Constant
Sensor Networks (CRSNs) [29]. Reevaluation[21]
Misbehavior Detection System (MDS)
[32], Cooperative neighboring
Byzantine Data
cognitive radio nodes (COOPON)
Attack Link
[33],
Layer
trust and reputation metrics
CCSDAttack Trust as Detection Mechanism
SCN Attack Trust as Detection Mechanism
Hello Attack Symmetric Key based algorithm
Sinkhole Attack Network Geographic routing protocols [24]
Sybil Attack Layer identity validation
Ripple effect checked and validated necessary
Attack information
Key Depletion
Transport Security Protocols
Attack
Layer
not complicated algorithm like direct
Jelly fish Attack
trust-based detection (DTD) [34]
Lion attack Cross- Single Layer Monitoring & Trust
Layers Calculation (SLMTC) ,Trust Fusion,
Fig 2: CROSS-LAYER FRAMEWORK COMMUNICATIONS. Lure Attack Abnormal Detection [30]
- Lion attack V. CONCLUSIONAND FUTURE WORK
A lion attack is outcome of a Primary User Emulation (PUE) One of the most efficient ways to use RF band is control on
or Spectrum Sensing Data Falsification (SSDF) attacks, they the security concept, Threats against CR environments
have affect at lower layer (PHY or MAC), lion attack has the divided into Wireless nature Threats (jamming, spoofing,
DoS, etc.) and Cognitive nature Threats (PUE,Ripple
ability to harm the transport layer for example reduce
effect,Spectrum Sensing Data Falsification, etc.).They are
throughput.Specifically, targets the TCP connection by
different Security Models reviewed in previous work as
exploiting vulnerability. This type of attack causes most separately models or as compound models on several levels
effective and damage to the network when moving to another of security within Encryptionand Modulation techniques to
new channel causing the same damage and thus prevents mitigate different types of attacks and make reliable
secondary user from transmission new data[30]. communications in CRNs. Literature review based on PhD
- Lure attack references material proposed to the improvement of security
Here the harmful node modify packets sent from source to CR facing bunch of threats. Build hybrid security scheme
destination during routing process by add false information fast and flexible furthermore non-vulnerable to attack for
leading to lure other nodes into the routing lap and deletion of example compound scheme combines between more secure
legitimate forwarded packets ,the final result for effect of this encryption algorithm like Advanced Encryption Standard
attack on the network leads to less efficient of network (AES) further enhance resistance to large number of layered
performance [31]. attacks like Frequency Hopping Spread Spectrum (FHSS)
proposed in future work.
Note from TABLE 2 we summarize Layered attacks and cross-
layers attacks against CRNs and their common
countermeasureusing to mitigate from the negative impact on
the cognitive radio networks.
ŶŶƵĂůŽŶĨĞƌĞŶĐĞŽŶEĞǁdƌĞŶĚƐŝŶ/ŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶΘŽŵŵƵŶŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐdĞĐŚŶŽůŽŐLJƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐͲ;Ed/dΖϮϬϭϳͿ
ϳͲϵDĂƌĐŚϮϬϭϳ


REFERENCES Enhancements," Journal of Global Research in Computer Science,
[1]J.Mitola, ³Cognitive radio for flexible multimedia communications´ Vol.4, No. 2, pp. 36-41, Feb. 2013.
inProceedings of MoMuC¶99, 1999, pp. 3-10. [27]J. Zhao, G. Cao, "Robust topology control in multi-hop
[2]R. Muraleedharan "Cognitive Security Framework For Heterogeneous cognitive radio networks", in: 2012 Proceedings IEEE INFOCOM,
Sensor Network Using Swarm Intelligence"Syracuse University , 2011. 2012, pp. 2032±2040 (IEEE).
[3]O.Le´onAbarca "Contributions to the Security of Cognitive Radio
[28] Mathur CN, Subbalakshmi KP. "Security issues in cognitive radio
Networks", January 2012.
[4]Q. Yan, " Security Enhanced Communications in Cognitive Networks ", networks. In: Cognitive networks: towards self-aware networks". John
Ph.D., Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 2014. Wiley and Sons, Ltd; 2007 [chapter 11].
[5]J. B Martinez , " Cognitive Strategies For security in Wireless Sensor [29] S. Zubair, N.Fisal, Y.S. Baguda, K. Saleem "Assessing Routing
Networks", University PolytechniqueMedrid, 2015. Strategies for Cognitive Radio Sensor Networks" in Sensors 2013, 13,
[6] K.Dabcevic, " Intelligent jamming and anti-jamming techniques using [30] W. Wang, Y. Sun, H. Li and Z. Han, "Cross-layer attack and
Cognitive Radios ", University of Genoa, 2015. defense incognitive radio networks", Proceedings of the IEEE Global
[7] J. Robert Harbin "Security Strategies In Wireless Sensor Networks" Telecommun. Conf., 2010.
University of York,Electronics, September 2011.
[31]J. Hernandez-Serrano, O. León and M. Soriano, "Modeling the
[8] D. S. Vernekar "An Investigation of Security Challenges in Cognitive Radio
Networks"University of Nebraska , 12-30-2012. LionAttack in Cognitive Radio Networks", EURASIP Journal on
[9] K. Chang "Security and Collaboration Protocols for Mobile and Sensor WirelessCommunications and Networking, Vol.2011, Article ID
Networks", Computer Science and Engineering, in The University of Michigan, 242304, 10pages, 2011.
2012 . [32]K. Tan, S. Jana, P. H. Pathak, P.Mohapatra, "Oninsider
[10] A. Kärkkäinen "A cyber Security Architecture for Military Networks using misbehavior detection in cognitive radio networks", IEEENetw. (2013)
A Cognitive Approach" , General Staff Officer Course 56, Army, July 2013. 5.
[11] S. BhagavathyNanthini, M. Hemalatha1, D. Manivannan1 and L. Devasena [33] M. Jo, L. Han, D. Kim, Hoh Peter In, "Selfish attacksand
"Attacks in Cognitive Radio Networks (CRN): A Survey", in Indian Journal of
detection in cognitive radio ad hoc networks", IEEE Netw. 27
Science and Technology, April 2014.
[12]W. Hu, D. Willkomm, M. Abusubaih, J. Gross, G. Vlantis, M. Gerla,and A. (3)(2013).
Wolisz, ³Dynamic frequency hopping communities for efficientIEEE 802.22 [34]V. Laxmi, C. Lal, M.S. Gaur, D. Mehta "JellyFish attack:
operation,´ IEEE Commun. Mag., vol. 45, no. 5, pp. 80±87, May 2007. Analysis, detection andcountermeasure in TCP-based MANET ",
[13] N. Kaur, I. KaurAulakh, R. Vig "Analysis of Spread Spectrum Techniques Computer Engineering Department, Malaviya National Institute of
in Cognitive Radio Networks"in International Journal of Applied Engineering Technology Jaipur, Rajasthan 302017, India.
Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 8 (2016) pp. 5641-5645
[14] M. Sundararajan, U. Govindaswamy "Multicarrier Spread Spectrum
Modulation Schemes andEfficient FFT Algorithms for Cognitive Radio
Systems" in Electronics 2014, 3, 419-443.
[15] M. Khasawneh, A. Agarwal " A Survey on Security in Cognitive Radio
Networks," Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Concordia
University, Montreal, Canada in 2014 6th International Conference on CSIT.
[16] Jacobs S., Engineering Information Security: The Application of Systems
Engineering Concepts to Achieve Information Assurance, IEEE Press Series on
Information and Communication Networks Security, John Wiley & Sons, 2011.
[17] Yi. Yu, L. Hu, H. Li, Y. Zhang, F. Wu, and J. Chu "The Security of
Physical Layer in Cognitive Radio Networks," Jilin University, Chang Chun
130012, China in Journal of Communications Vol. 9, No. 12, December 2014.
[18] W. El-Hajj, H. Safa, M. Guizani, ³Survey of Security Issues in
Cognitive Radio Network´, Journal of Internet Technology Volume 12,No.2,
2011.
[19] D. Hlavacek,, and J. Morris Chang,, ³A Layered Approach to
CognitiveRadio Network Security: A Survey´.
[20]O. León, J. Hernández-Serrano, and M. Soriano, ³Securing cognitiveradio
networks´, International Journal of Communication Systems,23(5):633±652,
2010.
[21]T. C. Clancy and N. Goergen, ³Security in cognitive radio networks:
Threats and mitigation,´ in Proc. 3rd International Conference on Cognitive
Radio Oriented Wireless Networks and Communications, IEEE, 2008.
[22] K. Bian and J. Park, MAC-Layer Misbehaviors in Multi-hop Cognitive
Radio Networks, 2006 US-Korea Conference on Science, Technology, and
Entrepreneurship (UKC2006), August, 2006
[23] L. Zhu and H. Zhou, Two Types of Attacks against Cognitive
Radio Network MAC Protocols, International Conference on
Computer Science and Software Engineering, Vol.4, Wuhan, China,
December, 2008, pp.1110-1113.
[24]C. Karlof, D. Wagner, Secure routing in wireless sensor
networks: attacks and countermeasures, Ad Hoc Netw. 1 (2) (2003)
293±315.
[25]S.M. Dudley et al.,"Practical Issues for Spectrum Management
WithCognitive Radios," Proceedings of the IEEE, Vol.102, No.3,
pp.242-264, 2014.
[26] M. Butt and M. Zaman, "Cognitive Radio Network: Security

View publication stats