A Critical Analysis of Multilayer IP Security Protocol

Soh, Ben

doi:10.1109/icita.2005.8

Cited by 9 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, these methods all appear to expose the connection to security threats [46]. An alternative is the use of multilayer IP security (ML-IPsec), which is a more flexible (though complex) solution [47], [48]. It divides the IP datagram into zones, with different protection schemes.…”

Section: Dtn Security a Internet Security Challenges When Using Pepsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Delay- and Disruption-Tolerant Networking (DTN): An Alternative Solution for Future Satellite Networking Applications

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Satellite communications are characterized by long delays, packet losses, and sometimes intermittent connectivity and link disruptions. The TCP/IP stack is ineffective against these impairments and even dedicated solutions, such as performance enhancing proxies (PEPs), can hardly tackle the most challenging environments, and create compatibility issues with current security protocols. An alternative solution arises from the delayand disruption-tolerant networking (DTN) architecture, which specifies an overlay protocol, called bundle protocol (BP), on top of either transport protocols (TCP, UDP, etc.), or of lower layer protocols (Bluetooth, Ethernet, etc.). The DTN architecture provides long-term information storage on intermediate nodes, suitable for coping with disrupted links, long delays, and intermittent connectivity. By dividing the end-to-end path into multiple DTN hops, in a way that actually extends the TCPsplitting concept exploited in most PEPs, DTN allows the use of specialized protocols on the satellite (or space) links. This paper discusses the prospects for use of DTN in future satellite networks. We present a broad DTN overview, to make the reader familiar with the characteristics that differentiate DTN from ordinary TCP/IP networking, compare the DTN and PEP architectures and stacks, as a preliminary step for the subsequent DTN performance assessment carried out in practical LEO/ GEO satellite scenarios. DTN security is studied next, examining the advantages over present satellite architectures, the threats faced in satellite scenarios, and also open issues. Finally, the relation between DTN and quality of service (QoS) is investigated, by focusing on QoS architectures and QoS tools and by discussing the state of the art of DTN research activity in modeling, routing, and congestion control.

show abstract

Section: Dtn Security a Internet Security Challenges When Using Pepsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Delay- and Disruption-Tolerant Networking (DTN): An Alternative Solution for Future Satellite Networking Applications

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…LES reduces the added network overhead by constraining the number of encryption zones and the locations of those zones. Sing and Soh [23] address some of the complexity and overhead issues with Multilayer IPsec (ML-IPsec) [33]. They limit the number of encryption zones to three and define those zones based on semantic information.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Making Network Intrusion Detection Work With IPsec

McLain¹,

Studer²,

Lippmann³

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Network-based intrusion detection systems (NIDSs) are one component of a comprehensive network security solution. The use of IPsec, which encrypts network traffic, renders network intrusion detection virtually useless unless traffic is decrypted at network gateways. One alternative to NIDSs, host-based intrusion detection systems (HIDSs), provides some of the functionality of NIDSs but with limitations. HIDSs cannot perform a network-wide analysis and can be subverted if a host is compromised. We propose an approach to intrusion detection that coinbines HIDS, NIDS, and a version of IPsec that encrypts the header and the body of IP packets separately. We refer to the latter generically as Two-Key IPsec. We show that all of the network events currently detectable by the Snort NIDS on unencrypted network traffic are also detectable on encrypted network traffic using this approach. The NIDS detects network-level events that HIDSs have trouble detecting and HIDSs detect application-level events that can't be detected by the NIDS. 111 ACKNOWLEDGMENTSThis work was sponsored by David Kenyon of the Air Force Electronic Systems Command, GIG Network Architecture Office.

show abstract

“…In this final part, the client acknowledges the response of the server and they both establish a reliable connection [68] with which they will start the actual data transfer. Generally, the three messages transmitted by TCP to negotiate and start a TCP session are nicknamed SYN, SYN-ACK, and ACK for SYNchronize, SYNchronize-ACKnowledgement, and ACKnowledge respectively [69], [70]. The threemessage mechanism enables the transport layer to pass information back and forth to two communicating computers to negotiate the parameters of the connection before transmitting data.…”

Section: Tcp 3 Way Handshake Protocolmentioning

confidence: 99%

TCP/IP stack transport layer performance, privacy, and security issues

Oroo Oyondi Felix

2024

World J. Adv. Eng. Technol. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Transmission Control Protocol/ Internet Protocol (TCP/IP) is the backbone of Internet transmission. The Transport Layer of the TCP/IP stack, which includes TCP (Transmission Control Protocol) and UDP (User Datagram Protocol) protocols, plays a crucial role in ensuring reliable communication between devices over a network. To come up with measures that make networks more secure, it is important to learn about the vulnerabilities that exist in the transport TCP/IP stack and then have an understanding of the typical attacks carried out in such layer. This paper explores how the TCP Protocol works, the TCP/IP 3 Way Handshake, TCP Header Structure, the typical vulnerabilities and the classical attacks of transport layer TCP/IP, tools, and solutions adopted to prevent and reduce the chances of some of these attacks. The findings indicated that the major TCP/ IP stack transport layer threats include Finger printing, SYN Flood, TCP reassembly and sequencing, IP Spoofing, TCP session hijacking, RST and FIN denial of service attack, Ping of Death, Low Rate/ Shrew Attacks. Their preventive measures and mechanisms are discussed.

show abstract

A Critical Analysis of Multilayer IP Security Protocol

Cited by 9 publications

References 14 publications

Delay- and Disruption-Tolerant Networking (DTN): An Alternative Solution for Future Satellite Networking Applications

Delay- and Disruption-Tolerant Networking (DTN): An Alternative Solution for Future Satellite Networking Applications

Making Network Intrusion Detection Work With IPsec

TCP/IP stack transport layer performance, privacy, and security issues

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About