Benchmarking block ciphers for wireless sensor networks

Law, Yee Wei; Doumen, Jeroen; Hartel, Pieter H.

doi:10.1109/mahss.2004.1392185

Cited by 34 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The evaluation results showed that Rijndael is suitable for high-security and energy-efficiency requirements while MISTY1 is suitable for good storage and energy efficiency. The evaluation results in [60] disagreed with the work in [8] in which RC5 was selected as the encryption/decryption scheme, and with the work in [22] in which RC6 was selected. The work in [60] provides a good resource for deciding which symmetric algorithm should be adopted in sensor networks.…”

Section: Symmetric Key Cryptography In Wsnscontrasting

confidence: 80%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A survey of security issues in wireless sensor networks

Wang

Attebury

Ramamurthy

2006

IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutorials

681

383

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials • 2nd Quarter 2006 2dvances in wireless communication and electronics have enabled the development of low-cost, lowpower, multifunctional sensor nodes. These tiny sensor nodes, consisting of sensing, data processing, and communication components, make it possible to deploy Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs), which represent a significant improvement over traditional wired sensor networks. WSNs can greatly simplify system design and operation, as the environment being monitored does not require the communication or energy infrastructure associated with wired networks [1].WSNs are expected to be solutions to many applications, such as detecting and tracking the passage of troops and tanks on a battlefield, monitoring environmental pollutants, measuring traffic flows on roads, and tracking the location of personnel in a building. Many sensor networks have mission-critical tasks and thus require that security be considered [2,3]. Improper use of information or using forged information may cause unwanted information leakage and provide inaccurate results.While some aspects of WSNs are similar to traditional wireless ad hoc networks, important distinctions exist which greatly affect how security is achieved. The differences between sensor networks and ad hoc networks are [4]: • The number of sensor nodes in a sensor network can be several orders of magnitude higher than the nodes in an ad hoc network.• Sensor nodes are densely deployed.• Sensor nodes are prone to failures due to harsh environments and energy constraints.• The topology of a sensor network changes very frequently due to failures or mobility.• Sensor nodes are limited in computation, memory, and power resources.• Sensor nodes may not have global identification.These differences greatly affect how secure data-transfer schemes are implemented in WSNs. For example, the use of radio transmission, along with the constraints of small size, low cost, and limited energy, make WSNs more susceptible to denial-of-service attacks [5]. Advanced anti-jamming techniques such as frequency-hopping spread spectrum and physical tamper-proofing of nodes are generally impossible in a sensor network due to the requirements of greater design complexity and higher energy consumption [5]. Furthermore, the limited energy and processing power of nodes makes the use of public key cryptography nearly impossible. While the A YONG WANG, GARHAN ATTEBURY, AND BYRAV RAMAMURTHY UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA-LINCOLN ABSTRACTWireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) are used in many applications in military, ecological, and health-related areas. These applications often include the monitoring of sensitive information such as enemy movement on the battlefield or the location of personnel in a building. Security is therefore important in WSNs. However, WSNs suffer from many constraints, including low computation capability, small memory, limited energy resources, susceptibility to physical capture, and the use of insecure wireless communication channels. These constraints ...

show abstract

Section: Symmetric Key Cryptography In Wsnscontrasting

confidence: 80%

“…They further evaluated six block ciphers, including RC5 and RC6 [56], Rijndael [50], MISTY1 [57], KASUMI [58], and Camellia [59] on IAR Systems' MSP430F149 in [60]. The benchmark parameters were code, data memory, and CPU cycles.…”

Section: Symmetric Key Cryptography In Wsnsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A survey of security issues in wireless sensor networks

Wang

Attebury

Ramamurthy

2006

IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutorials

681

383

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many research papers [3,6,7] analyze encryption algorithms for wireless sensor networks exclusively with reference to speed and code size while only a few [8] address the energy consumption of software based implementations. However, the ultra-low power applications we are envisioning, do not provide enough power for running cryptographic algorithms on general purpose microprocessors.…”

Section: Motivationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Energy Comparison of AES and SHA-1 for Ubiquitous Computing

Kaps

Sunar

2006

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Wireless sensor networks and Radio Frequency Identifiers are becoming mainstream applications of ubiquitous computing. They are slowly being integrated into our infrastructure and therefore must incorporate a certain level of security. However, both applications are severely resource constrained. Energy scavenger powered sensor nodes and current RFID tags provide only 20 µW to 50 µW of power to the digital component of their circuits. This makes complex cryptography a luxury. In this paper we present a novel ultra-low power SHA-1 design and an energy efficient ultra-low power AES design. Both consume less than 30 µW of power and can therefore be used to provide the basic security services of encryption and authentication. Furthermore, we analyze their energy consumption based on the TinySec protocol and come to the somewhat surprising result, that SHA-1 based authentication and encryption is more energy efficient than using AES for payload sizes of 17 bytes or larger.

show abstract

“…In [7] the authors present a detailed benchmark on block ciphers for wireless sensor networks. They consider security properties, storage and energy-efficiency of a set of candidates: RC5, RC6, Rijndael, MISTY1, KASUMI and Camellia.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rijndael for Sensor Networks: Is Speed the Main Issue?

Vitaletti

Palombizio

2007

Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present an implementation of Rijndael for wireless sensor networks running on Eyes sensor nodes. In previous works, Rijndael has not been considered a suitable encryption algorithm for sensor nodes because it is too slow and requires a large space in memory, a precious resource in this environment. Our implementation of Rijndael is smaller, from about 1/3 to 1/5 of the size of previous implementations. Furthermore, we observe that nowadays MAC and routing protocols for wireless sensor networks, exhibit latencies up to few seconds, and thus the few milliseconds required by Rijndael to encrypt a TinyOS message are negligible if compared to these latencies. For this reason, in our opinion the main focus on the implementation of encryption algorithms for wireless sensor networks should move from speed, to memory occupation and energy efficiency. © 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved

show abstract

Benchmarking block ciphers for wireless sensor networks

Cited by 34 publications

References 31 publications

A survey of security issues in wireless sensor networks

A survey of security issues in wireless sensor networks

Energy Comparison of AES and SHA-1 for Ubiquitous Computing

Rijndael for Sensor Networks: Is Speed the Main Issue?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About