Defending against path-based DoS attacks in wireless sensor networks

Deng, Jing; Han, Richard; Mishra, Shivakant

doi:10.1145/1102219.1102235

Cited by 150 publications

(105 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

105

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…1) Reprogramming Attack: In this sort of assault attacker get get admission to of supply code of original programming and attacker modifies the source code Such that application is going into limitless loophole so that network useful resource end up inaccessible, and request continue to be infinitely waiting for respond. 2) Path based DoS [7]: Conventional DDoS preventive measures and defenses too carefully rely on electricity supply, computing property, and longtime processing. Considering the traits of IoT environment, all such preconditions have to be avoided inside the layout of IoT defense tool.…”

Section: Ddos On Application Layermentioning

confidence: 99%

Security and Ddos Mechanisms in Internet of Things

kaur¹,

Gandhi²

2017

ijarcs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Internet of Things refer as interconnection of smart item, protected from small espresso device to massive automobile, speak with every different with out human interactions also known as as Device to Device communications. In modern emerging global, all of the devices become smarter and might communicate with other gadgets as properly. With this speedy development of Internet of Things in one of a kind location like smart home, clever hospital and many others. It also have to face a few difficulty to securing overall privateness due to heterogeneity nature. There are such a lot of kinds of vulnerability but right here in this paper we pay attention on Distributed Denial of Service assault (DDoS). DoS is attack that may block the usage for real user and make network resource unavailable, consume bandwidth; if comparable assault is penetrated from exceptional resources its name DDoS.In this paper we will discuss various IoT security issues and Cryptographic Services to solve such issues.

show abstract

Section: Ddos On Application Layermentioning

confidence: 99%

Security and Ddos Mechanisms in Internet of Things

kaur¹,

Gandhi²

2017

ijarcs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Each node consumed 16.25 μJ and 12.25 μJper byte when transmitting and receiving, respectively. False event packets were large TinyOS packets of 29 bytes each [7].The chosen detection scheme adapted the algorithm of Flooding Attack Prevention (FAP) to detect a flooding attack in the ad-hoc network for use in the sensor network [8].…”

Section: Fig3:-multipath Routing Typesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Network Lifetime Extension Scheme Using Multipath Routing in Flooding Attack Detection of Wireless Sensor Networks.

JinChung¹,

Cho.²

2017

IJAR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A malicious attacker can exploit a vulnerability of a sensor node within a wireless sensor networkto easily create a compromised node and attack the sensor network. The main purpose of a flooding attack, which is one kind of denial of service (DoS) attack, is to shorten the lifetime of the sensor network by exhausting the energy of the compromised node and of other sensor nodes along the path to the base station (BS).Existing security schemes to protect against flooding attacks do not take into account the amount of energy remaining in each sensor node. Therefore, in the case where the sensor network was installed long ago and its nodes have little remaining energy, such schemes are unsuitable because they are likely to completely drain individual nodes. In this paper, we propose a security scheme that includes multipath routing to reduce the load on each sensor node and thereby increase the sensor network lifetime. Experimental results herein confirm that the proposed scheme extends the network lifetime, increasing the energy efficiency of one sensor node included in the path by 40% compared with an existing scheme and reducing the number of exhausted sensor nodes by more than 60%.Copy Right, IJAR, 2017,. All rights reserved. …………………………………………………………………………………………………….... Introduction:-A wireless sensor network (WSN) consists of a number of small sensor nodes that detect events and a base station (BS) that receives and analyzes data collected by the sensor nodes. WSNs are deployed in areas that are hardtoreach or where information needs to be received in real time. When a relevant event occurs in the region where the WSN is deployed, the sensor node located closest to the region is selected as the source node, and the event is detected. The source node collects the detected event information, generates an event packet, and transmits the event packet to the BS [1]. However, sensor nodes are vulnerable to attack because they have limited computing power, low energy, and use wireless communication. Using these vulnerabilities, an attacker can easily compromise a node. Using a compromised node, attackers can subject the sensor network to various attacks such as eavesdropping or other attacks that do not yield important event messages in the network. Typical attacks include denial of service (DoS), selective forwarding, sybil, sinkhole, and wormhole attacks [2][3][4]. Security techniques that can detect or prevent attacks continue to be studied. In this paper, we propose the energy efficiency of each node and the lifetime extension of the sensor network when a flooding attack, which is one kind of DoS, attacks the sensor network. The rest of this paper is organized as follows. Section 2 describes flooding attacks and multipath routing. Section 3

show abstract

“…• Increased attacks' risks and vulnerabilities [22], new attacks, increased tiny/embedded devices, multi-hopping routing (selfish) [21]; • Devices with limited capabilities [15,16], pervasiveness (privacy worries), wireless (medium) [4,13,22] and mobility;…”

Section: Vulnerabilities and Challenges Of Wsnsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…• Typical combinational attacks include jamming attack; send a large number of packets to the base station by attacker [16];…”

Section: Path-based Dos (Pdos)mentioning

confidence: 99%