2018
DOI: 10.1007/s10291-017-0693-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

GNSS spoofing detection based on new signal quality assessment model

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
23
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 30 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
0
23
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The authors showed that if the receiver is able to detect changes in the noise floor, this enhanced capability can be combined with C/N o discrimination to detect spoofed PRNs. A similar technique that characterises the noise floor is presented in [44]. The method presented is quite robust provided that the code phase difference between the authentic and spoofed PRNs is > 1.5 chips.…”
Section: Signal Statistic Analyzing Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…The authors showed that if the receiver is able to detect changes in the noise floor, this enhanced capability can be combined with C/N o discrimination to detect spoofed PRNs. A similar technique that characterises the noise floor is presented in [44]. The method presented is quite robust provided that the code phase difference between the authentic and spoofed PRNs is > 1.5 chips.…”
Section: Signal Statistic Analyzing Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is noteworthy that spoofing attacks are dynamic and there are no spoofing countermeasure techniques that are able to work in all scenarios. Consequently, it is essential that the end user considers the cost, complexity and other factors based on a given use case scenario [44].…”
Section: Antenna Based Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Monitoring a received signal's power, carrier noise ratio and noise level can also be used to detect spoofing [9][10][11]. A new signal-quality assessment model has been proposed to detect and identify spoofing [12] that can work well even when the strength of a received signal's spoofing and authentic signal are very close to each other. However, the performance of this algorithm may deteriorate when the code phase differences between authentic signals and spoofing signals are <1.5 chips and the Doppler frequency differences between authentic signals and spoofing signals are relatively small.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%