2008 the Fourth International Conference on Information Assurance and Security 2008
DOI: 10.1109/ias.2008.24
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Managing Reputation over MANETs

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
16
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
0
16
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In [11], the authors proposed a survey of key management techniques targeted to only network-layer security. In [12], the authors proposed a framework to mitigate double-face attacks based on collecting both direct and remote recommendations. This framework is strong to conflicting behavior and onoff attacks with little extra overhead.…”
Section: Related Work and Motivationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In [11], the authors proposed a survey of key management techniques targeted to only network-layer security. In [12], the authors proposed a framework to mitigate double-face attacks based on collecting both direct and remote recommendations. This framework is strong to conflicting behavior and onoff attacks with little extra overhead.…”
Section: Related Work and Motivationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Bella et al [9] proposed a reputation management scheme that enables a node to exchange and update other nodes' reputation values in mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs). Arboit et al [10] introduced a computational reputation model considering accusations against nodes in MANETs.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Arboit et al [10] introduced a computational reputation model considering accusations against nodes in MANETs. However, [9], [10] do not deal with a false recommendation attack that often significantly deters accurate reputation assessment. Some other existing reputation management schemes [11]- [14] evaluate reputation of a node subjectively based on the evaluator's direct observation, ultimately leading to inconsistent global reputation view.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For any return to misbehaviour mode, an observer node should stretch out the required period the attacker should behave trustworthy to be able to be re-trusted. Moreover, It [12] is vulnerable to the bad mouthing attack since no mechanism is considered to differentiate between correct and false recommendations. Furthermore, we believe that the framework gets also immune to the conflicting behaviour attack since nodes' trustworthiness is evaluated based on both positive and negative recommendations received from all over the network.…”
Section: Global Reputation Table (Grt) Based Tmfmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this Trust management framework Global Reputation Table (GRT) [12] is used to store the node's view on neighbours and far nodes. A node uses the received recommendations to update its GRT table before rebroadcasting it to its neighbours after a predefined schedule.…”
Section: Global Reputation Table (Grt) Based Tmfmentioning
confidence: 99%