2015
DOI: 10.1109/lcomm.2015.2429715
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Noncoherent Detection of Misbehaving Relays in Decode-and-Forward Cooperative Networks

Abstract: This letter considers a three-node cooperative network with an untrusted relay. We propose a noncoherent relay misbehavior detection scheme for decode-and-forward (DF) systems based on the correlation among channel estimates at the destination under quasistatic channels. The proposed scheme does not require instantaneous channel state information and can detect arbitrary misbehavior patterns and various signal constellations. An asymptotic analysis of the proposed correlationbased detection statistic is conduc… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
(21 reference statements)
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Relying on the a priori shared knowledge of cryptographic keys, the destination performs attack detection by checking whether or not its received data obeys the constraints imposed by the cryptographic keys. In [5]- [8], tracing symbols are inserted into the transmitted signal in the physical layer. Using these tracing symbols, the intended destination is capable of determining whether an attack has occurred or not by comparing the known and observed tracing symbols.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Relying on the a priori shared knowledge of cryptographic keys, the destination performs attack detection by checking whether or not its received data obeys the constraints imposed by the cryptographic keys. In [5]- [8], tracing symbols are inserted into the transmitted signal in the physical layer. Using these tracing symbols, the intended destination is capable of determining whether an attack has occurred or not by comparing the known and observed tracing symbols.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To identify the malicious 48 relays, the destination measures the error probability of the 49 observed tracing symbols, according to their a priori ground 50 truth. In [10]- [12], Lo et al applied a tracing-based method 51 to non-coherent detection in various scenarios, requiring no 52 channel state information (CSI). Note that the transmission 53 of tracing symbols also requires the support from a key-54 distribution mechanism.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…where K = g rs h rd h rs is unknown. According to (12), 926 we have Pr(X = x|Y 1 = y 1 )f 0 Y2|X (Y 2 = y 2 |X = x; g). 935 (56) 936…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These schemes are mainly enabled by utilizing tracing symbols, or self-information provided by network topology structure. In tracing-based schemes [7]- [10], source node inserts tracing symbols into a sequence of information bits, and then sends them together to the destination.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Relying on the priori knowledge of tracing symbols, the destination could detect attacks by comparing its observed tracing symbols and the ground truth of tracing symbols. This tracing-based method is applicable with perfect CSI [7], [8] or no need of CSI [9], [10] for varying network scenarios. The tracing-symbol based schemes commonly assume that the value and insertion location of the tracing symbols are known only at the source and the destination, which indeed requires a additional tracing-symbol distribution mechanism implemented between communication parties.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%