Physical Layer Security for Authentication, Confidentiality, and Malicious Node Detection: A Paradigm Shift in Securing IoT Networks

Secrecy Performance Enhancement Using Self-Interference Cancellation in Wireless Mutual Broadcast Networks for Proximity-Based Services

“…However, this WMB is inherently vulnerable to eavesdropping because a transmitter ingenuously disseminates its broadcast message (BM) to unknown nodes. On the other hand, physical layer security (PLS) ensures nonzero secrecy capacity by maintaining the link quality of eavesdroppers below that of legitimate nodes [ 12 ], gaining significant attention as an effective alternative or complement to traditional cryptographic methods [ 13 , 14 ]. This approach is particularly useful in large-scale distributed networks where managing and sharing security keys may be challenging [ 14 , 15 ].…”

“…On the other hand, physical layer security (PLS) ensures nonzero secrecy capacity by maintaining the link quality of eavesdroppers below that of legitimate nodes [ 12 ], gaining significant attention as an effective alternative or complement to traditional cryptographic methods [ 13 , 14 ]. This approach is particularly useful in large-scale distributed networks where managing and sharing security keys may be challenging [ 14 , 15 ]. Recently, its applications have been being extended to various networks, including satellite–terrestrial integrated networks [ 16 ], simultaneous wireless information and power transfer networks [ 17 ], and covert mmWave communication networks [ 18 ].…”

“…In PLS, for a nonzero secrecy capacity [ 12 ], the connection quality for unauthorized eavesdroppers (Eves) needs to be kept below the performance of legitimate receivers, and this strategy may require knowledge about nearby legitimate nodes [ 13 , 14 ]. However, a WMB operation often commences without such prior information, and this poses significant challenges in integrating WMB with PLS strategies [ 11 ].…”

“…The PLS offers advantages in the context of wireless networks by leveraging the inherent characteristics of physical medium [ 13 ], thus providing security that is inherently robust against eavesdropping without the complexities and vulnerabilities associated with key management and algorithmic encryption in conventional cryptographic methods. This makes PLS particularly suitable for dynamic and resource-constrained environments, such as wireless sensor, IoT, V2V, and D2D networks [ 14 , 15 ]. In order to confound Eves more actively, a legitimate transmitter and friendly jammer send artificial noise (AN) for impairing Eves’ link [ 14 , 15 , 37 ].…”

“…This makes PLS particularly suitable for dynamic and resource-constrained environments, such as wireless sensor, IoT, V2V, and D2D networks [ 14 , 15 ]. In order to confound Eves more actively, a legitimate transmitter and friendly jammer send artificial noise (AN) for impairing Eves’ link [ 14 , 15 , 37 ]. However, AN may be rather harmful to other nearby legitimate nodes in wireless networks because jamming signals raise interference.…”