Advertisement

Energy efficient reputation mechanism for defending different types of flooding attack

  • Sandhya AnejaEmail author
  • Preeti Nagrath
  • G. N. Purohit
Article
  • 14 Downloads

Abstract

Delay tolerant network solves technical challenges in the heterogeneous network that may lack end-to-end connectivity. However, due to the disconnected paths, message delivery is much dependent on the cooperation of intermediate nodes, but malicious nodes may inject other nodes with either bogus messages or copies of good messages. This causes relaying of unwanted packets, which in turn leads to draining the energy of the intermediate nodes. This scenario may be termed as flooding attack. The paper discusses three types of flooding attacks, namely breadth attack (type 1), breadth attack (type 2), and depth attack. Breadth attack (type 1) refers to attack by those malicious nodes that relay only bogus messages, breadth attack (type 2) refers to the attack by those malicious nodes that relay both bogus and good messages, and depth attack refers to the attack by those malicious nodes that create copies of its own good messages and floods in the network. In this paper, we present a novel reputation based schemas that detect the flooding type of malicious nodes in DTNs. We propose three algorithms where first algorithm Reputation Algorithm handles a breadth attack (type 1), second algorithm Reputation with Good Messages over Total Messages Algorithm handles both breadth attacks (type 1 and type 2), and third algorithm, Reputation using Good Messages over Total Messages with Check message Generation Rate (RepGMTMwithCGR) is robust for (depth attack \(+\) breadth attack) flooding attack. The simulation study shows RepGMTMwithCGR defends all categories of flooding attack considered in this paper and there is the improvement of 20% in message delivery, 61% decrease in relaying, 49% decrease in message dropping and 63% decrease in energy consumption in the presence of 30% malicious nodes in the network. The algorithm shows increase in message latency by 2% but decreases message latency by 25% when compared to existing work. The protocols can be employed in monitoring systems using base stations in open environments.

Keywords

Flooding attack Energy consumption Malicious nodes Reputation system 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Anantraman, V., Mikkelsen, T., & Ohno, L. (2002). Handheld computers for rural healthcare, experiences in a large scale implementation. In Proceedings of development by design.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bista, B. B., & Rawat, D. B. (2016) Energy consumption and performance of delay tolerant network routing protocols under different mobility models. In Intelligent systems, modelling and simulation (ISMS), 2016 7th international conference on (pp. 325–330). IEEE.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Burgess,J., Gallagher, B., Jensen, D., & Levine, B. N. (2006). Maxprop: Routing for vehicle-based disruption-tolerant networks. In INFOCOM 2006. 25th IEEE international conference on computer communications. Proceedings (pp. 1–11). IEEE.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cabaniss, R., Bridges, J. M., Wilson, A., & Madria, S. (2011). Dsg-n 2: A group-based social routing algorithm. In Wireless communications and networking conference (WCNC), 2011 IEEE (pp. 504–509). IEEE.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cabaniss, R., Madria, S., Rush, G., Trotta, A., & Vulli, S. S. (2010). Dynamic social grouping based routing in a mobile ad-hoc network. In High performance computing (HiPC), 2010 international conference on (pp. 1–8). IEEE.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chuah, M., Yang, P., & Han, J. (2007). A ferry-based intrusion detection scheme for sparsely connected ad hoc networks. In Mobile and ubiquitous systems: Networking & services, 2007. MobiQuitous 2007. Fourth annual international conference on (pp. 1–8). IEEE.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dini, G., & Duca, A. L. (2010). A reputation-based approach to tolerate misbehaving carriers in delay tolerant networks. In Computers and communications (ISCC), 2010 IEEE Symposium on (pp. 772–777). IEEE.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dini, G., & Duca, A. L. (2012). Towards a reputationbased routing protocol to contrast blackholes in a delay tolerant network. Ad Hoc Networks, 10(7), 1167–1178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Elwhishi, A., Ho, P.-H., Naik, K., & Shihada, B. (2010). A novel buffer management architecture for epidemic routing in delay tolerant networks (DTNS). In International conference on heterogeneous networking for quality, reliability, security and robustness (pp. 438–453). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gupta, G., Nagrath, P., Aneja, S., & Gupta, N. (2012). Reference based approach to mitigate blackhole attacks in delay tolerant networks. In Proceedings of the 8H ACM Symposium on QoS and security for wireless and mobile networks, Q2SWinet ’12, New York, NY, USA (pp. 85–88). ACM.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hu, F., & Hao, Q. (2012). Intelligent sensor networks: The integration of sensor networks, signal processing and machine learning. Boca Raton: CRC Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Huang, T.-K., Lee, C.-K., & Chen, L.-J. (2010). Prophet+: An adaptive prophet-based routing protocol for opportunistic network. In Advanced information networking and applications (AINA), 2010 24th IEEE international conference on (pp. 112–119). IEEE.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jain, S., Fall, K., & Patra, R. (2004). Routing in a delay tolerant network. In Proceedings of the 2004 conference on applications, technologies, architectures, and protocols for computer communications, SIGCOMM ’04, New York, NY, USA (pp. 145–158). ACM.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Joanna, D. C., & Sathiyavathi, R. (2014). Quota based routing protocol in disruption tolerant networks. In International conference on information communication and embedded systems (ICICES2014) (pp. 1–4).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Johari, R., Gupta, N., & Aneja, S. (2015). A DTN routing scheme for information connectivity of health centres in Hilly State of North India. International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks, 11, 376861.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jones, E. P., Li, L., Schmidtke, J. K., & Ward, P. A. (2007). Practical routing in delay-tolerant networks. IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, 6(8), 943–959.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Keränen, A., Ott, J., & Kärkkäinen, T. (2009). The one simulator for DTN protocol evaluation. In Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on simulation tools and techniques (p. 55). Institute for Computer Sciences, Social-Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering (ICST).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Krifa, A., Barakat, C., & Spyropoulos, T. (2008). Optimal management policies for delay tolerant networks. In Sensor, mesh and ad hoc communications and networks, 2008. SECON ’08. 5th annual IEEE communications society conference on (pp. 260–268).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Laoutaris, N., Smaragdakis, G., Rodriguez, P., & Sundaram, R. (2009). Delay tolerant bulk data transfers on the internet. ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review, 37(1), 229–238. Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lee, F. C., Goh, W., & Yeo, C.-K. (2010). A queuing mechanism to alleviate flooding attacks in probabilistic delay tolerant networks. In Telecommunications (AICT), 2010 sixth advanced international conference on (pp. 329–334).Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lee, J., Kim, S.-K., Yoon, J.-H., & Yang, S.-B. (2015). Snapshot: A forwarding strategy based on analyzing network topology in opportunistic networks. Wireless Networks, 21(6), 2055–2068.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Li, Q., Gao, W., Zhu, S., & Cao, G. (2013). To lie or to comply: Defending against flood attacks in disruption tolerant networks. IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing, 10, 168–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Li, Y., Weng, B., Liu, Q., Tang, L., & Daneshmand, M. (2011). Multiple ferry routing for the opportunistic networks. In Proceedings of the global communications conference, GLOBECOM 2011, 5–9 December 2011, Houston, TX, USA (pp. 1–5).Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lilien, L., Gupta, A., & Yang, Y. (2007). Opportunistic networks for emergency applications and their standard implementation framework. In 2007 IEEE International Performance, Computing, and Communications Conference (pp. 588–593).Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lindgren, A., Doria, A., & Schelén, O. (2004). Probabilistic routing in intermittently connected networks. SIGMOBILE Mobile Computing and Communications Review, 7(3), 19–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Liu, Q., Liu, M., Li, Y., & Daneshmand, M. (2015). A novel game based incentive strategy for opportunistic networks. In 2015 IEEE global communications conference (GLOBECOM) (pp. 1–6).Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Liu, Y., Huang, J., Wang, W., Zhou, H., An, Y., & Wang, J. (2015). Mobility similarity-based routing in buffer-limited delay tolerant networks. International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks, 11(6), 593607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lu, Z., & Fan, J. (2010). Delay/disruption tolerant network and its application in military communications. In Computer design and applications (ICCDA), 2010 international conference on (Vol. 5, pp. V5-231–V5-234).Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Nagrath, P., Aneja, S., Gupta, N., & Madria, S. (2015). Protocols for mitigating blackhole attacks in delay tolerant networks. Wireless Networks, 22(1), 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Nagrath, P., Aneja, S., & Purohit, G. (2014). Flooding attack in delay tolerant network. International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering, 4(7), 329–337.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Nagrath, P., Aneja, S., & Purohit, G. (2015). Blackbox as a DTN device. International Journal of Next-Generation Computing, 6(1), 57–65.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Nagrath, P., Aneja, S., & Purohit, G. (2015). Defending flooding attack in delay tolerant networks. In Information networking (ICOIN), 2015 international conference on (pp. 40–45).Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Natarajan, V., Yang, Y., & Zhu, S. (2011). Resource-misuse attack detection in delay-tolerant networks. In Performance computing and communications conference (IPCCC), 2011 IEEE 30th international (pp. 1–8). IEEE.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ouadrhiri, A. E., El-Azouzi, R., & Kamili, M. E. (2015). Energy and delay optimal epidemic relaying in delay tolerant networks. In 2015 international conference on wireless networks and mobile communications (WINCOM) (pp. 1–7).Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Pan, D., Ruan, Z., Zhou, N., Liu, X., & Song, Z. (2013). A comprehensive-integrated buffer management strategy for opportunistic networks. EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking, 2013(1), 103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Parris, I., & Henderson, T. (2012). Privacy-enhanced social-network routing. Computer Communications, 35(1), 62–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Parris, I., & Henderson, T. (2014). Friend or flood? Social prevention of flooding attacks in mobile opportunistic networks. In 2014 IEEE 34th international conference on distributed computing systems workshops (ICDCSW) (pp. 16–21).Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Pentland, A., Fletcher, R., & Hasson, A. (2004). Daknet: Rethinking connectivity in developing nations. Computer, 37, 78–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Ren, Y., Chuah, M. C., Yang, J., & Chen, Y. (2010). Muton: Detecting malicious nodes in disruption-tolerant networks. In Wireless communications and networking conference (WCNC), 2010 IEEE (pp. 1–6).Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Sadreddini, Z., & Afshord, M. M. (2013). Impact of using several criteria for buffer management in vehicular delay tolerant networks. World Applied Sciences Journal, 22, 1204–1209.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Spyropoulos, T., Psounis, K., & Raghavendra, C. S. (2005). Spray and wait: An efficient routing scheme for intermittently connected mobile networks. In Proceedings of the 2005 ACM SIGCOMM workshop on delay-tolerant networking (pp. 252–259). ACM.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Vahdat, A., & Becker, D. (2000). Epidemic Routing for Partially-Connected Ad Hoc Networks. Technical Report. Technical Report CS-200006, Duke University.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Vasilakos, A. V., Zhang, Y., & Spyropoulos, T. (2011). Delay tolerant networks: Protocols and applications (1st ed.). Boca Raton: CRC Press Inc.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Wei, L., Cao, Z., & Zhu, H. (2011). Mobigame: A user-centric reputation based incentive protocol for delay/disruption tolerant networks. In Global telecommunications conference (GLOBECOM 2011), 2011 IEEE (pp. 1–5).Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Wei, L., Zhu, H., Cao, Z., & Shen, X. (2011). Mobiid: A user-centric and social-aware reputation based incentive scheme for delay/disruption tolerant networks. In Proceedings of the 10th international conference on ad-hoc, mobile, and wireless networks, ADHOC-NOW’11 (pp. 177–190). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Yun, L., Xinjian, C., Qilie, L., & Xiaohu, Y. (2010). A novel congestion control strategy in delay tolerant networks. In 2010 second international conference on future networks (pp. 233–237).Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Zhu, H., Du, S., Gao, Z., Dong, M., & Cao, Z. (2014). A probabilistic misbehavior detection scheme toward efficient trust establishment in delay-tolerant networks. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, 25(1), 22–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Systems Engineering, Faculty of Integrated TechnologiesUniversiti Brunei DarussalamGadongBrunei Darussalam
  2. 2.Computer Science DepartmentBanasthali UniversityTonkIndia

Personalised recommendations