Enhanced trust based encroachment discovery system for Mobile Ad-hoc networks

Article
  • 5 Downloads

Abstract

The ultimate goal of this paper is to avoid inclusion of intruder node in the route and to ensure reliability. The trust metrics are used to provide the secure communication. Opportunistic routing scheme is used to ensure reliability or data consistency in the MANET. In the opportunistic routing, each and every node has the chance to select the next intermediate node. The best intermediate node is selected based on the trust value of a node. Each and every mobile node maintains the trust value for its neighbors. The trust value is calculated based on the node’s Quality of Service parameters. In the opportunistic routing, each and every node maintains the trust value for its neighbor nodes. The next forwarder node is selected from the neighbor list. The node with highest trust value is selected as next forwarder node. In the proposed method a node does not maintain the static route to reach the destination. Instead of that the node selects the next forwarder node during runtime. We present a Enhanced Light-weight Trust-based Routing protocol (ELTB). It is light-weight in the sense that the intrusion detection system (IDS) used for estimating the trust that one node has for another, consumes limited computational resource and finding the best optimal path for packet transmission. Moreover, it uses only local information thereby ensuring scalability. Our Enhanced Light-weight IDS takes care of two kinds of attacks, namely, the blackhole attack and the grey hole attack. It is beast suite for highly dynamic environment to handle the frequent link failure. So, the source node transmits the data to the destination node only via trusted node to ensure secure routing in the MANET. The authors have used AODV as the base routing protocol to evaluate our proposed approach and give a performance analysis.

Keywords

MANET Trust Routing Protocol 

References

  1. 1.
    Yi, S., Naldurg, P., Kravets, R.: A security-aware ad hoc routing protocol for wireless networks. In: The 6th World Multi-Conference on Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics (SCI 2002)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Marti, S., Giuli, T.J., Lai, K., Baker, M.: Mitigating routing misbehavior in mobile ad hoc networks. Mobile Computing and Networking (2000)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gupte, S., Singhal, M.: Secure Routing In Mobile Wireless Ad-Hoc Networks, Elsevier Ad-Hoc Netw 2003, pp 151–174Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ayday, E., Fekri, F.: An iterative algorithm for trust management and adversary detection for delay—tolerant networks. In: IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, vol 11(9) (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Balakrishnan, V., Varadharajan, V., Lucs, P., Tupakula, U.K.: Trust enhanced secure mobile ad-hoc network routing. In: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Advanced Information Networking and Applications Workshops (AINAW’07) (2007)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Marchang, N., Datta, R.: Light weight trust based routing protocol for mobile ad-hoc networks. IET Information Security (2011)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Xu, G., Member IEEE: A policy enforcing mechanism for trusted ad hoc networks. In: IEEE Transactions Actions on Dependable And Secure Computing, vol 8(3) (2011)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Govindan, K., Member IEEE: Trust Computations and Trust dynamics In Mobile ad-hoc networks: a survey. In: IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol 14(2) second quarter (2012)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sanzgiri, K., Dahill, B., Levine, B.N., Shields, C., Belding-Royer, E.M.: A secure routing protocol for ad hoc networks. In: Proceedings of 2002 IEEE International Conference on Network Protocols (ICNP) (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hu, Y.-C., Perrig, A., Johnson, D.B.: ARIADNE: a secure on-demand routing protocol for ad hoc networks MobiCom 2002, Atlanta, Georgia, USA, 23–28 Sept 2002Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zhao, H., Yang, X., Xiaolin Member IEEE: cTrust: trust management in cyclic mobile ad-hoc N. IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol 62(6) (2013)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pawar, M.V., Anuradha: Network security and types of attack in network. In: Procedia Computer Science ICCC 2015Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sandeep, J., Satheeshkumar, J.: Efficient packet transmission and energy optimization in military operation scenarios of MANET. In: Pocedia Computer Science, vol. 47(2015), pp. 400–407Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Li, J., Lee, C.: Improve routing trust with promiscuous listening routing security algorithm in mobile ad-hoc networks. Elsevier Comput. Commun. 29(8), 1121–1132 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Papadimitratos, P., Haas, Z.J.: Secure Routing for Mobile Ad hoc Networks SCS Communication Networks and Distributed Systems Modeling and Simulation Conference (CNDS 2002), San Antonio, TX, 27–31 Jan 2002Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hu, Y., Perrig, A., Johnson, D.B.: Ariadne: a secure on demand routing protocol for ad-hoc networks. In: Proceedings of the Mobicom 2002-National Science Foundation and Polytechnic University Atlanda Georgia USA, 23–26 Sept 2002Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sargunavathi, S., Martin Leo Manickam, J.: Design and development of CTSR with direct & indirect observations of MANET applications. Mobile Netw. Appl. (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11036-017-0843-8 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Electronics and Communication EngineeringSt Joseph’s College of EngineeringChennaiIndia
  2. 2.Electronics and Communication EngineeringSt Joseph’s College of EngineeringChennaiIndia

Personalised recommendations