Secure Relative Location Determination in Vehicular Network

  • Lei Tang
  • Xiaoyan Hong
  • Phillip G. Bradford
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4325)

Abstract

Relative location information is very useful in vehicular networks although it is vulnerable to various attacks. Many techniques have been proposed for relative positioning and location verification. Due to the high speed and the strict security requirements, the existing relative positioning and location verification techniques are not directly applicable to vehicular networks. Hence we present a scheme called SRLD, which securely determines the relative locations of a set of wirelessly connected vehicles based on the relative locations of each vehicle’s surrounding vehicles. SRLD uses cryptographic keys to authenticate location messages and uses a vehicle’s public key to identify the vehicle while protecting drivers’ privacy. To defend against Sybil attacks, SRLD employs registration and ticket verification mechanisms. It defends Wormhole and black hole attacks by probabilistically monitoring losses of relative location messages. Analysis and simulation results show that SRLD is lightweight and is resilient to Sybil, Wormhole and some other attacks.

Keywords

secure vehicular relative location security vehicular networks 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Fatality analysis reporting system (FARS) web-based encyclopedia, http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/
  2. 2.
    Ward, A., Jones, A., Hopper, A.: A new location technique for the active office. IEEE Personal Communications Magazine 4(5), 42–47 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bahl, P., Padmanabhan, V.N.: RADAR: An in-building RF-based user location and tracking system. In: IEEE Infocom 2000, vol. 2, pp. 775–784 (2000)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brands, S., Chaum, D.: Distance bounding protocols. In: Helleseth, T. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 1993. LNCS, vol. 765, pp. 344–359. Springer, Heidelberg (1994)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bulusu, N., Heidemann, J., Estrin, D.: GPS-less low cost outdoor localization for very small devices. IEEE Personal Communications Magazine 7(5), 28–34 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Capkun, S., Hubaux, J.-P.: Secure positioning of wireless devices with application to sensor networks. In: IEEE INFOCOM (2005)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Castro, P., Chiu, P., Kremenek, T., Muntz, R.R.: A probabilistic room location service for wireless networked environments. In: Abowd, G.D., Brumitt, B., Shafer, S. (eds.) UbiComp 2001. LNCS, vol. 2201, pp. 18–34. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Singelee, D., Preneel, B.: Location verification using secure distance bounding protocols. In: International workshop on wireless and sensor networks security (2005)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hu, L., Evans, D.: Using directional antennas to prevent wormhole attacks. In: Network and Distributed System Security Symposium (NDSS) (February 2004)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hu, Y.-C., Perrig, A., Johnson, D.B.: Ariadne: a secure on-demand routing protocol for ad hoc networks. In: MobiCom 2002, pp. 12–23 (2002)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hubaux, J.-P., Capkun, S., Luo, J.: The security and privacy of smart vehicles. IEEE Security and Privacy 2(3), 49–55 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kukshya, V., Krishnan, H., Kellum, C.: Design of a system solution for relative positioning of vehicles using vehicle-to-vehicle radio communications during gps outages. In: Vehicular Technology Conference 2005, vol. 2, pp. 1313–1317 (October 2005)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lazos, L., Poovendran, R.: SeRLoc: Robust localization for wireless sensor networks. ACM Trans. Sen. Netw. 1(1), 73–100 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Liu, D., Ning, P., Du, W.: Attack-resistant location estimation in wireless sensor networks. In: IPSN 2005, Los Angeles, California, USA, pp. 99–106 (2005)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Marti, S., Giuli, T.J., Lai, K., Baker, M.: Mitigating routing misbehavior in mobile ad hoc networks. In: MobiCom 2000, pp. 255–265 (2000)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Newsome, J., Shi, R., Song, D., Perrig, A.: The sybil attack in sensor networks: Analysis and defenses. In: IPSN 2004 (April 2004)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Persiano, P., Visconti, I.: A secure and private system for subscription-based remote services. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. Secur. 6(4), 472–500 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Priyantha, N.B., Chakraborty, A., Balakrishnan, H.: The cricket location-support system. In: MobiCom 2000, pp. 32–43 (2000)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Qualnet Network Simulator, http://www.qualnet.com/
  20. 20.
    Rivest, R.L., Shamir, A., Adleman, L.: A method for obtaining digital signatures and public-key cryptosystems. Commun. ACM 26(1), 96–99 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sastry, N., Shankar, U., Wagner, D.: Secure verification of location claims. In: WiSe 2003, New York, NY, USA, pp. 1–10 (2003)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Shang, Y., Ruml, W., Zhang, Y., Fromherz, M.P.J.: Localization from mere connectivity. In: MobiHoc 2003, pp. 201–212 (2003)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Warner, J.S., Johnston, R.G.: Think GPS cargo tracking = high security? Think again. Technical report, Los Alamos National Laboratory (2003)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hu, Y., Perrig, A., Johnson, D.: A defense against wormhole attacks in wireless ad hoc networks. In: Proc. of INFOCOM 2003, San Francisco, CA, USA (2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lei Tang
    • 1
  • Xiaoyan Hong
    • 1
  • Phillip G. Bradford
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceThe University of AlabamaTuscaloosaUSA

Personalised recommendations