Set Difference Attacks in Wireless Sensor Networks

  • Tulio de Souza
  • Joss Wright
  • Piers O’Hanlon
  • Ian Brown
Part of the Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering book series (LNICST, volume 106)

Abstract

We show that existing proposed mechanisms for preserving the privacy of reported data values in wireless sensor networks are vulnerable against a simple and practical form of attack: the set difference attack. These attacks are particularly effective where a number of separate applications are running in a given network, but are not limited to this case. We demonstrate the feasibility of these attacks and assert that they cannot, in general, be avoided whilst maintaining absolute accuracy of sensed data. As an implication of this, we suggest a mechanism based on perturbation of sensor results whereby these attacks can be partially mitigated.

Keywords

privacy privacy-preserving wireless sensor network data perturbation differential privacy privacy-preserving data aggregation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Denning, D.E., Denning, P.J., Schwartz, M.D.: The Tracker: A Threat to Statistical Database Security. ACM Transactions on Database Systems 4(1), 76–96 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dwork, C.: Differential Privacy. In: Bugliesi, M., Preneel, B., Sassone, V., Wegener, I. (eds.) ICALP 2006. LNCS, vol. 4052, pp. 1–12. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dwork, C., McSherry, F., Nissim, K., Smith, A.: Calibrating Noise to Sensitivity in Private Data Analysis. In: Halevi, S., Rabin, T. (eds.) TCC 2006. LNCS, vol. 3876, pp. 265–284. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Erdős, P., Rényi, A.: On a classical problem of probability theory. Magyar Tud. Akad. Mat. Kutató Int. Közl 6, 215–220 (1961)MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    European Commission: 95/46/EC-Data Protection Directive. Official Journal of the European Communities 281, 0031–0050 (1995)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ganti, R.K., Pham, N., Tsai, Y.E., Abdelzaher, T.F.: PoolView: stream privacy for grassroots participatory sensing. In: Proceedings of the 6th ACM Conference on Embedded Network Sensor Systems, pp. 281–294. ACM (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gentry, C.: A fully homomorphic encryption scheme. Ph.D. thesis, Stanford University (2009)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gülcü, C., Tsudik, G.: Mixing email with BABEL. In: Symposium on Network and Distributed System Security, pp. 2–16 (1996)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    He, W., Liu, X., Nguyen, H., Nahrstedt, K., Abdelzaher, T.: PDA: Privacy-Preserving Data Aggregation in Wireless Sensor Networks. In: IEEE INFOCOM 2007 - 26th IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications, pp. 2045–2053. IEEE (May 2007)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    He, W., Nguyen, H., Liuyi, X., Nahrstedt, K., Abdelzaher, T.: iPDA: An Integrity-Protecting Private Data Aggregation Scheme for Wireless Sensor Networks. In: IEEE Military Communications Conference on MILCOM 2008, pp. 1–7. IEEE (November 2008)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Huygens, C., Joosen, W.: Federated and shared use of sensor networks through security middleware. In: Sixth International Conference on Information Technology: New Generations, pp. 1005–1011 (2009)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Leontiadis, I., Efstratiou, C., Mascolo, C., Crowcroft, J.: Senshare: Transforming sensor networks into multi-application sensing infrastructures. In: 9th European Conference on Wireless Sensor Networks (February 2012)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Murdoch, S.J.: Hot or not: Revealing hidden services by their clock skew. In: 13th ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 27–36. ACM Press (2006)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rastogi, V., Nath, S.: Differentially private aggregation of distributed time-series with transformation and encryption. In: Proceedings of the 2010 International Conference on Management of Data, pp. 735–746. ACM (2010)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yick, J., Mukherjee, B., Ghosal, D.: Wireless sensor network survey. Comput. Netw. 52, 2292–2330 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© ICST Institute for Computer Science, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tulio de Souza
    • 1
  • Joss Wright
    • 2
  • Piers O’Hanlon
    • 2
  • Ian Brown
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of OxfordUK
  2. 2.Oxford Internet InstituteUniversity of OxfordUK

Personalised recommendations