Advertisement

The Internet of Things (IoT) Routing Security—A Study

  • M. Durairaj
  • J. Hirudhaya Mary AshaEmail author
Chapter
  • 31 Downloads
Part of the Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering book series (LNEE, volume 637)

Abstract

Internet of things (IoT) is the finest metric following technology that turns the attention of the people throughout the world. IoT is a global connecting network that allows people to connect with each other largely. It is a challenging technology due to its complex environment and resource-dependent features. Different surveys depict that there may be several billions of IoT users by 2020. There are numerous companies that offer IoT services. Nowadays, the security of an IoT feature is an issue which is non-measurable in nature. Different research works are being performed to find the optimal solution to provide security of IoT. IoT requires less human commanding and controls which results in vulnerability due to hacking. In this paper, the literature is reviewed based on the types of routing attacks in wireless sensor network interface layer communication and classified the attacks that disturb the communication. These attacks are classified as attacks on topology, resources, and traffic. Based on the classification of attacks, countermeasures are suggested to protect the routing standard for the IoT environment.

Keywords

Internet of things Wireless sensor network Security attacks Routing protocols Resource attacks Traffic attacks 

References

  1. 1.
    Akpakwu, G.A., et al.: A survey on 5G networks for the Internet of Things: communication technologies and challenges. IEEE Access 6: 3619–3647 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Vermesan, O., et al.: Internet of things strategic research roadmap. In: Internet of Things-Global Technological and Societal Trends, vol. 1.2011, pp. 9–52 (2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Roman, R., Zhou, J., Lopez, J.: On the features and challenges of security and privacy in the distributed internet of things. Comput. Netw. 57(10), 2266–2279 (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Balevi, E., Al Rabee, F.T., Gitlin, R.D.: ALOHA-NOMA for massive machine-to-machine IoT communication. arXiv preprint arXiv:1803.09323 (2018)
  5. 5.
    Zhou, R., et al.: File-centric multi-key aggregate keyword searchable encryption for industrial internet of things. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inf. (2018)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Silva, E.F., Muchaluat-Saade, D.C., Fernandes, N.C.: ACROSS: a generic framework for attribute-based access control with distributed policies for virtual organizations. Fut. Gener. Comput. Syst. 78: 1–17 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Huotari, S., Rothstein, K.M.: Mechanism for executing server discovery. U.S. Patent No. 9,871,872, 16 Jan 2018Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kogias, D.G., et al.: Realizing the wireless technology in the Internet of Things (IoT). In: Emerging Wireless Communication and Network Technologies. Springer, Singapore, pp. 173–192 (20118)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jiang, Y., Huang, Z., Tsang, D.H.K.: Challenges and solutions in fog computing orchestration. IEEE Netw. 32(3): 122–129 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rao, A.P.: Adaptive control strategies for task scheduler using the Internet of Things. In: Exploring the Convergence of Big Data and the Internet of Things. IGI Global, pp. 129–140Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Morabito, R., et al.: Consolidate IoT edge computing with lightweight virtualization. IEEE Net. 32(1): 102–111 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Silva, B.N., Khan, M., Han, K.: Internet of things: a comprehensive review of enabling technologies, architecture, and challenges. IETE Techn. Rev. 35(2), 205–220 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Restuccia, F., D’Oro, S., Melodia, T.: Securing the Internet of Things: new perspectives and research challenges. arXiv preprint arXiv:1803.05022 (2018)
  14. 14.
    Wang, H., Zhang, Z., Taleb, T.: Special issue on security and privacy of IoT. World Wide Web 21(1), 1–6 (2018)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Osanaiye, O., Alfa, A.S., Hancke, G.P.: A statistical approach to detect jamming attacks in wireless sensor network. Sensors 18(6), 1691 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Weekly, K., Pister, K.: Evaluating sinkhole defense techniques in RPL networks. In: 2012 20th IEEE International Conference on Network Protocols (ICNP), pp. 1092–1648, 14 Feb 2013Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gao, S., et al.: Security threats in the data plane of software-defined networks. IEEE Netw. (2018)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Feng, Y., et al.: Vulnerability of traffic control system under cyber-attacks using falsified data. Transportation Research Board 2018 Annual Meeting (TRB) (2018)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Valanarasu, M.R.: Smart and secure IoT and ai integration framework for hospital environment. J. ISMAC 1(03):172–179 (2019)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Airehrour, D., Gutierrez, J., Ray, S.K.: A trust-based defense scheme for mitigating blackhole and selective forwarding attacks in the RPL routing protocol. Aust. J. Telecommun. Dig. Econ. 6(1), 41 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tiwari, R., Saxena, T.: A review on Sybil and sinkhole of service attack in VANET. Recent Trends Electron. Commun. Syst. 5(1) 7–11 (2018)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Gill, R.K., Sachdeva, M.: Detection of hello flood attack on LEACH in wireless sensor networks. In: Next-Generation Networks, pp. 377–387 (2018)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ghugar, U., Pradhan, J.: Intrusion detection system in wireless sensor networks for wormhole attack using trust-based system. In: Handbook of Research on Information Security in Biomedical Signal Processing. IGI Global, pp. 198–209 (2018)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Thomas, A., Gireesh Kumar, T., Mohan, A.K.: Neighbor attack detection in the internet of things. In: Advanced computational and communication paradigms. Springer, Singapore, pp. 87–196 (2018)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Yujie, Z.H.A.O., et al.: Techniques for automatically mitigating denial of service attacks via attack pattern matching. U.S. Patent No. 9,912,678. 6 Mar 2018Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Singh, M.M., Mandal, J.K.: Impact of black hole attack on the reliability of mobile ad hoc network under DSDV routing protocol. Int. J. Syst. Control Commun. 9(1), 20–30 (2018)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kelpen, K., Simo, H.: Privacy and data protection in the domain name system. Privatheit und selbstbestimmtes Leben in der digitalen Welt. Springer Vieweg, Wiesbaden, pp. 253–302 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Azzuhri, S.R., et al.: Towards a better approach for link breaks detection and route repairs strategy in AODV protocol. Wireless Commun. Mobile Comput. (2018)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Devibala, K., et al.: Neighbor constraint traffic centric distributed sinkhole detection and mitigation approach for quality of service improvement in wireless sensor networks. In: Industry Interactive Innovations in Science, Engineering, and Technology. Springer, Singapore, pp. 357–366 (2018)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Cho, J.-H., Chen, R.: PROVEST: provenance-based trust model for delay tolerant networks. IEEE Trans. Dependable Secure Comput. 15(1), 151–165 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Sharma, S., Bansal, R.K., Bansal, S.: Issues and challenges in wireless sensor networks. In: 2013 International Conference on Machine Intelligence Research and Advancement (2013)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Le, A., Loo, J., Luo, Y., Lasebae, A.: Specification-based IDS for securing RPL from topology attacks (2011)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
  34. 34.
    Perrey, H., Landsmann, M., Ugus, O., Wahlisch, M., Schmidt, TC: TRAIL: topology authentication in RPL. ACM 978-1-4503-1169-4 (2016)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Raza, S., Wallgren, L., Voigt, T.: SVELTE: real-time intrusion detection in the Internet of Things. Ad Hoc Netw. (2013)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Patil, M., Biradar, R.C.: A survey on routing protocols in wireless sensor networks. 978–1-4673-4523-1/12/$31.00 ©2012. IEEEGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Li, H., Lu, R., Zhou, L., et al.: An efficient Merkle-tree-based authentication scheme for smart grid (2013)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Wikipedia: Wikipedia: the free encyclopedia. Retrieved from https://www.wikipedia.org/ (2017)
  39. 39.
    Thubert, P., et al.: Co-existence of a distributed routing protocol and centralized path computation for deterministic wireless networks. U.S. Patent No. 9,882,804, 30 Jan 2018Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Mihovska, A., Sarkar, M.: Smart connectivity for the Internet of Things (IoT) applications. In: New Advances in the Internet of Things, pp. 105–118. Springer, Cham (2018)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Assistant Professor, Department of Computer ScienceBharathidasan UniversityTiruchirapalliIndia
  2. 2.Research Scholar, Department of Computer ScienceBharathidasan UniversityTiruchirapalliIndia

Personalised recommendations