A Novel Approach to Detection of and Protection from Sybil Attack in VANET

  • Binod Kumar PattanayakEmail author
  • Omkar Pattnaik
  • Sasmita Pani
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems book series (LNNS, volume 109)


With increment in human populace and financial advancement, populace of private vehicles on street has likewise expanded. This has brought about expanded mishap likelihood and fatalities on the streets. Vehicular ad hoc networks (VANETs) have indicated guarantee of cutting down street mishaps and fatalities thereof by empowering correspondence between vehicles. VANETs likewise enable the street administrators to control and screen vehicles for rash driving and snappy help. Be that as it may, these systems face difficulties of design, routing, communication, and security. Utilization of remote vehicle for correspondence has left these systems powerless against various sorts of security assaults. One of the significant helplessness in such systems is caused when a malignant vehicle or RSU can gain different characters. The assault is named as Sybil attack. In VANETs, a noxious vehicle may send wrong messages identified with traffic, mishap ahead, street shut, and so on. This may compel the engine driver to take an alternate course, hence making him inclined to an untoward occurrence. In this paper, we have used different methodologies like PKC, PVM, and RTM techniques to detect Sybil attack in VANET.


RSU (roadside unit) Public key cryptography (PKC) position verification method (PVM) and resource testing method (RTM) 


  1. 1.
    Karlof C, Wagner D (2003) Secure routing in wireless sensor networks: attacks and countermeasures. Ad hoc Netw J 1:293–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sood M, Vasudeva A (2013) Perspectives of Sybil attack in routing protocols of mobile ad hoc network. Comput Netw Commun (NetCom) 131:3–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Newsome J, Shi E, Song D, Perrig A (2004) The Sybil attack in sensor networks: analysis & defenses. In: Third international symposium on information processing in sensor networks, IPSN 2004, pp 259–268Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pouyan AA, Alimohammadi M (2014) Sybil attack detection in vehicular networks. Comput Sci Inf Technol 2(4):197–202Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hubaux JP, Capkun S, Luo J (2004) The security and privacy of smart vehicles. IEEE Secur Priv Mag 2(3):49–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
  7. 7.
    Yu B, Xu C-Z, Xiao B (2013) Detecting Sybil attacks in VANETs. J Parallel Distrib Comput. Available online 9 Feb 2013Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Douceur JR (2002) The Sybil attack. In Proceedings of the international workshop on peer to peer systems, March 2002, pp 251–260Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Saini M, Kumar K, Bhatnagar KV (2013) Efficient and feasible methods to detect Sybil attack in VANET. Int J Eng Res Technol 6:431–440Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Grover J, Gaur MS, Laxmi V (2011) Sybil attack in VANETs detection and prevention. Published in security of self-organizing networks. Printed in the United States of America on acid-free paper-10 in 2011Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Newsome J, Shi E, Song D, Perrig A (2004) The Sybil attack in sensor networks: analysis and defenses. In: Proceedings of international symposium on information processing in sensor networks, April 2004, pp 259–268Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Raya M, Hubaux JP (2007) Securing vehicular ad hoc networks. J Comput Secur 39–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Khalili A, Katz J, Arbaugh WA (2003) Towards secure key distribution in truly ad-hoc networks. In: Proceedings of IEEE workshop on security and assurance in ad-hoc networksGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Martucci LA, Kohlweiss M, Anderson C, Panchenko A (2008) Self-certified Sybil-free pseudonyms. In: WiSec’08: proceedings of the first ACM conference on wireless network security, New York, NY, USA, ACM Press, pp 154–159Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yan G, Olariu S, Weigle MC (2008) Providing VANET security through active position detection. Comput Commun 31(12):2883–2897CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pathre A, Agrawal C, Jain A (2013) Identification of malicious vehicle in vanet environment. J Glob Res Comput Sci 4:30–34Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Isaac T, Zeadally S, Camara JS (2010) Security attacks and solutions for vehicular ad hoc networks. Commun IET 4(7)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Samara G, A-Salihy WAH, Sures R (2010) Security Analysis of Vehicular Ad Hoc Networks (VANET). In: IEEE second international conference on network applications, protocols and servicesGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ibrahim K (2011) Data aggregation and dissemination in vehicular ad-hoc networks. Doctoral dissertation, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VirginiaGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rahbari M, Jamali MAJ (2011) Efficient detection of Sybil attack based on cryptography in VANET. Int J Netw Secur Its Appl (IJNSA) 3:185–195Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Zhou T, Choudhury RR, Ning P, Chakrabarty K (2011) P2 DAP-Sybil attacks detection in vehicular ad hoc networks. IEEE J. Sel Areas Commun 29(3)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Levine BN, Shields C, Margolin NB (2006) A survey of solutions to the Sybil attack. University of Massachusetts, AmherstGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hao Y, Tang J, Cheng Y (2011) Cooperative Sybil attack detection for position based applications in privacy preserved VANETs. In: IEEE communications society in the IEEE Globecom 2011 proceedingsGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Binod Kumar Pattanayak
    • 1
    Email author
  • Omkar Pattnaik
    • 2
  • Sasmita Pani
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringInstitute of Technical Education and Research, Siksha ‘O’ Anusandhan Deemed to be UniversityBhubaneswarIndia
  2. 2.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringGovernment College of EngineeringKeonjharIndia

Personalised recommendations