On Building a Lightweight Security Architecture for Sensor Networks

  • Taejoon Park
  • Kang G. Shin
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4097)


Sensor networks are characterized by their large-scale and unattended deployment that invites numerous critical attacks, thereby necessitating high-level security support for their intended applications and services. However, making sensor networks secure is challenging due mainly to the fact that sensors are battery-powered and it is usually very difficult to change or recharge their batteries. In this paper, we give a comprehensive overview of recent research results for securing such sensor networks, and then describe how to build a security framework, called a Lightweight Security Architecture (LiSA), for sensor networks, which achieves energy-aware security via closely-coupled, mutually-complementary security solutions.


Sensor Network Sensor Node Wireless Sensor Network Security Protocol Sensor Device 


  1. 1.
    Crossbow. MICA, MICA2 Motes & Sensors, available: http://www.xbow.com/
  2. 2.
    Heidemann, J., et al.: Building Efficient Wireless Sensor Networks with Low-Level Naming. In: Proceedings of SOSP 2001 (October 2001)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ratnasamy, S., et al.: Data-Centric Storage in Sensornets with GHT. In: MONET: Algorithmic Solutions for Wireless, Mobile, Ad Hoc and Sensor Networks (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Karp, B., Kung, H.T.: GPSR: Greedy Perimeter Stateless Routing for Wireless Networks. In: Proceedings of MobiCom 2000 (August 2000)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    He, T., et al.: Range-Free Localization Schemes for Large Scale Sensor Networks. In: Proceedings of MobiCom 2003 (September 2003)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nicolescu, D., Nath, B.: Ad-Hoc Positioning Systems (APS). In: Proceedings of IEEE GLOBECOM 2001 (November 2001)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hu, L., Evans, D.: Localization for Mobile Sensor Networks. In: Proceedings of MobiCom 2004 (October 2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Malan, D.: Crypto for Tiny Objects, Harvard Univ. Tech. Rep. TR-04-04 (2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Perrig, A., Szewczyk, R., Wen, V., Culler, D., Tygar, J.D.: SPINS: Security Protocol for Sensor Networks. In: Proceedings of MobiCom 2001 (July 2001)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Burnside, M., Clarke, D., Mills, T., Devadas, S., Rivest, R.: Proxy-based Security Protocols in Networked Mobile Devices. In: Nyberg, K., Heys, H.M. (eds.) SAC 2002. LNCS, vol. 2595, Springer, Heidelberg (2003)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Basagni, S., Herrin, K., Bruschi, D., Rosti, E.: Secure Pebblenets. In: Proceedings of MobiHoc 2001 (October 2001)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Carman, D.W., Kruus, P.S., Matt, B.J.: Constraints and Approaches for Distributed Sensor Network Security, NAI Tech. Rep. #00-010 (September 2000)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Eschenauer, L., Gligor, V.D.: A Key-Management Scheme for Distributed Sensor Networks. In: Proceedings of ACM CCS 2002 (November 2002)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chan, H., Perrig, A., Song, D.: Random Key Predistribution Schemes for Sensor Networks. In: Proceedings of IEEE Security and Privacy 2003 (May 2003)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lazos, L., Poovendran, R.: SeRLoc: Secure Range-Independent Localization for Wireless Sensor Networks. In: Zhou, X., Su, S., Papazoglou, M.P., Orlowska, M.E., Jeffery, K.G. (eds.) WISE 2004. LNCS, vol. 3306, Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Li, Z., Trappe, W., Zhang, Y., Nath, B.: Robust Statistical Methods for Securing Wireless Localization in Sensor Networks. In: Proceedings of IPSN 2005 (April 2005)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Liu, D., Ning, P., Du, W.: Attack-Resistant Location Estimation in Sensor Networks. In: Proceedings of IPSN 2005 (April 2005)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wroblewski, G.: General Method of Program Code Obfuscation. In: Proceedings of SERP 2002 (June 2002)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Barak, B., Goldreich, O., Impagliazzo, R., Rudich, S., Sahai, A., Vadhan, S., Yang, K.: On the (Im)possibility of Obfuscating Programs. In: Kilian, J. (ed.) CRYPTO 2001. LNCS, vol. 2139, Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ergun, F., Kannan, S., Kumar, S.R., Rubinfeld, R., Vishwanathan, M.: Spot-Checkers. In: Proceedings of ACM Symp. Theory of Computing (May 1998)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Aucsmith, D.: Tamper Resistant Software: An Implementation. In: Anderson, R. (ed.) IH 1996. LNCS, vol. 1174, pp. 317–333. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Horne, B., Matheson, L., Sheehan, C., Tarjan, R.E.: Dynamic Self-Checking Techniques for Improved Tamper Resistance. In: Sander, T. (ed.) DRM 2001. LNCS, vol. 2320, pp. 141–159. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Chang, H., Atallah, M.J.: Protecting Software Code by Guards. In: Sander, T. (ed.) DRM 2001. LNCS, vol. 2320, pp. 160–175. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kennell, R., Jamieson, L.H.: Establishing the Genuinity of Remote Computer Systems. In: Proceedings of USENIX Security Symposium (August 2003)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Seshadri, A., Perrig, A., Doorn, L., Khosla, P.: SWATT: SoftWare-based ATTestation for Embedded Devices. In: Proceedings of IEEE S&P 2004 (May 2004)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Park, T., Shin, K.G.: Soft Tamper-Proofing via Program Integrity Verification in Wireless Sensor Networks. IEEE Trans. on Mobile Computing (May/June 2005)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Park, T., Shin, K.G.: LiSP: A Lightweight Security Protocol for Wireless Sensor Networks. ACM Trans. on Embedded Computing Systems (August 2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Taejoon Park
    • 1
  • Kang G. Shin
    • 2
  1. 1.Samsung Advanced Institute of TechnologySuwonKorea
  2. 2.Real-Time Computing Laboratory, Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer ScienceUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA

Personalised recommendations