Wireless Sensor Networks for Military Purposes

  • Michael Winkler
  • Michael Street
  • Klaus-Dieter Tuchs
  • Konrad Wrona
Part of the Springer Series on Chemical Sensors and Biosensors book series (SSSENSORS, volume 13)


By connecting multiple sensors, data analysis services and applications, military capabilities can be increased significantly. Consequently, wireless sensor networking has become a fundamental aspect of modern military sensor technology and military information systems. The diverse set of military use cases for wireless sensor networks is presented in this chapter in the context of intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, of environmental monitoring and of battlefield situational awareness.

On this basis, the characteristics of military wireless sensor networks are outlined towards operation without a pre-deployed infrastructure, for a rapid deployment of the capability, and for operation in a hostile environment. The extent to which the military requirements on wireless sensor networks go beyond commercial/civil requirements is explained. In the areas of security and sensor fusion, many well-known mechanisms deployed for the internet infrastructure are not applicable and alternative solutions are furthermore presented.


Civil military cooperation Military applications Security Sensor fusion Situational awareness Surveillance Waveform design Wireless sensor networks 



Allied environmental conditions testing publication


Chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear


Civil and military cooperation


Communication and information system


Combined likelihood vector


Communication intelligence


Coalition shared data base


Defence requirements review


Denial of service


Electronic intelligence




Electronic warfare


Friendly force tracking


Full motion video


Ground moving target indicator






Human intelligence


Identity-based encryption


Identification data combining process


Improvised explosive devices


Joint Directors of Laboratories


Joint intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance


Joint likelihood vector


Low probability of intercept


Medium access control


Mikoyan-and-Gurevich Design Bureau


North Atlantic Treaty Organisation


Network-enabled capability


NATO identification system




Radio frequency identification


Synthetic aperture radar


Signals intelligence


Service interoperability point


Source probability matrices


NATO standardization agreement


Trusted platform module


Unmanned aerial vehicle


Wireless application protocol


Extensible mark-up language


  1. 1.
    Southee D, Henry J, Perry G (2005) Osama seeker: AISB 05 – Proceedings of the Symposium on Robotics, Mechatronics and Animatronics in the Creative and Entertainment Industries and Arts, Hatfield, UK (April 2005)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Winkler M, Bartolomasi P, Nesse L (2009) Multi-hop Networking for Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance UAS Missions, Military CIS Conference MCC 2009Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    US Department of Defense (1999) Interoperability and performance standards for medium and high frequency radios, Military Standard 188-141B, March 1999Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Domingo MC (2011) Securing underwater wireless communication networks. IEEE Wirel Commun 18(1):22–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Halperin D et al (2008) Pacemakers and implantable cardiac defibrillators: software radio attacks and zero-power defense. Proceedings of the 2008 IEEE Symposium on Security and PrivacyGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Maisel W, Kohno D (2010) Improving the security and privacy of implantable medical devices. N Engl J Med 362(13):1164–1166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zheng J, Lee MJ, Anshel M (2006) Toward Secure Low Rate Wireless Personal Area Networks. IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing 5(10):1361–1373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hu W, Tan H, Corke P, Shih WC, Jha S (2010) Toward trusted wireless sensor networks. ACM Trans Sens Netw 7(1):5:1–5:25Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wood A, Stankovic J (2002) Denial of service in sensor networks. IEEE Computer 35(10):54–62Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Law YW, Palaniswami M, Van Hoesel L, Doumen J, Hartel P, Havinga P (2009) Energy-efficient link-layer jamming attacks against wireless sensor network MAC protocols. ACM Trans Sens Netw 5(1):6:1–6:38Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ning P, Liu A, Du W (2008) Mitigating DoS attacks against broadcast authentication in wireless sensor networks. ACM Trans Sens Netw 4(1):1:1–1:35Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Poovendran R, Wang C, Roy S (eds) (2007) Secure localization and time synchronization for wireless sensor and ad hoc networks. Advances in information security, vol 30. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ozdemir S, Xiao Y (2009) Secure data aggregation in wireless sensor networks: a comprehensive overview. Comput Netw 53:2022–2037CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hegland A, Winjum E, Mjolsnes S, Rong C, Kure O, Spilling P (2006) A survey of key management in ad hoc networks. IEEE Commun Surv Tutorials 8(3):48–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gaubatz G, Kaps J-P, Sunar B (2005) Public key cryptography in sensor networks—revisited. In: Castelluccia C et al (eds) Security in ad-hoc and sensor networks. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 3313. Springer, Berlin, pp 2–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wang R, Du W, Liu X, Ning P (2009) ShortPK: a short-term public key scheme for broadcast authentication in sensor networks. ACM Trans Sens Netw 6(1):9:1–9:29Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gura N, Patel A, Wander A, Eberle H, Shantz S (2004) Comparing elliptic curve cryptography and RSA on 8-bit CPUs. In: Joye M, Quisquater J-J (eds) Proceedings of Cryptographic Hardware and Embedded Systems (CHES). Lecture notes in computer science, vol 3156, pp 935–943Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nikoletseas S, Rolim J (2011) Theoretical aspects of distributed computing in sensor networks. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zhang J, Varadharajan V (2010) Wireless sensor network key management survey and taxonomy. J Netw Comput Appl 33:63–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Simplicio M, Barreto P, Margi C, Carvalho T (2010) A survey on key management mechanisms for distributed wireless sensor networks. Comput Netw 54:2591–2612CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tan C, Wang H, Zhong S, Li Q (2008) Body sensor network security: an identity-based cryptography approach. WiSec’08, Alexandria, Virginia, USAGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Anderson R, Chan H, Perrig A (2004) Key infection: smart trust for smart dust. In: Proceedings of the 12th IEEE International Conference on Network Protocols (ICNP '04). IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, pp 206–215Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pietro R, Mancini L, Mei A (2006) Energy efficient node-to-node authentication and communication confidentiality in wireless sensor networks. Wireless Networks 12(6):709–721Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Liggins M, Hall D, Llinas J (2001) Handbook of multisensor data fusion. CRC, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Smith D, Singh S (2006) Approaches to multisensor data fusion in target tracking: a survey. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 18(12):1696–1710CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hall D, Llinas J (1997) An introduction to multisensor data fusion. Proc IEEE 85(1):6–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Nakamura E, Laureiro A, Frery A (2007) Information fusion for wireless sensor networks: methods, models, and classification. ACM Comput Surv 39(3):9Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Shahbazian E, Blodgett D, Labbe P (2001) The extended OODA model for data fusion systems. In: Proceedings of 4th International Conference on Information FusionGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Bedworth M, O'Brien J, Jemity M (2000) The Omnibus model: a new model of data fusion? Aerosp Electron Syst Mag 15(4):30–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Esteban J, Starr A, Willetts R, Hannah P, Bryanston-Cross P (2005) A review of data fusion models and architectures: towards engineering guidelines. Neural Comput Appl 14(4):273–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Elmenreich W (2007) A review on system architectures for sensor fusion applications. In: Nah Y, Puschner P, Rammig F (eds) Software technologies for embedded and ubiquitous systems. Springer, Berlin, pp 547–559CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Frankel CB, Bedworth MD (2000) Control, estimation and abstraction in fusion architectures: lessons from human information processing. In: FUSION 2000: Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Information FusionGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Steinberg AN, Bowman CL, White FE (1998) Revisions to the JDL Model. In: Joint NATO/IRIS conference proceedings, Quebec, 1998Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Blasch E, Plano S (2002) JDL Level 5 fusion model “user refinement” issues and applications in group tracking. In: Proc. of SPIE – Aerosense, vol 4729, pp 270–279Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    NATO Standardization Agency: Identification Data Combining Process. STANAG 4162, Brussels (2001)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    NATO Standardization Agency: NATO Joint Standard Identification Description. STANAG 1241, Brussels (2009)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Koks D, Challa S (2005) An introduction to Bayesian and Dempster-Shafer data fusion, Edinburgh, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Sentz K, Ferson S (2002) Combination of evidence in Dempster-Shafer theory. Sandia Report SAND2002-0835, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New MexicoGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Hinman M (2002) Some computational approaches for situation assessment and impact assessment. In: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Information Fusion, vol.1, pp 687–693Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Wrona K, Oudkerk S, Hallingstad G (2010) Designing medium assurance XML-labelling guards for NATO. In: Proceedings of the Military Communications Conference (MILCOM), San Jose, USA, 2010Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Wrona K, Hallingstad G (2011) Controlled information sharing in NATO operations. In: Proceedings of the Military Communications Conference (MILCOM), Baltimore, USA, 2011Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Associated Press; Hackers in the bloodstream: diabetics vulnerable to attack on insulin pumps, sugar monitors, 4 Aug 2011Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Chu C-K, Liu J, Zhou J, Bao F, Deng R (2010) Practical ID-based encryption for wireless sensor networks. In: Proceedings of the 5th ACM Symposium on Information, Computer and Communications Security (ASIACCS 2010), pp 337–340Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Duh D-R, Lin T-C, Tung C-H, Chan S-J (2006) An implementation of AES algorithm with the multiple spaces random key pre-distribution scheme on MOTE-KIT 5040. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Sensor Networks, Ubiquitous, and Trustworthy Computing, vol. 2, pp 64–71Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Gouvea CPL, Lopez J. Software implementation of pairing-based cryptography on sensor networks using MSP430 microcontroller, INDOCRYPT 2009, LNCS 5922, pp 248–262Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Nguyen ST, Rong C. ZigBee security using identity-based cryptography. ATC 2007, LNCS 4610, pp 3–12Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Szczechowiak P, Kargl A, Collier M, Scott M (2009) On the application of pairing based cryptography to wireless sensor networks. WiSec’09, Zurich, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael Winkler
    • 1
  • Michael Street
    • 2
  • Klaus-Dieter Tuchs
    • 1
  • Konrad Wrona
    • 2
  1. 1.NATO Consultation, Command and Control Agency (until 2011)The HagueThe Netherlands
  2. 2.NATO Communications and Information AgencyThe HagueThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations