6
D.G.Anand, Dr.H.G.Chandrakanth, Dr.M.N.Giriprasad / International Journal of Engineering Research and Applications (IJERA) ISSN: 2248-9622 www.ijera.com Vol. 2, Issue 1,Jan-Feb 2012, pp.911-916 911 | P a g e SECURITY THREATS & ISSUES IN WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORKS D.G.Anand, Sri Krishna Institute of Technology, Bangalore, Karnataka. Dr.H.G.Chandrakanth Sri Krishna Institute of Technology, Bangalore, Karnataka. Dr.M.N.Giriprasad Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University College of Engineering, Anantapur, Andra Pradesh ABSTRACT The Wireless Sensor Network (WSN) increasingly becoming more practicable solution to many challenging applications. One of the major applications of the sensor networks is in military. So providing security is particularly challenging and its security mechanisms are also be the greatest concern to deploy sensor network such hostile unattended environments, monitoring real world applications. In this paper we attempt to analyze the various threat models, attacks on WSN and respective defensive measures available relevant to security networks highlighting their advantages and weaknesses. KeywordsAttacks, Threats, Security, Sensor nodes, Wireless Sensor Network. Security issues INTRODUCTION Wireless Sensor Network is a promising platform for a variety of application areas in such as environmental monitoring, battlefield surveillance, and homeland security domains and it is attracting many researchers to work on various problems related to this domain. The coverage, connectivity and energy related issues are very important in WSNs. But WSNs appears that they are more prone to attacks than wired networks. In applications like military, without security, the use of Wireless Sensor Network is any application would result in disastrous consequences. Security allows Wireless Sensor Networks to be used to maintain integrity of data and availability of all messages in the presence of resourceful adversaries. The main objective of confidentiality and authenticity is expected in sensor networks to safe guard the information traveling among the nodes of the network or between the sensor nodes and the sink node from disclosure. The WSNs are comprised of a group of nodes for scalar or multidimensional data gathering. Sensor nodes are employed to collect the information, compress and process it for storage purpose and to transmit the processed data to a sink such as an intermediate cluster head or a base station (also called as gateway sometimes). The transmitted information is then presented to the system by base station connection. They are open to different varieties of attacks, including node capture, and denial of service and tampering physically, promoting a range of fundamental research challenges [1] In WSNs, the primary challenges of sensor networks are by two facts. First, sensors are extremely energy constrained. Secondly, in most of the applications nodes will be randomly deployed. This randomness leads to the issue of dimensioning the sensor network. The nodes deployed may be either in a controlled environment where monitoring, maintenance and surveillance are very difficult. In the uncontrolled environments, security for sensor networks becomes extremely important. In this paper we discuss the most common security services and issues in wireless sensor networks and try to give a comparative note of various existing security approaches. The paper is organized as follows. Section-1 provides a brief overview of wireless sensor networks, their evolution, major research initiatives and future applications along with issues of sensor Network. Section-2 Different types of Security attacks. Section-3 Security issues & challenges are discussed. Section-4 highlights the related work in sensor networks. Section-5 concludes the paper by highlighting the problems of sensor networks and future directions. Network hole appears in the network due to the destruction of group of nodes. Holes in networks often cause failures in message routing due to the local minimum problem. Therefore, traditional geographic routing protocols cannot be applied with such topology management protocols. This paper addresses the security concerns in wireless sensor networks. More specifically, we address the wormhole attack, which is a severe attack in wireless sensor networks whereby an attacker stores transmitted packets and then replays them into the network. Defending against such an attack is challenging because it can be

SECURITY THREATS & ISSUES IN WIRELESS SENSOR … · major research initiatives and future applications along -2 Different types of ... Security Threats and Issues in ... the sensor

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: SECURITY THREATS & ISSUES IN WIRELESS SENSOR … · major research initiatives and future applications along -2 Different types of ... Security Threats and Issues in ... the sensor

D.G.Anand, Dr.H.G.Chandrakanth, Dr.M.N.Giriprasad / International Journal of Engineering Research

and Applications (IJERA) ISSN: 2248-9622 www.ijera.com

Vol. 2, Issue 1,Jan-Feb 2012, pp.911-916

911 | P a g e

SECURITY THREATS & ISSUES IN WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORKS

D.G.Anand,

Sri Krishna Institute of

Technology, Bangalore, Karnataka.

Dr.H.G.Chandrakanth

Sri Krishna Institute of

Technology, Bangalore, Karnataka.

Dr.M.N.Giriprasad

Jawaharlal Nehru Technological

University College of Engineering,

Anantapur, Andra Pradesh

ABSTRACT

The Wireless Sensor Network (WSN) increasingly

becoming more practicable solution to many challenging

applications. One of the major applications of the sensor

networks is in military. So providing security is particularly

challenging and its security mechanisms are also be the

greatest concern to deploy sensor network such hostile

unattended environments, monitoring real world

applications. In this paper we attempt to analyze the various

threat models, attacks on WSN and respective defensive

measures available relevant to security networks

highlighting their advantages and weaknesses.

Keywords– Attacks, Threats, Security, Sensor nodes,

Wireless Sensor Network. Security issues

INTRODUCTION

Wireless Sensor Network is a promising platform for a

variety of application areas in such as environmental

monitoring, battlefield surveillance, and homeland security

domains and it is attracting many researchers to work on

various problems related to this domain. The coverage,

connectivity and energy related issues are very important in

WSNs. But WSNs appears that they are more prone to

attacks than wired networks. In applications like military,

without security, the use of Wireless Sensor Network is any

application would result in disastrous consequences.

Security allows Wireless Sensor Networks to be used to

maintain integrity of data and availability of all messages in

the presence of resourceful adversaries. The main objective

of confidentiality and authenticity is expected in sensor

networks to safe guard the information traveling among the

nodes of the network or between the sensor nodes and the

sink node from disclosure.

The WSNs are comprised of a group of nodes for scalar or

multidimensional data gathering. Sensor nodes are

employed to collect the information, compress and process

it for storage purpose and to transmit the processed data to

a sink such as an intermediate cluster head or a base station

(also called as gateway sometimes). The transmitted

information is then presented to the system by base station

connection. They are open to different varieties of attacks,

including node capture, and denial of service and tampering

physically, promoting a range of fundamental research

challenges [1]

In WSNs, the primary challenges of sensor networks are by

two facts. First, sensors are extremely energy constrained.

Secondly, in most of the applications nodes will be

randomly deployed. This randomness leads to the issue of

dimensioning the sensor network. The nodes deployed may

be either in a controlled environment where monitoring,

maintenance and surveillance are very difficult. In the

uncontrolled environments, security for sensor networks

becomes extremely important.

In this paper we discuss the most common security services

and issues in wireless sensor networks and try to give a

comparative note of various existing security approaches.

The paper is organized as follows. Section-1 provides a

brief overview of wireless sensor networks, their evolution,

major research initiatives and future applications along

with issues of sensor Network. Section-2 Different types of

Security attacks. Section-3 Security issues & challenges are

discussed. Section-4 highlights the related work in sensor

networks. Section-5 concludes the paper by highlighting

the problems of sensor networks and future directions.

Network hole appears in the network due to the destruction

of group of nodes. Holes in networks often cause failures in

message routing due to the local minimum problem.

Therefore, traditional geographic routing protocols cannot

be applied with such topology management protocols.

This paper addresses the security concerns in wireless

sensor networks. More specifically, we address the

wormhole attack, which is a severe attack in wireless

sensor networks whereby an attacker stores transmitted

packets and then replays them into the network. Defending

against such an attack is challenging because it can be

Page 2: SECURITY THREATS & ISSUES IN WIRELESS SENSOR … · major research initiatives and future applications along -2 Different types of ... Security Threats and Issues in ... the sensor

D.G.Anand, Dr.H.G.Chandrakanth, Dr.M.N.Giriprasad / International Journal of Engineering Research

and Applications (IJERA) ISSN: 2248-9622 www.ijera.com

Vol. 2, Issue 1,Jan-Feb 2012, pp.911-916

912 | P a g e

launched even if all network communication is authentic

and confidential.

2. Security Threats and Issues in Wireless Sensor

Networks (WSN)

There are several security requirements to guard a network.

Denial of Service (DoS)

A Denial of Service attack in sensor networks and networks

in general is defined as any event that eliminates the

network’s capacity to perform its desired function. DoS

attacks in wireless sensor networks may be carried out at

different layers like the physical, link, routing and transport

layers. [25], [26].

This occurs by the unintentional failure of sensor nodes.

The simplest DoS attack tries to exhaust the resources

available to the victim node, by transmitting additional

unwanted packets and thus prevents legitimate sensor

network users from tapping work or resources to which

these nodes are deployed [2][3]. Denial of Service (DoS)

attack is means that not only for the adversary’s attempt to

subvert, disrupt, or destroy a sensor network, but also for

any event that diminishes a sensor network’s capability to

provide a service [3].In WSNs, several types of Denial of

Service attacks in different layers might be performed. i.e.

at physical layer, the Denial of Service attacks could be

jamming and tampering, at link layer, collision, exhaustion,

unfairness, at network layer, neglect and greed, homing,

misdirection, black holes and at transport layer this attack

could be performed by malicious flooding and

resynchronizations.

Countermeasures against Denial of Service

In [4] the authors have presented a security solution

framework prepared to the base station to defend against

Denial of Service (DoS) attack. After Denial of Service is

detected, base station challenges clients with cryptographic

solution to safeguard it from various types of attacks.

Compared with normal and traditional schemes, they

introduce a reputation based client puzzles, which uses a

dynamic protocols to adjust the puzzle problem for each

and every node in terms of node’s reputation value. Due to

which the punishment for problematic malicious nodes

becomes stronger and stronger pressing without adding any

extra burden to most normal sensor nodes.

In [5], authors have presented Denial of Service (DoS)

attacks on underwater sensor networks. These networks

typically employ acoustic methods to send the information

under water, the detection methods cannot be applied

directly to WSNs.

In [6], Wood and Stankovic explained different Denial of

Service (DoS) attacks that can cause problems to different

layers of sensor networks. The simplest DoS attack tries to

drain the resources required to the victim sensor node, by

forwarding additional unwanted message packets and

thereby prevents legitimate sensor network users from

accessing network resources to which they are authorized.

The DoS attack is meant that normally attempt to disrupt or

destroy a network, and it also diminishes a network’s

capability to provide a service. It also varies from layer to

layers.

Wormhole attacks

A devastating attack is known as the wormhole attack,

where more than two malicious colluding sensor nodes

does a virtual tunnel in the wireless sensor network, which

is used to forward message packets between the tunnel

edge points. This tunnel establishes shorter links in the

network. In which adversary documents forwards packets

at one location in the sensor network, tunnels them to

different location, and re-forwards them into the sensor

network.

In sensor network when sender node sends a message to

another receiver node in the network [1].Then the receiving

node tries to send the message to its neighboring nodes.

The neighbor sensor nodes assume that the message was

sent by the sender node (this is normally out of range), so

they tries to forward the message to the originating node,

but this message never comes because it is too far away.

Wormhole attack is a great threat to sensor networks since,

this type of attack will not require compromising a wireless

sensor in the network instead; it could be performed even at

the starting phase during the sensors initializes to identify

its neighboring information [7].

This Wormhole attacks are very difficult to stop since

routing information given by a sensor node is very difficult

to check. The wormhole attack is possible even when the

attacker has not compromised with any hosts nodes and

even if all communication provides confidentiality and are

authenticated also. [8]

Countermeasures against Wormhole attacks

In [9], authors proposed a solution to wormhole attacks for

wireless sensor adhoc networks in which all sensor nodes

are equipped by directional antennas. In these method

nodes utilizes predefined sectors of their antennas to

communicate with one another. Each pair of sensor nodes

has to check the direction of received message signals by

its neighboring sensor node. Thereby, the neighbor relation

is established only when the directions of both couples are

matched. This additional information makes wormhole

discovery and intern introduces great amount of

inconsistencies in the sensor network, and this can be easily

be detected.

Wang and Bhargava [10] propose a methodology in which

sensor network visualization is employed for the detection

of wormhole attacks in stationary wireless sensor networks.

Page 3: SECURITY THREATS & ISSUES IN WIRELESS SENSOR … · major research initiatives and future applications along -2 Different types of ... Security Threats and Issues in ... the sensor

D.G.Anand, Dr.H.G.Chandrakanth, Dr.M.N.Giriprasad / International Journal of Engineering Research

and Applications (IJERA) ISSN: 2248-9622 www.ijera.com

Vol. 2, Issue 1,Jan-Feb 2012, pp.911-916

913 | P a g e

In this presentation, each sensor node calculates the

distance to its neighbors based on signal strength received.

Each and every sensor informs this distance data to the

central controller, which studies the sensor network’s

physical topology depending upon every sensor node

distance measurements. Without presence of wormholes,

the sensor network topology should be almost flat, whereas

a wormhole would be observed as a string stretching

different ends of the wireless sensor network together.

Song et al [11] presents a wormhole discovery mechanism

which is depending on statistical analysis of multipath

routing. Song noted that a link established by a wormhole

is attractive in routing sense, and this will be selected and

requested with very high frequency as it only uses routing

information which is already available to a sensor node.

This information’s allow for easy integration of this type

into intrusion detection methods only to routing guidelines

that multipath.

Lite Worp [12] depends on overhearing by identified sensor

nodes, which are called Guards, distributed throughout the

sensor network. These guards take care of full local traffic

control to detect wormhole attacks. Lite Worp assumes

unidirectional antennas, overhearing with a fixed topology.

Sinkhole attack

In this case a compromised sensor node tries to influence

the information to it from each and every neighboring node.

Thereby, sensor node eavesdrops on each and every

information is being communicated with its neighboring

sensor nodes.

Sinkhole prevention

One motivation for a sinkhole attack is that it always makes

very selective forwarding trivial. By confirming that all

traffic in the selected area moves through a compromised

sensor node, an adversary can selectively suppress or alter

the packets moving from any sensor node in the given area.

It is observed that the reason networks are susceptible to

sinkhole attacks is because of their specialized

communication structure. Since all packets share the same

destination to influence a potentially very big number of

sensor nodes a compromised node required only to give a

high quality route to the base station [13].

Q. Wu et. al. [14] proposed a genetic algorithm based

method to result in an approximation to the better source-

visiting method. The usage of Mobile node in computer

networks has some advantages and also disadvantages [15],

naming, code caching, safety and security which is based

on the given scenario. Irrespective of, they have been

properly deployed in many usage starting from e-commerce

to most security expected military applications. [16].

Sybil Attack

It is defined as a malicious device illegitimately taking on

number of identities. In this Sybil attack, a single sensor

node i.e. a malicious sensor device will appear to be a set of

sensor devices and it will forward the incorrect message to

a sensor node in the network which definitely decreases the

normal performance of fault tolerant such as distributed

storage [17], dispersity [18] and paths. This incorrect

message may be any things [19], which may include the

position of sensor nodes, strength; the generation of node

which is not actually exists.

Sybil prevention

Public key cryptography can also be used to prevent such

an insider attack, this is very expensive and it may be used

in the energy constrained wireless sensor networks.

Sybil attacks can be prevented by utilizing identity

certificates [20].It employs an simple logic, before the

deployment of sensor nodes, that the server node designates

a unique information to each of the sensor nodes. Soon

after that the server creates an identity certificate binding

this node’s identity to given designated unique information,

and downloads the message onto the sensor node. To

securely reveal its identity, a sensor node first gives up its

identity certificate information, and then proves that it

matches the unique information. The whole process require

good number of exchanging of messages. Normally,

Merkle hash tree can be used for computing identity

certificates [20].This Merkle hash tree vertex-labeled

binary tree, in which it has two child vertexes. The first

primary path of a leaf vertex is a group of vertexes on the

path from its leaf to tree’s root. The vertex, its

authenticated paths, and the primary path along with hash

functions can be calculated. This result is compared with

the stored value, to check the authenticity of the label of

leaf vertex.

Hello flood attack

In [21], authors introduced “Hello Flood Attack” .In this,

HELLO packets will have high radio transmission range

and these are used as weapons in WSN. This processing

power sends HELLO packets to a number of sensor nodes

which are deployed in a large area within a Wireless Sensor

Network. The sensor devices are thus persuaded that the

adversary is their neighboring nodes. As a result of this,

while forwarding the messages to the base station, the

victim sensor nodes try to go through the attacker as they

are aware, that it is their neighborers and are spoofed by the

attacker.

Countermeasures against Hello Flood Attack

To prevent the hello flood attack cryptographic technique is

employed in [22].In this type of techniques two sensors use

same secret key. During the communication the new

encryption key is generated. This ensures that only

reachable nodes can decrypt and checks the message and

thereby prevents the adversary from attacking the sensor

Page 4: SECURITY THREATS & ISSUES IN WIRELESS SENSOR … · major research initiatives and future applications along -2 Different types of ... Security Threats and Issues in ... the sensor

D.G.Anand, Dr.H.G.Chandrakanth, Dr.M.N.Giriprasad / International Journal of Engineering Research

and Applications (IJERA) ISSN: 2248-9622 www.ijera.com

Vol. 2, Issue 1,Jan-Feb 2012, pp.911-916

914 | P a g e

network. The disadvantage of this technique is that any

attacker can spoof its identity and then starts attacks.

In [23], author presented a data forwarding technique called

Multi-path multi-base station, in which a sensor node

maintains number of different secrets in a multiple tree.

Sensor device can sent to its sensed information to multiple

routes by employing these keys or secrets. In these multiple

base stations have control over specific number of nodes of

the WSN? Each base stations share all the secrets which is

there with all sensor nodes, in accordance with key

assignment protocol. This process is very inefficient, since

the given shared secret, developed secrete key between the

nodes, route setup requires maximum processing. Given the

shared secret and the generated new key between two

sensor nodes, the process of route setup requires much

processing hence is inefficient.

The author in [24] proposed a protocol called “identity

verification protocol” to counter attack the hello flood

attack .In this technique, protocol checks the bidirectional

link with encrypted echo- back mechanism, before

initiating the right action based on a message received over

that established link. This counter attacking technique

becomes very highly effective when an attacker has very

highly sensitive receiver and strong, powerful transmitter.

In case an attacker compromises a sensor node before

sending the feedback message, it can stop all its incoming

nodes by dropping feedback messages. Thus, such an

attacker can develop a wormhole to each and every node

within its range. Since the links between these attacker and

also sensor nodes are bidirectional, the proposed technique

will unlikely being able to locally prevent a “hello flood”.

The complete comparison between Layer based treats and possible counter measure in Wireless Sensor Networks have

been shown in the table 1.

Table.1. Typical Layer based treats and possible counter measure in Wireless Sensor Networks.

S.No. Layer Treat Counter measure

1 Physical

Layer

Jamming ,Node Tampering and

Eavesdropping

Use Spread-Spectrum techniques and MAC layer admission

control mechanisms, low duty Cycle, Tamper-Proofing,

effective key management schemes, Directional antenna for

access restriction & To protect data confidentiality,

cryptography is indispensable

2. Data Link

Layer

Exhausting, Collision and

Unfairness (Adversaries can

disobey the coordination rules and

produce malicious traffic to

interrupt network operations in the

MAC layer.)

Use Spread-Spectrum techniques & Error Correcting Codes,

Rate Limitation.

(MAC layer can exclude the attacking nodes from

interactions)

3. Network

Layer

Sybil Attack, Sinkhole, Wormhole

and Hallo flood, Neglect & Greed

(tampering with routing service

such as modifying routing

information and replicating data

packets)

Authentication, Monitoring, Redundancy

Flexible Routing, monitoring Two-way authentication, three

way handshake, Verification of the bidirectonality of the

link.( some countermeasures are available as follows:

• Routing Access Restriction

• False Routing Information Detection

• Wormhole Detection)

4. Transport

Layer

Flooding, Injects false messages

and energy drain attacks,

Desynchronisation.

Authentication and Limiting Connection Numbers

5. Application

Layer

Attacks on reliability and Clone

Attack.

• Clock Skewing

• Selective Message Forwarding

•Data Aggregation Distortion

Unique Pair-wise keys and Cryptographic approach.

Data Integrity Protection: authentication can be used to

protect any data integrity

Data Confidentiality Protection: Encryption is an effective

approach to prevent attackers from understanding captured

data.

Page 5: SECURITY THREATS & ISSUES IN WIRELESS SENSOR … · major research initiatives and future applications along -2 Different types of ... Security Threats and Issues in ... the sensor

D.G.Anand, Dr.H.G.Chandrakanth, Dr.M.N.Giriprasad / International Journal of Engineering Research

and Applications (IJERA) ISSN: 2248-9622 www.ijera.com

Vol. 2, Issue 1,Jan-Feb 2012, pp.911-916

915 | P a g e

The comparison between Class of routing protocols and possible attacks in Wireless Sensor Networks have been shown

in the table 2.

Table 2. Class of routing protocols and possible attacks.

S.No Protocol

Possible attacks

Sink

Hole Sybil Wormhole

Hello

Flood

Black

Hole

Energy

Drain

1. Flat Based Routing Protocol Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

2. Hierarchical Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

3. Location-Based No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

4. Network Flow and QoS-aware Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes

CONCLUSION

The survey on wireless sensor network security is vast,

with various attack models and counter measures proposed

by various researchers. Countermeasures for these attacks

exist at different sensor network levels and they are aimed

at giving protection to the data during different levels of the

receiving, processing and distribution process. Various

methodologies are presented for ensuring security in WSNs

have been surveyed and summarized both at the higher

level as well as at the low levels. In WSNs, the issue of

having security and design of routing algorithms is very

important to study the design properties like connectivity,

node coverage and fault tolerance.

We have discussed different attacks that spoil the

characteristics of that layer. We have also covered the

countermeasures and potential solutions against those

attacks, and mentioned some open research issues.

Hopefully by reading the survey, the readers can have a

better view of attacks and countermeasures in wireless

sensor networks, and find their way to start secure designs

for these networks.

REFERENCES

[1] Adrian Perrig, John Stankovic, and David Wagner,”

Security in wireless sensor networks”. ACM

Communication, 47(6): 2004, pp. 53-57.

[2] A.D. Wood and J.A. Stankovic, (2002) “Denial of

Service in Sensor Networks,” Computer, vol. 35,

no. 10, 2002, pp. 54–62.

[3] David R. Raymond and Scott F. Midkiff, (2008)

"Denial-of-Service in Wireless Sensor Networks:

Attacks and Defenses," IEEE Pervasive

Computing, vol. 7, no. 1, 2008, pp. 74-81.

[4] Zhen Cao, Xia Zhou, Maoxing Xu, Zhong Chen,

Jianbin Hu, Liyong Tang , “Enhancing Base Station

Security against DoS Attacks in Wireless Sensor

Networks”, IEEE, 2006.

[5] J. Kong, Z. Ji, W. Wang, M. Gerla, R. Bagrodia and

B. Bhargava” Lowcost attacks against packet

delivery, localization and time synchronization

services in underwater sensor networks”,

Proceedings of the Fourth ACM Workshop on

Wireless Security, 2005, pp. 87-96.

[6] A.D. Wood. Stankovic, “Denial of service in sensor

network”, IEEE Computer Magazine, vol. 5, no. 10,

Oct. 2002, pp. 54-62.

[7] Zaw Tun and Aung Htein Maw,(2008),” Worm

hole Attack Detection in Wireless Sensor

networks”, proceedings of world Academy of

Science, Engineering and Technology Volume 36,

December 2008, ISSN 2070-3740.

[8] Khin Sandar Win, Department of Engineering

Physics, Mandalay Technological University,

Pathein Gyi, Mandalay,” Analysis of Detecting

Wormhole Attack in Wireless Networks”, World

Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology

, 2008,pp.48-55

[9] L. Hu, D. Evans, Using Directional Antennas to

Prevent Wormhole Attacks, 14 Proceedings of the

11th Network and Distributed System Security

Symposium, pp. 2003.

[10] W. Wang, B. Bhargava., Visualization of

wormholes in sensor networks, Proceedings of the

2004 ACM workshop on Wireless Security, pp. 51-

60, 2004.

[11] I. Khalil, S. Bagchi, and N. B. Shroff,

“LITEWORP: A Lightweight Countermeasure for

the Wormhole attack in multihop wireless

network,” in International Conference on

Dependable Systems and Networks (DSN), 2005.

Page 6: SECURITY THREATS & ISSUES IN WIRELESS SENSOR … · major research initiatives and future applications along -2 Different types of ... Security Threats and Issues in ... the sensor

D.G.Anand, Dr.H.G.Chandrakanth, Dr.M.N.Giriprasad / International Journal of Engineering Research

and Applications (IJERA) ISSN: 2248-9622 www.ijera.com

Vol. 2, Issue 1,Jan-Feb 2012, pp.911-916

916 | P a g e

[12] D. Sheela, Nirmala. S, Sangita Nath and Dr. G

Mahadevan,” A Recent Technique to Detect Sink

Hole Attacks in WSN ”.

[13] Wu, Q., Rao, N.S.V., Barhen, J., etc, “On

computing mobile agent routes for data fusion in

distributed sensor networks,” IEEE Transactions on

Knowledge and Data Engineering, Vol.16 , NO. 6,

pp. 740-753, June 2004.

[14] S. Capkun, L. Buttyan, J. Hubaux, SECTOR:

Secure Traking of Node Encounters in Muti-hop

Wireless Networks, in: proc. Of SASN 2003.

Fairfax, Virginia, October 2003.

[15] K.N. Ross and R.D. Chaney, "Mobile Agents in

Adaptive Hierarchical Bayesian Networks for

Global Awareness," Proc. IEEE Int'l Conf.

Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, pp. 2207-2212,

1998.

[16] Castro and Liskov, "Practical byzantine fault

tolerance," in OSDI: Symposium on

OperatingSystems Design and Implementation.

USENIX Association, Co-sponsored by IEEE

TCOS and ACM SIGOPS, 1999.

[17] A. Banerjea, "taxonomy of dispersity routing

schemes for fault tolerant real-time channels," in

Proceedings of ECMAST, vol. 26, May 1996,

pp.129-148.

[18] Y.-C. Hu, A. Perrig, and D. B. Johnson,

"Wormhole detection in wireless ad hoc

networks,"Department of Computer Science, Rice

University, Tech. Rep. TR01-384, June 2002.

[19] J. R. Douceur, (2002) “The Sybil Attack,” in 1st

International Workshop on Peer-to-Peer Systems

(IPTPS ‟02).

[20] Karlof, C. and Wagner, D., “Secure routing in

wireless sensor networks: Attacks and

countermeasures”, Elsevier's Ad Hoc Network

Journal, Special Issue on Sensor Network

Applications and Protocols, September,2003, pp.

293-315.

[21] Chris Karlof, David Wagner, (2003) Secure

Routing in Wireless Sensor Networks: Attacks and

Countermeasures, IEEE.

[22] A Hamid, S Hong, (2006) Defense against Lap-top

Class Attacker in Wireless Sensor Network, ICACT

[23] Venkata C. Giruka, Mukesh Singhal, James

Royalty, Srilekha Varanasi, (2006), Security in

wireless networks,Wiley Inter Science.

[24] A. D. Wood and J. A. Stankovic, “Denial of service

in sensor networks,” IEEE Computer, vol. 35, no.

10, pp. 54–62, October 2002.

[25] M. Lee, E. J. Kim, and C. W. Lee, “Source

identification scheme against DDoS attacks in

cluster interconnects,” in Proc. International

Workshop on Network Design and Architecture,

Montreal, Quebec, August 2004, pp. 354–362.