| Literature DB >> 22163606 |
Abstract
Security is a critical issue for sensor networks used in hostile environments. When wireless sensor nodes in a wireless sensor network are distributed in an insecure hostile environment, the sensor nodes must be protected: a secret key must be used to protect the nodes transmitting messages. If the nodes are not protected and become compromised, many types of attacks against the network may result. Such is the case with existing schemes, which are vulnerable to attacks because they mostly provide a hop-by-hop paradigm, which is insufficient to defend against known attacks. We propose a location-aware dynamic session-key management protocol for grid-based wireless sensor networks. The proposed protocol improves the security of a secret key. The proposed scheme also includes a key that is dynamically updated. This dynamic update can lower the probability of the key being guessed correctly. Thus currently known attacks can be defended. By utilizing the local information, the proposed scheme can also limit the flooding region in order to reduce the energy that is consumed in discovering routing paths.Entities:
Keywords: attack; grid-based; key management; security; wireless sensor networks
Mesh:
Year: 2010 PMID: 22163606 PMCID: PMC3231151 DOI: 10.3390/s100807347
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1.Wireless sensor network applications.
Figure 2.Network topology.
Figure 3.The TTDD scheme for a source node forwarding data to a mobile base station.
Figure 4.The CODE scheme for multi-hop routing through coordinators.
Figure 5.The DARQ scheme for data aggregation with regular-shape ranges.
Equivalent key sizes for symmetric and asymmetric cryptography.
| 80 | 2TDEA | k = 1,024 | f = 160–223 |
| 112 | 3TDEA | k = 2,048 | f = 224–255 |
| 128 | AES-128 | k = 3,072 | f = 256–383 |
| 192 | AES-192 | k = 7,680 | f = 384–511 |
| 256 | AES-256 | k = 15,360 | f = 512+ |
Figure 6.Grid structure.
Figure 7.The flooding region.
Figure 8.Grid index.
Figure 9.A physical area partitioned into logical grids
Figure 10.Selected interest region.
Figure 11.Transmission paths for the sensor network.
Figure 12.The communication protocol.
The security and characteristic comparison of the grid-based schemes.
| Against malicious guessing attacks | NA | NA | NA | Yes |
| Against replay attacks | NA | NA | NA | Yes |
| Against falsification attacks | NA | NA | NA | Yes |
| Against man-in-the-middle-attacks and guarantee of data privacy | NA | NA | NA | Yes |
| Against node capture attacks | NA | NA | NA | Yes |
| Grid-based protocol | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Event-driven data dissemination | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Limit interest region to prevent flooding storm | No | No | Yes | Yes |
| Routing problem with obstacles in sensor field | Yes | No | Yes | Yes |
| Routing problem with voids in sensor field | Yes | No | Yes | Yes |
Comparison of time complexity between our scheme and Mizanur Rahman and El-Khatib’s scheme.
| Nodes Relationship | Mizanur Rahman and El-Khatib’s scheme [ | Our scheme |
|---|---|---|
| Sensor node (or L-node) | ||
| Cluster node (or H-node) | ||
| Base station | N/A |
Notes:
the time complexity for using a symmetric encryption algorithm
the time complexity for using a symmetric decryption algorithm
the time complexity for verifying a message
the time complexity for using a hash function
the time complexity for addition
the time complexity for division
the number of aggregation data for a cluster node
the time complexity for generating an ECC secret key
the time complexity for ECC encryption
Comparison of communication cost between our scheme and Mizanur Rahman and El-Khatib’s scheme.
| Nodes Relationship | Mizanur Rahman and El-Khatib’s scheme[ | Our scheme |
|---|---|---|
| Sensor node and Cluster node (or H-node) | ||
| Cluster node (or H-node) and Base station | N/A | |
| H-node and H-node | N/A |
Notes:
the transmission time for a symmetric encryption message (For example AES-128 bits)
the transmission time for a message (16 bits, for example ID, ID)
the transmission time for a hash message (for example, hash message of 168 bits)
the transmission time for an ECC ciphertext (for example, a ciphertext of 256 bits)
the transmission time for a random number (for example, random number of 16 bits)
Parameters used in the simulation environment.
| Simulation tool | NS2 |
| Simulation area | 2,000 m × 2,000 m |
| Number of nodes | 100–400 nodes |
| Base station mobility model | Random waypoint model |
| Radio transmission range | 100 m |
| Data packet size | 64 bytes |
| Data transmission rate | 1 Mbps |
Figure 13.Comparison of energy consumption versus number of grids for different schemes.