| Literature DB >> 29543773 |
Chundong Wang1,2, Likun Zhu3,4, Liangyi Gong5,6, Zhentang Zhao7,8, Lei Yang9,10, Zheli Liu11, Xiaochun Cheng12.
Abstract
With the development of the Internet-of-Things (IoT), wireless network security has more and more attention paid to it. The Sybil attack is one of the famous wireless attacks that can forge wireless devices to steal information from clients. These forged devices may constantly attack target access points to crush the wireless network. In this paper, we propose a novel Sybil attack detection based on Channel State Information (CSI). This detection algorithm can tell whether the static devices are Sybil attackers by combining a self-adaptive multiple signal classification algorithm with the Received Signal Strength Indicator (RSSI). Moreover, we develop a novel tracing scheme to cluster the channel characteristics of mobile devices and detect dynamic attackers that change their channel characteristics in an error area. Finally, we experiment on mobile and commercial WiFi devices. Our algorithm can effectively distinguish the Sybil devices. The experimental results show that our Sybil attack detection system achieves high accuracy for both static and dynamic scenarios. Therefore, combining the phase and similarity of channel features, the multi-dimensional analysis of CSI can effectively detect Sybil nodes and improve the security of wireless networks.Entities:
Keywords: DBSCAN algorithm; Sybil attack; channel state information; indoor AoA technology
Year: 2018 PMID: 29543773 PMCID: PMC5877424 DOI: 10.3390/s18030878
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Sybil attack models. (a) Attack for different angles; (b) attack for the same angles; (c) a large number of Sybil nodes.
Figure 2Different methods of measuring the angle of arrival. (a) Traditional MUSIC Algorithm; (b) self-Adaptive MUSIC Algorithm.
Figure 3Overview of the Sybil attack detection system. CSI, Channel State Information.
Figure 4Sybil attack detection system of multiple detection APs.
Figure 5Different data processing methods. (a) Low pass filter; (b) PCA; (c) Savitzky–Golay (SG) filter.
Figure 6Motion detection of different packets. (a) Client from static to moving; (b) variance; (c) variance rate of changes.
Figure 7Amplitude and RSSI of different distances. (a) RSSI of different distances; (b) amplitude of different distances.
Figure 8Different activities in the environment.
Effect of the attack on various feature selection schemes. MCR, number of times the Signal Crosses the Mean value; NPV, the total Number of Peaks and Valleys.
| I | 0.040 | 0.039 | 0.059 | 0.082 | 0.129 | 0.186 | 0.246 | 0.048 | |
| IG | 0.019 | 0.021 | 0.042 | 0.045 | 0.085 | 0.106 | 0.190 | 0.039 | |
| PCA | 3.350 | −1.530 | 1.712 | 4.880 | 3 | 1.311 | 1.215 | 4 | |
| I | 0.051 | 0.038 | 0.085 | 0.143 | 0.135 | 0.193 | 0.208 | 0.151 | |
| IG | 0.045 | 0.029 | 0.027 | 0.054 | 0.126 | 0.087 | 0.115 | 0.040 | |
| PCA | 3.490 | −1.340 | 2.132 | 4.830 | 4 | 1.462 | 0.700 | 4 | |
Figure 9AoA Error bar of different clients. (a) Error bar of access points; (b) error bar of mobile devices.
Figure 10AoA Estimation error. (a) CDF of access points; (b) CDF of access points of different packets.
Figure 11Different attacks’ Sybil node detection rate. (a) Sybil attacks’ Sybil node detection rate; (b) spoofing attacks’ Sybil node detection rate.
Figure 12Different mobile clients in the environment.
Figure 13Dynamic Sybil attack detection rates for different mobile clients.