13.07.2015 Views

Page 2 Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2865 Edited by G. Goos ...

Page 2 Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2865 Edited by G. Goos ...

Page 2 Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2865 Edited by G. Goos ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

142 J. Zhen and S. Sr<strong>in</strong>ivasTraffic Analysis: Resource limitations make it difficult to <strong>in</strong>corporate strongencryption mechanisms <strong>in</strong>to wireless data transmissions. Furthermore, mutablefields <strong>in</strong> the rout<strong>in</strong>g packets such as hop count are not authenticated. This mayresult <strong>in</strong> exposure of <strong>in</strong>formation <strong>by</strong> traffic analysis.Rout<strong>in</strong>g Loop: By impersonat<strong>in</strong>g other hosts’ Medium Access Control (MAC)addresses and falsify<strong>in</strong>g favored packets (such as those with higher sequence numbersor shorter hop counts), attackers can make routes to form a loop. This typeof attack has become less likely as a result of node authentication mechanismsproposed recently [4].Black/Gray Hole: By falsely claim<strong>in</strong>g they have optimal routes to multipledest<strong>in</strong>ations, attackers can manage to make relative amount of routes pass <strong>by</strong>them so as to manipulate packets later on. This attack has been solved <strong>by</strong> Denget. al. [18].Detour: Malicious nodes operate on packets illegally, such as <strong>by</strong> chang<strong>in</strong>g hopcounts and sequence numbers arbitrarily, to poison rout<strong>in</strong>g tables and make itimpossible for optimal routes to be chosen. Some solutions have been proposedbut they only solve part of the problem [4].Fake RERR(Route Error): A malicious node claims that an actually wellconnectednode is now unreachable <strong>by</strong> forg<strong>in</strong>g RERR packets. This RERR mayhave a high sequence number (fresher than any other) such that nodes will notaccept any opposite <strong>in</strong>formation (such as RREQ to/from the isolated node).Injection of Extra Control Packets: Injected control packets will result <strong>in</strong>unnecessary network operations. For example, <strong>in</strong>jected RREQ will cause thenetwork to be flooded without the need for data transmission, thus result<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>a denial of service attack. This can be solved <strong>by</strong> authenticat<strong>in</strong>g the source of theRREQ packets [15].General Replay Attacks: Intruder nodes can launch attacks on the ad hocnetwork <strong>by</strong> replay<strong>in</strong>g rout<strong>in</strong>g packets. While general authentication mechanismscannot prevent replay attacks, the sequence number and the RREQ ID fieldsare designed to reduce their possibility. However, there are two types of replayattacks that are particularly challeng<strong>in</strong>g to defend aga<strong>in</strong>st. We describe these <strong>in</strong>the next section.2.3 Two Special Replay AttacksRREQ Flood<strong>in</strong>g Attack. We identify a potential replay attack on the AODVprotocol. The RREQ packets are broadcast <strong>in</strong> an <strong>in</strong>crement<strong>in</strong>g r<strong>in</strong>g to reduce

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!