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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Resisting Malicious Packet Dropping in Wireless Ad Hoc Networks 155interest. Our proposed probing technique can be used as one of the monitoring techniquesin the CONFIDANT protocol.Awerbuch et al [2] proposed a secure routing protocol for resisting byzantine failuresin a wireless ad hoc network. The protocol requires an ultimate destination to sendan acknowledgment back to the sender for each of its successfully received packets. Ifthe loss rate of acknowledgment packets exceeds the predefined threshold, which is setto be slightly above the normal packet loss rate, the route used for sending packets fromthe source to the destination is detected as faulty and a binary search probing techniqueis deployed to locate the faulty link. The disadvantages of this protocol are: 1) it mayincur significant routing overhead; 2) a data packet with an inserted probe list can bedistinguished from those without probe lists, although the probe list is onion encryptedand cannot be tampered en route. Our proposed probing technique differs in that it canbe implemented above the network layer (e.g., based on UDP), and the end-to-end encryptionof IP payload using pair-wise shared keys can prevent intermediate nodes fromdistinguishing probe messages from data packets.Padmanabhan and Simon [20] proposed a secure traceroute to locate faulty routersin wired networks. In their approach, end hosts will monitor network performance. If anend-to-end performance degrade is detected by a host to a destination, a complaint bitis set in all the subsequent traffic to that destination. The complaining host itself or therouter sitting closest to the complaining host may start the troubleshooting process if itobserves enough complaints. It first sends a secure traceroute packet to the next hop,which can be derived from its routing table. The router receiving the secure traceroutepacket is expected to send a response back which also includes a next hop address. Thisprocess repeats until a faulty router is located (no response received from it) or everyrouter on the path to the ultimate destination proves healthy. Our approach is differentfrom the secure traceroute in that 1) our approach is proposed for MANET using sourcerouting protocols (e.g., DSR), the secure traceroute is mainly used in wired networks. 2)our approach does not require modification to existing routing infrastructures, the securetraceroute may need to modify IP layer in order to monitor performance problem; 3)our approach utilizes redundant routing information for diagnosis, the secure traceroutedoes not.Malicious nodes silently dropping packets exhibit the same behavior as selfish nodes,which may choose to drop packets for the sake of saving its own constraint resources,such as battery or CPU cycle. Selfishness and its threat to the network performance havebeen well studied by Roughgarden [23]. Incentive mechanisms have been proposed toencourage selfish nodes to be cooperative and to forward packets for others. Unfortunately,incentive mechanisms don’t work for malicious users since they never playby rules. Our proposed probing scheme can be used to detect and mitigate selfishnessproblem.3 Definitions and Assumptions3.1 Node StatesWe classify the states of a node as follows. A node is GOOD if it responds to probemessages for itself and forwards other probe messages along their source routes. A
156 M. Just, E. Kranakis, and T. Wannode is BAD if it responds to probe messages destined to itself but fails in forwardingprobe messages for others. A benign link failure may also be detected as BAD behaviorif it is not cleared by other mechanisms (e.g., route error in DSR). A node is consideredDOWN if 1) it is a neighbor node to the probing node and it doesn’t respond to probemessages; or 2) it is not a neighbor node and it doesn’t respond to probe messagesthrough all the known paths. A node is considered at the UNKNOWN state if on allknown paths from the probing node to the node, there exists at least one node in BADor DOWN state.3.2 AssumptionsProbe messages are indistinguishable from normal packets. One limitation of the probingtechnique is that it can be easily defeated if probe messages can be distinguishedfrom normal data packets. For example, a malicious node may forward probe messages,but drop all the other data packets, thereby avoiding detection. This assumption can berealized using end-to-end encryption of IP payload by pair-wise shared keys. Since amalicious node can understand only the IP header, it does not have the information ofupper layer protocols, such as TCP/UDP port numbers. By implementing the probingtechnique above the network layer (e.g., based UDP), an adversary will not be able todistinguish a probe message from a other data packet (e.g., HTTP or SMTP packet).Some other options are: 1) piggybacking a probe message on a normal data packetwhich requires acknowledgment, such as TCP SYN. The disadvantage is that such datapackets may not be available during the time of probing. 2) assuming that an adversarycannot modify the forwarding software of the compromised router. Therefore, theadversary can only make decisions based on IP addresses, which does not allow fordistinguishing a probe message from a normal data packet.Multi-hop source routing protocols. The probing technique assumes a multi-hopsource routing protocol since a probing node needs to specify the source route by whicha probe message takes to get to the destination. This assumption is practical since somerouting protocols, such as Dynamical Source Routing (DSR) [16], are multi-hop sourcerouting protocols.Bi-directional communication links. We assume that all communication links arebi-directional. This assumption is practical in some wireless networks, such as IEEE802.11 [1], where all links have to be bi-directional for link layer acknowledgment towork.4 The Distributed Probing SchemeIn order to monitor the behavior of mobile nodes by the probing technique, we needto decide which node should probe and how far it should probe. Given a network withn nodes, there are several interesting possibilities: 1) there is only one probing nodeand it probes all the other nodes; 2) there are k probing nodes (1
Page 2 and 3:
Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2
Page 4 and 5:
Samuel Pierre Michel BarbeauEvangel
Page 6:
PrefaceAd Hoc Networks are wireless
Page 9 and 10:
Program CommitteeG. Alonso, ETHZ, S
Page 11 and 12:
XTable of ContentsResisting Malicio
Page 13 and 14:
2 H. Dubois-Ferrière, M. Grossglau
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
10 H. Dubois-Ferrière, M. Grossgla
Page 23 and 24:
SAFAR: An Adaptive Bandwidth-Effici
Page 25 and 26:
14 J. Doshi and P. Kilambiour proto
Page 27 and 28:
16 J. Doshi and P. Kilambipacket th
Page 29 and 30:
18 J. Doshi and P. Kilambibandwidth
Page 31 and 32:
20 J. Doshi and P. Kilambi5 Simulat
Page 33 and 34:
22 J. Doshi and P. Kilambiquery its
Page 35 and 36:
24 J. Doshi and P. Kilambi4. David
Page 37 and 38:
26 P. Narayan and V.R. SyrotiukThe
Page 39 and 40:
28 P. Narayan and V.R. Syrotiuk2.2
Page 41 and 42:
30 P. Narayan and V.R. Syrotiukrand
Page 43 and 44:
32 P. Narayan and V.R. Syrotiukenti
Page 45 and 46:
34 P. Narayan and V.R. SyrotiukDSRA
Page 47 and 48:
36 P. Narayan and V.R. Syrotiuk7. A
Page 49 and 50:
38 L. Qin and T. Kunzthese two prot
Page 51 and 52:
40 L. Qin and T. Kunzsidered broken
Page 53:
42 L. Qin and T. KunzP = Prdlog( )
Page 57 and 58:
46 L. Qin and T. KunzFig. 5. Averag
Page 59 and 60:
48 L. Qin and T. Kunz6. J. Broch et
Page 61 and 62:
50 M. Diha and S. Pierrethe propose
Page 63 and 64:
52 M. Diha and S. Pierre3. All proc
Page 65 and 66:
54 M. Diha and S. Pierre3.3 Perform
Page 67 and 68:
56 M. Diha and S. PierreCmip/Cprop0
Page 69 and 70:
58 M. Diha and S. PierreThe tunneli
Page 71 and 72:
Proactive QoS Routing in Ad Hoc Net
Page 73 and 74:
62 Y. Ge, T. Kunz, and L. LamontFig
Page 75 and 76:
64 Y. Ge, T. Kunz, and L. Lamontits
Page 77 and 78:
66 Y. Ge, T. Kunz, and L. Lamonttha
Page 79 and 80:
68 Y. Ge, T. Kunz, and L. Lamontwhi
Page 81 and 82:
70 Y. Ge, T. Kunz, and L. Lamontver
Page 83 and 84:
Delivering Messagesin Disconnected
Page 85 and 86:
74 R. Shah and N.C. Hutchinson3.1 T
Page 87 and 88:
76 R. Shah and N.C. Hutchinsonset c
Page 89 and 90:
78 R. Shah and N.C. HutchinsonTable
Page 91 and 92:
80 R. Shah and N.C. HutchinsonOracl
Page 93 and 94:
82 R. Shah and N.C. Hutchinsonthe r
Page 95 and 96:
Extending Seamless IP Multicast Edg
Page 97 and 98:
86 P.M. Ruiz et al.Section 4 presen
Page 99 and 100:
88 P.M. Ruiz et al.Access NetworkCo
Page 101 and 102:
90 P.M. Ruiz et al.Access NetworkR
Page 103 and 104:
92 P.M. Ruiz et al.MIGAccess Networ
Page 105 and 106:
94 P.M. Ruiz et al.10.90.81-hop-750
Page 107 and 108:
A Uniform Continuum Model for Scali
Page 109 and 110:
98 E.W. Grundke and A.N. Zincir-Hey
Page 111 and 112:
100 E.W. Grundke and A.N. Zincir-He
Page 113 and 114:
102 E.W. Grundke and A.N. Zincir-He
Page 115 and 116: Probabilistic Protocols for Node Di
Page 117 and 118: 106 G. Alonso et al.A node discover
Page 119 and 120: 108 G. Alonso et al.frequency alloc
Page 121 and 122: 110 G. Alonso et al.- D is a diagon
Page 123 and 124: 112 G. Alonso et al.and therefore,
Page 125 and 126: 114 G. Alonso et al.complicated. Fo
Page 127 and 128: Towards Adaptive WLAN Frequency Man
Page 129 and 130: 118 F. Gamba, J.-F. Wagen, and D. R
Page 139 and 140: Analyzing Split Channel Medium Acce
Page 141 and 142: 130 J. Deng, Y.S. Han, and Z.J. Haa
Page 151 and 152: Preventing Replay Attacks for Secur
Page 153 and 154: 142 J. Zhen and S. SrinivasTraffic
Page 155 and 156: 144 J. Zhen and S. SrinivasFig. 2.
Page 157 and 158: 146 J. Zhen and S. Srinivasbeginnin
Page 159 and 160: 148 J. Zhen and S. Srinivasthe time
Page 161 and 162: 150 J. Zhen and S. Srinivas16. Y. H
Page 163 and 164: 152 M. Just, E. Kranakis, and T. Wa
Page 165: 154 M. Just, E. Kranakis, and T. Wa
Page 175 and 176: A New Framework for Building Secure
Page 177 and 178: 166 H.-P. Bischof, A. Kaminsky, and
Page 187 and 188: 176 G. Calinescuof the UDG 2-hops a
Page 189 and 190: 178 G. CalinescuSection 3 describe
Page 191 and 192: 180 G. CalinescuWhen receiving a pa
Page 193 and 194: 182 G. CalinescuRyvxFig. 3. The unn
Page 195 and 196: 184 G. Calinescu< nodeID, pieceID,
Page 197 and 198: 186 G. Calinescu7. Heinz Breu and D
Page 199 and 200: 188 S.O. Krumke et al.desirable in
Page 201 and 202: 190 S.O. Krumke et al.2.2 Bicriteri
Page 203 and 204: 192 S.O. Krumke et al.1. From the g
Page 205 and 206: 194 S.O. Krumke et al.The following
Page 207 and 208: 196 S.O. Krumke et al.1. Let α =6l
Page 209 and 210: 198 S.O. Krumke et al.for any given
Page 211 and 212: 200 S. PatilIDEA uses the concept o
Page 213 and 214: 202 S. PatilAfter flooding the quer
Page 215 and 216: 204 S. Patil5 Simulation ModelSourc
Page 217 and 218:
206 S. PatilAvg. Aggregate Energy C
Page 219 and 220:
208 S. PatilTable 1. Probability of
Page 221 and 222:
210 S. Patilergy consumption of the
Page 223 and 224:
212 T. Chu and I. Nikolaidisenergy
Page 225 and 226:
214 T. Chu and I. Nikolaidisaim at
Page 227 and 228:
216 T. Chu and I. Nikolaidis12: end
Page 229 and 230:
218 T. Chu and I. Nikolaidis1.8E+09
Page 231 and 232:
220 T. Chu and I. Nikolaidis2.0E+10
Page 233 and 234:
222 T. Chu and I. Nikolaidisattack
Page 235 and 236:
224 F.J. Molina, J. Barbancho, and
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
236 G. Calinescu and P.-J. Wan3.5 4
Page 249 and 250:
238 G. Calinescu and P.-J. Wanmum s
Page 251 and 252:
240 G. Calinescu and P.-J. WanFrom
Page 253 and 254:
242 G. Calinescu and P.-J. Wan5 Alg
Page 255 and 256:
244 G. Calinescu and P.-J. WanThe n
Page 257 and 258:
246 G. Calinescu and P.-J. Wan9. A.
Page 259 and 260:
248 C.J. Colbourn, V.R. Syrotiuk, a
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
260 S. Bhadra and A. Ferreirathe mo
Page 273 and 274:
262 S. Bhadra and A. FerreiraIn thi
Page 275 and 276:
264 S. Bhadra and A. FerreiraDefini
Page 277 and 278:
266 S. Bhadra and A. FerreiraThis s
Page 279 and 280:
268 S. Bhadra and A. FerreiraTheore
Page 281 and 282:
270 S. Bhadra and A. Ferreira4. T.
Page 283 and 284:
272 M.K. Denko and Q.H. MahmoudAn i
Page 285 and 286:
274 M.K. Denko and Q.H. Mahmoud3.1
Page 287 and 288:
276 M.K. Denko and Q.H. Mahmoud5. D
Page 289 and 290:
278 B. Macabéo, S. Pierre, and A.
Page 291 and 292:
280 B. Macabéo, S. Pierre, and A.
Page 293 and 294:
282 A. Benslimane and A. BachirIn [
Page 295 and 296:
284 A. Benslimane and A. BachirFig.
Page 297 and 298:
286 A. Benslimane and A. Bachir5 Co
Page 299 and 300:
288 L. Hughes, K. Shumon, and Y. Zh
Page 301 and 302:
Page 303 and 304:
Page 305 and 306:
3BerlinHeidelbergNew YorkHong KongL
Page 307 and 308:
Series EditorsGerhard Goos, Karlsru
Page 310 and 311:
Organizing CommitteeConference Co-c
Page 312 and 313:
Table of ContentsSpace-Time Routing
Page 314:
Author IndexAlonso, G. 104Bachir, A
show all

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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?