Secured Routing Strategy over MANET - IJIFR · MANET is a collection of wireless mobile nodes forming a temporary/short ... state of war an army cannot rely on fixed ... The technique

3385

www.ijifr.com Copyright © IJIFR 2015

Research Paper

International Journal of Informative & Futuristic Research ISSN (Online): 2347-1697

Volume 2 Issue 9 May 2015

Abstract

In the recent years, the area of mobile ad hoc networking is of quite interest to researchers. A Mobile Ad Hoc Network (MANET) is a collection of wireless mobile nodes forming a temporary/short-lived network without any fixed infrastructure where all nodes are free to move about arbitrarily and where all the nodes configure themselves. The wireless links in this network are highly error prone and can go down frequently due to mobility of nodes, interference, less infrastructure and lack of security. A variety of routing protocols have been proposed that targets the issue of security in the ad hoc networks. However, little information about the various robust security measures has previously been available. Therefore secure routing in mobile ad hoc network is still a critical task due to highly dynamic environment. In this paper, a method is proposed to secure ad hoc on-demand distance vector (AODV) routing protocol. The proposed method provides security for routing packets and can efficiently modifying routing information and impersonation. We simulate and compare the proposed method with original AODV and secure AODV (SAODV) protocol using network simulator tool (NS2). Simulation result shows that proposed method minimizes the time delay and network routing load involved in computation and verification of security fields during route discovery process and performs better than the original AODV protocol in the presence of malicious nodes.

Secured Routing Strategy over MANET Paper ID IJIFR/ V2/ E9/ 081 Page No. 3385-3402 Research Area

Mobile Adhoc

Networks

Key Words AODV, Security Attacks, Authentication, Impersonation, MANET, Routing

Strategies, NS 2.34, OTcl

Mani Goyal 1

Research Scholar Department of Computer Science Ganpati Institute of Technology & Management, Bilaspur, Yamunanagar-Haryana

Dr. Sunil Taneja 2

Associate Professor & Head Department of Computer Science Government College, Chhachhrauli, Yamunanagar-Haryana

3386

ISSN (Online): 2347-1697 International Journal of Informative & Futuristic Research (IJIFR)

Volume - 2, Issue - 9, May 2015 21st Edition, Page No: 3385-3402

Mani Goyal, Dr. Sunil Taneja:: Secured Routing Strategy over MANET

1. Introduction MANET is a collection of wireless mobile nodes forming a temporary/short-lived network without

any fixed infrastructure where all nodes are free to move about arbitrarily and where all the nodes

configure themselves. Unlike traditional networks whereby routing functions are performed by

dedicated nodes or routers, in MANET, routing functions are carried out by all available nodes.

There are no fixed base stations and each node acts both as a router and as a host. Even the topology

of network may also change rapidly. The mobile nodes in the Ad Hoc network dynamically establish

routing among themselves to form their own network „on the fly‟. In essence, the network is created

in ad-hoc fashion by the participating nodes without any central administration. Further ad hoc

networks can be classified as single-hop or multi-hop. In single-hop ad hoc networks, nodes are in

their reach area and can communicate directly but in case of multi-hop, some nodes are far and

cannot communicate directly. The traffic has to be forwarded by other intermediate nodes. Ad hoc

networks are primarily meant for use by military forces or for emergency rescue situations. At the

state of war an army cannot rely on fixed infrastructure, as it is an easy and attractive target for the

enemy. Ad hoc networks are optimal solution in such cases. For civil use ad hoc networks are

crucial if the fixed infrastructure has been torn down by some natural disaster, like a flood or an

earthquake. Then rescue operations could in such a situation be managed through utilizing ad hoc

networks.

2.Major Challenges In Implementation Of MANET

Mobile ad hoc networks have several advantages over traditional wireless networks including ease

of deployment, speed of deployment and decreased dependence on a fixed infrastructure but there

are certain challenges too in implementation of ad hoc networks. Some of these challenges include:

1. Unicast routing

2. Multicast routing

3. Dynamic network topology

4. Bandwidth constrained

5. Network overhead

6. Frequency of updates

7. Scalability

8. QoS support

9. Mobile agent based routing

10. Energy efficient/Power aware routing

11. Secure routing

2. Security Criteria’s [5,8,9,10]

The dilemma is that how should we judge whether the mobile ad hoc network is secure or not. We

shall briefly discuss the main security criteria‟s that are used to inspect the security state of the

mobile ad hoc network.

Confidentiality: Confidentiality ensures that certain information is only accessible to those who

have been authorized to access the same. This information is never disclosed to unauthorized

entities. In order to maintain the confidentiality of some confidential information, we need to keep

them secret from all entities that do not have the privilege to access them. Network transmission of

sensitive information, such as strategic or tactical military information, requires confidentiality.

Leakage of such information to enemies could have devastating consequences. Routing information

3387




must also remain confidential in certain cases, because the information might be valuable for

enemies to identify and to locate their targets in a battlefield. The technique of encryption/decryption

can prevent unauthorized users from accessing the contents of packets.

Authenticity: Authenticity is essentially assurance that participants in communication are genuine

and not impersonators. It is necessary for the communication participants to prove their identities as

what they have claimed using some techniques so as to ensure the authenticity. If there is not such

an authentication mechanism, the adversary could impersonate a benign node and thus get access to

confidential resources, or even propagate some fake messages to disturb the normal network

operations.

Integrity: Integrity guarantees the identity of the messages when they are transmitted. Integrity can

be compromised mainly in two ways:

– Malicious altering

– Accidental altering

A message can be removed, replayed or revised by an adversary with malicious goal, which is

regarded as malicious altering; on the contrary, if the message is lost or its content is changed due to

some benign failures, which may be transmission errors in communication or hardware errors such

as hard disk failure, then it is categorized as accidental altering. This can be accomplished by using

message digests or digital signatures.

Availability: The term Availability means that a node should maintain its ability to provide all the

designed services regardless of the security state of it. This security criterion is challenged mainly

during the denial-of-service attacks, in which all the nodes in the network can be the attack target

and thus some selfish nodes make some of the network services unavailable, such as the routing

protocol or the key management service. This implies that resources are available, where desired or

it can be considered that it provides survivability of network services despite denial of service

attacks.

Non repudiation: Non repudiation ensures that the sender and receiver of a message cannot deny

that they have ever sent or received the message. In other words the routers cannot repudiate

ownership of routing protocol messages they send. This is useful especially when we need to

discriminate if a node with some abnormal behavior is compromised or not: if a node recognizes that

the message it has received is erroneous, it can then use the incorrect message as an evidence to

notify other nodes that the node sending out the improper message should have been compromised.

The origin or the receipt of a specific message must be verifiable by a third party. The ad hoc nodes

obtain information from their neighbours and forward it to other neighbours which in turn forward

the same to other neighbours and so on. In most of the existing protocols, nodes cannot guarantee for

the authenticity of updates that are not generated by their immediate neighbours. Therefore, to

preserve trust relationships, it is necessary to form chain of routers using digital signatures and

authenticate everyone in turn following the chain to source node.

Authorization: Authorization is a process in which an entity is issued a credential, which specifies

the privileges and permissions it has and cannot be falsified, by the certificate authority.

Authorization is generally used to assign different access rights to different level of users. For

instance, we need to ensure that network management function is only accessible by the network

administrator. Therefore there should be an authorization process before the network administrator

accesses the network management functions.

Anonymity: Anonymity means that all the information that can be used to identify the owner or the

current user of the node should default be kept private and not be distributed by the node itself or the

3388




system software. This criterion is closely related to privacy preserving, in which we should try to

protect the privacy of the nodes from arbitrary disclosure to any other entities.

Having dealt with the main security criteria‟s let us now discuss the main threats that violate the

security criteria, which are generally called as attacks [5]. All attacks on a computer system are a

violation of one or more of these security criteria‟s. On one side, many organizations including

hospitals, airports, and business enterprises plan to capitalize the various benefits provided by

wireless technologies. But on the other side, there have been numerous published reports and papers

describing attacks on wireless networks that expose organizations to security risks such as attacks on

confidentiality, authenticity, integrity, availability, and non repudiation etc. These attacks include:

– Denial of Service: A network service is not available due to overload or malfunction.

– Information theft: Information is read by an unauthorized instance.

– Intrusion: An unauthorized person gains access to some restricted service.

– Tampering: Data is modified by an unauthorized person.

In mobile networks, radio transmission is the most common means of communication.

Eavesdropping on a node is far easier than in wired networks. Since intermediate nodes no longer

belong to a trusted infrastructure, but may be eavesdroppers as well, consequent end-to-end

encryption is mandatory. Next, as all nodes in an Ad hoc network cooperate in order to discover the

network topology and forward packets, denial of service attacks on the routing function are very

easy to mount. Nodes may create stale or wrong routes, creating black holes or routing loops.

Furthermore, in Ad hoc networks exists a strong motivation for non-participation in the routing

system. Both the routing system and the forwarding of foreign packets consume a node‟s battery

power, CPU time, and bandwidth, which are restricted in mobile devices. Consequently, selfish

nodes may want to save their resources for own use. There are three main causes for a node not to

work according to the common routing protocol:

– Malfunctioning nodes are simply suffering from a hardware failure or a programming

error. Although this is not an attack, they may cause severe irritation in the routing system of

an ad hoc network.

– Selfish nodes try to save their own resources, as described above.

– Malicious nodes are trying to sabotage other nodes or even the whole network, or

compromise security in some way.

Before developing a security framework that prevents selfish or malicious nodes from harming the

network, it is worthwhile to first create a structured overview on what kinds of attacks are possible

in Ad hoc networks.

4. Classification Of Security Attacks [4,6]

Network security attacks are typically divided into two categories: passive vs. active attacks and

external vs. internal attacks.

Passive vs. Active Attacks

An attack in which an unauthorized party gains access to an asset and does not modify its contents is

called as passive attack. The passive attacker does not send messages; it only eavesdrops on the

network. The malicious entity in this type of attack only listens to the traffic, without modifying or

disturbing it in any way. The main threat by such an attack is that some confidential information is

leaked to the attacker. Passive attacks can be either eavesdropping or traffic analysis.

3389




– Eavesdropping: The attacker monitors transmissions for message content. An example of

this attack is a person listening into the transmissions on a network topology between two

workstations or tuning into transmissions between a wireless handset and a base station.

– Traffic analysis/Traffic flow analysis: The attacker, in a more subtle way, gains

intelligence by monitoring the transmissions for patterns of communication. A considerable

amount of information is contained in the flow of messages between communicating parties.

Table 1: Passive vs. active attacks

Passive attacks: Eavesdropping, traffic analysis

Active attacks: Masquerading/Spoofing, Replaying, Message modification, DoS

An attack whereby an unauthorized party makes modifications to a message, data stream, or file is

called as an active attack. In an active attack, the malignant node actively disturbs the normal

operation of the network. This can be done by forging packets, disrupting normal routing or

consuming network resources etc. Active attacks may take the form of one of four types

masquerading, replay, message modification, and denial-of-service (DoS). These attacks are

summarized as under and are shown in table 1:

– Masquerading: The attacker impersonates an authorized user and thereby gains certain

unauthorized privileges. A spoofing attack is a situation in which one person or program

successfully masquerades as another by falsifying data and thereby gaining an illegitimate

advantage.

– Replay: The attacker monitors transmissions (passive attack) and retransmits messages as

the legitimate user.

– Message modification: The attacker alters a legitimate message by deleting, adding to,

changing, or reordering it.

– Denial-of-service: The attacker prevents or prohibits the normal use or management of

communications facilities.

External vs. Internal attacks [10]

External attacks, in which the attacker aims to cause congestion, propagate fake routing information

or disturb nodes from providing services. Internal attacks, in which the adversary wants to gain the

normal access to the network and participate the network activities, either by some malicious

impersonation to get the access to the network as a new node, or by directly compromising a current

node and using it as a basis to conduct its malicious behaviours. In the two categories shown above,

external attacks are similar to the normal attacks in the traditional wired networks in that the

adversary is in the proximity but not a trusted node in the network, therefore, this type of attack can

be prevented and detected by the security methods such as membership authentication or firewall,

which are relatively conventional security solutions. However, due to the pervasive communication

nature and open network media in the mobile ad hoc network, internal attacks are far more

dangerous than the external attacks: because the compromised nodes are originally the benign users

of the ad hoc network, they can easily pass the authentication and get protection from the security

mechanisms. As a result, the adversaries can make use of them to gain normal access to the services

that should only be available to the authorized users in the network, and they can use the legal

identity provided by the compromised nodes to conceal their malicious behaviours. Therefore, we

3390




should pay more attention to the internal attacks initiated by the malicious insiders when we

consider the security issues in the mobile ad hoc networks.

5. Security Solutions [1]

The consequences of these attacks include, but are not limited to, loss of proprietary information,

legal and recovery costs, tarnished image, and loss of network service. Some of the measures that can

be incorporated after broad analysis of various security criteria‟s and attack are as under:

Virtual Private Networks (VPN): This offers a solid solution to many security issues, where an

authenticated key provides confidentiality and integrity for IP (Internet Protocol) data grams.

Software are available to implement VPNs on just about every platform. Authentication depends

upon three factors as password, Fingerprints and a security Token. Using two factors is desirable and

using all three is most secured. VPN only support IP suite so it cannot be solution for all

environments.

Encryption: Encryption is a technique used for many years for passing information from one place

to other in a secured manner. A message in its original shape is referred to as a plaintext (or Text)

and a message used to conceal original message is called Ciphertext (or Cipher). The process of

changing plaintext into ciphertext is called Encryption and the reverse process is called decryption.

There are many algorithms available for these processes. Some of them are Data Encryption

Standard (DES), International Data Encryption algorithm (IDEA) and Public key algorithm (RSA).

These algorithms are key based algorithms. There is one popular key algorithm as Digital signature

algorithm. In Digital signature, Signer encrypts the message with key, this is sent to recipient, the

message is then decrypted with sender‟s public key. In case of ad hoc networks this may not be the

best method as it uses a lot of space and is also slow.

One Way Hash Function: There is another algorithm called one way hash Function: it is like

checksum of a block of text and is secure in that it is impossible to generate the same hash function

value without knowing the correct algorithm and key. It accepts a variable size message and

produces a affixed size tag as output. This algorithm can be combined with encryption to provide an

efficient and effective digital signature.

Digital Signature: External attacks can be checked using Confidentiality of the routing information

and also by authentication and integrity assurance features. Encryption can be solution to this.

Digital signatures and one way functions can be applied. Permian used complex robustness to

protect routing data from compromised nodes. It is ability to continue correct operation in presence

of arbitrary nodes with complex failures.

6. Proposed Plan

It was found that not one method can carried out to make MANET routing secured. Many

combinations were tried and it was found that each protocol behaves differently in each proposed

plan. New scheme is incorporated on AODV because most of the work has been carried out using

AODV as a base protocol. Proposed Scheme is compared with existing AODV without malicious

nodes, with malicious nodes and results are analyzed based on the proposed approach. It was found

malicious nodes are big issue in MANET routing. These malicious nodes drop the packets by using

fake routes and it is very difficult to identify a malicious node. The proposed approach is designed to

detect and isolate the malicious node from the network under certain assumptions based on which

the proposed algorithm works.

Assumptions

3391




The following assumptions are considered in order to design the proposed algorithm:-

• A node interacts with its 1-hop neighbours directly and even with other mobile nodes

through intermediate nodes using, multi-hop packet forwarding technique.

• Every mobile node is uniquely identified using unique id in the network. This identification

is provided to every node entering the network according to the existing mobile nodes in the

network.

• The network is considered to be layered.

• The source and destination are not the intruders.

Proposed Algorithm

Steps of INTRU_SecureIDS algorithm

Phase 1: Route Request phase

Start route Request

Initialize sequence numbers 1 to N as number of nodes varying 1 to N

Name Source node as ‘S’ and Destination as ‘D’

Route Request is forwarded as Source routing

AODV Route request is followed

Route reply is confirmed based on Shortest path as in AODV

Route is established

Call INTRUDETECT

Phase 2: Local Repair LREPAIR

Check link break = true

Node upstream repair the route locally

If destination not far than MAX_REPAIR_TTL

Node increments sequence no. for destination broadcasts Route Request

Discovery phase starts node waits for Route Reply

Route is established

Else call INTRUDETECT

Phase 3: Intrusion detection INTRUDETECT

Check route table entry for each node

If seq no. is greater than assigned N , follow steps 3 else return

Check for node having higher seq no.

Block the node as M-Node

Initialize Route request again

Call RREQ

Call INTRUISOLATE

Phase 4: Intrusion isolation INTRUISOLATE

Source send ICMP packets to route path.

Route path sends ICMP packets to the neighboring intermediate nodes and update the

route table and delete M-node entry

ISOLATE the node as M-node.

Initialize Route request again

Call RREQ

3392




7. Network Simulations And Results

NS 2.34 has been used as simulator. It provides support for both wired and wireless networking with

multicast capabilities and satellite networks. It provides substantial support for simulation of

Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) and User Datagram Protocol (UDP) routing. Network

Simulator has two components as under:

Object oriented simulator, written in C++ and

OTcl (an object oriented extension of Tool Command Language TCL) interpreter which is

used to execute user‟s command scripts.

The OTcl scripts for different scenarios can be written in any text editor like vi or emacs. The script

defines the network components such as nodes, links, protocols and traffic requirements. The output

is generated by simulator in two files: Trace file and NAM file. To analyze the trace files, other

independent tools will be needed to filter, compute and display the results (e.g. Awk). The graphs

can also be plotted using XGRAPH with help of trace file and the same can be used for better

analysis. NAM, Network Animator, is a very good animation tool supported by NS-2.34 which is

used for viewing network simulation traces and real world packet trace data. The output generated

by network simulator in the form of trace and NAM file is used to calculate packet delivery ratio,

end-to-end delays, network throughput, power consumption, normalized routing load, packet loss

and other performance measures. Some of the snapshots during simulation are given below.

Figure 1: NAM file showing AODV with 10 Nodes with Varying Pause Time

Figure 2: NAM file showing AODV with 10 Nodes with Varying Speed


3393







The results of simulations using various metrics on AODV and DSR protocols are given beow.

Graph 1: Average Delay vs. Pausetime for 10 Nodes

This graph works as per the conditions and parameters assigned for 10 nodes ,shows the delay is

more in case of AODV with respect to the pause time .

3394





This graph shows the variance in average delay for 20 nodes and as resulted in case of DSR average

delay is increasing with increasing the number of nodes .


This graphs shows that AODV is much better than DSR as the delay is decreasing while the nodes

are increased to 50.Which is as per the theory Thus, AODV gives better results.

Graph 4: Throughput vs. Pausetime for 10 Nodes

This works at 10 nodes and observerd results shows that throughput of DSR is more in case of 10

nodes. While in case of AODVthe throughput increases with increase in pause time . Thus, AODV

gives better throughput as compared to DSR.


This graph shows that throughput is increasing in case of AODV while nodes are increased to 20.

Hence AODV works much better as per the theory suggested for AODV.


3395




This graph shows that throughput is almost similar in case of both protocols, while observed results

shows that ADOV gives more throughput while increasing the number of nodes to 50. So as per the

theory AODV is preffered over DSR with more congested networks.

Graph 7: PDR vs. Pausetime for 10 Nodes

This graph works as per the plan at 10 nodes while varing the pause time. Though the delay is more

in AODV but it is as per the theory DSR works better when nodes are less.

Graph 8: PDR vs. Pausetime for 20 Nodes

This graph shows the results at 20 nodes .Though the PDR is approximately remains in the range of

97-99% which is considered good for both the protocols.

Graph 9: PDR vs. Pausetime for 50 nodes

This graph works at 50 nodes while varying the pause time. Though the PDR remains almost stable

for DSR protocol but it increases in case of AODV it is as per theory. PDR increases in AODV with

increase in number of nodes.

Proposed algorithm implementation and Result Analysis

3396




Following are the Ns-2 animations which show the working of proposed approach in the network

simulator according to the parameters considered for the system. These NAM files show the

implementation of the proposed algorithm in the network simulator. These are the graphs obtained

with the implementation of the proposed approach:-

Graph 10: Graph for Pause Time vs. Average Delay for 10 Nodes

This graph works as per suggested plan at 10 nodes using varying pause time our proposed plan

would work better. Though delay decreases with increase of pause time still it is more in proposed

plan but it is as per the theory. As more time is required to search the malicious node.

Graph 11: Graph for Pause Time vs. Throughput for 10 Nodes


would work better. Though throughput increases with increase of pause time still it is more in

proposed plan but it is as per the theory. Thus throughput decrease as with the malicious node.

Graph 12: Graph for Pause Time vs. PDR for 10 Nodes

3397





would work better. Though PDR increases with increase of pause time still it is more in proposed

plan but it is as per the theory. Thus PDR must increase with the malicious node.

Graph 13: Graph for Speed vs. Average Delay for 10 Nodes

This graph works as per suggested plan at 10 nodes using varying speed our proposed plan would

work better. Though delay is inconsistent with increase of speed still it is approximately same in

proposed plan but it is as per the theory. As more time is required to search the malicious node.

Graph 14: Graph for Speed vs. Throughput for 10 Nodes

This graph shows throughput at 10 nodes while varying the speed. Though the throughput is stable

but its high in AODV which is par the theory.

Graph 15: Graph for Speed vs. PDR for 10 Nodes


work better. Though throughput decreases with increase of speed still it is more in proposed plan but

it is as per the theory. Thus PDR must decrease with the malicious node.

3398










work better. Though throughput decreases with increase of pause time still it is more in proposed

plan but it is as per the theory. Thus throughput must decrease with the malicious node.



would work better. Though throughput is approximately same for both with increase of pause time

still it is more in proposed plan but it is as per the theory. Thus PDR must increase with the

malicious node.


3399




This graph works as per suggested plan at 20 nodes using varying Speed our proposed plan would

work better. Though delay is approximately constant with increase of speed but it is as per the

theory. As more time is required to search the malicious node.



work better. Though delay is constant in both the cases but the throughput is more with proposed

approach. As malicious nodes decreases the throughput.


This graph works as per the suggested plan at 20 nodes using varying speed our proposed plan

would work better. Though PDR is constant in both the cases but the PDR is less in proposed

approach but it is as per the theory. As malicious node has suspected behavior.






3400





would work better. Though throughput decreases with increase of pause time still it is more in

proposed plan but it is as per the theory. Thus throughput decreases with the malicious node.



would work better. Though throughput is variable with increase of pause time still it is more in

proposed plan but it is as per the theory. Thus throughput must decrease with the malicious node.



work better. Though delay decreases with increase of speed still it is more in proposed plan but it is

as per the theory. As more time is required to search the malicious node.


This graph works as per suggested plan at 50 nodes using varying speed our proposed plan would work better.

Though throughput decreases with increase of pause time still it is more in proposed plan but it is as per the

theory. Thus throughput must decrease with the malicious node.


3401





work better. Though PDR is varying continuously with increase of speed still it is more in proposed

plan but it is as per the theory. Thus PDR must decrease with the malicious node.

8. Conclusion The routing protocols proposed for Mobile Ad hoc networks seem to meet the basic requirements

like dynamically changing network topologies rather well. However, the security issues have been

left primarily ignored. The MANET routing protocols must be secured from the viewpoint of the

authentication, integrity and privacy. These requirements can be at least partially met by using

strong authentication and encryption mechanisms, digital signatures, hashing and MACs. Moreover,

the protection means can be optimized for every protocol based on the approach taken to routing.

Some MANET routing protocol developers suggest the application of IPSEC within the protocol to

achieve the necessary security goals. This kind of approach is not totally adequate, due to the

problems of replay etc. Moreover, the traditional security mechanisms such as link-level encryption

or bi-directional tunnels are not adequate, due to the dynamic and unpredictable nature of MANET

networks. The proposed security algorithm is for detection of malicious nodes present in the

network. The proposed approach presented a scheme to proactively prevent external attacks. The

solution is specifically targeted for AODV protocol. The results of implementation of proposed

algorithm show that the effect of the overheads caused by our scheme is marginal and has negligible

effects on network performance.

9. Future Work This addressed the security issues pertaining to the routing protocols. The focus has been on on-

demand protocols, specifically, AODV. It would be interesting to study the issues specific to table

driven protocols and look into schemes that work optimally when integrated with them. Though the

proposed approach has done a very limited analysis of the internal attacks. Some of the attacks,

especially those that are not deterministic, have not been handled. Intrusion detection schemes that

analyze traffic profiles/patterns to detect intruders would be another challenging area to explore. The

detection of compromised nodes is a very tough problem especially in a dynamically changing

network. In future we will try to enhance the capability of our IDS by making it more robust to

detect the intrusions of all the types and to overcome the damage caused to the system during the

hacking or intruding phase. The IDS capability to withstand more dynamic threats is to be enhanced

more in future and proposed algorithm can be enhanced more in terms of Quality of Service (QOS).

References [1] Ashwani Kush, “Security and Reputation Schemes in Ad-Hoc Networks Routing”, International Journal of

Information Technology and Knowledge Management, Volume 2, No. 1, pp. 185-189, January June 2009.

[2] B. Dahill, B. N. Levine, E. Royer and C. Shields, “A secure routing protocol for ad hoc networks”,

Technical Report UM-CS-2001-037, University of Massachusetts, Department of Computer Science, Aug.

2001.

[3] C.K. Toh, “Ad hoc mobile wireless Networks”, Prentice Hall, New Jersey, 2002.

[4] D. B. J. Yih-Chun Hu, Adrian Perrig, “Ariadne: A secure on-demand routing protocol for ad-hoc

networks”, Proceedings of the Eighth Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking

(MobiCom 2002), Sept. 2002.

[5] Frank Kargl Stefan Schlott Andreas Klenk Alfred Geiss MichaelWeber,“Securing Ad hoc Routing

Protocols”, Proceedings of the 30th EUROMICRO Conference (EUROMICRO 2004)), PP: 514-519 ,

ISBN ~ ISSN:1089-6503 , 0-7695-2199-1, Publisher: IEEE Computer Society Washington, DC, USA, 2004

3402




[6] Kai Inkinen, “New Secure Routing in Ad Hoc Networks: Study and Evaluation of Proposed Schemes”,

Helsinki University of Technology T-110.551, Seminar on Internetworking, Sjökulla, 2004-04-26/27.

[7] P. Papadimitratos and Z. J. Haas, “Secure routing for mobile ad hoc networks”, SCS Communication

Networks and Distributed Systems Modeling and Simulation Conference (CNDS 2002), Jan 2002.

[8] Seung Yi, Prasad Naldurg, Robin Kravets, “Security-Aware Ad-hoc routing for wireless networks”,

Technical Report No. UIUCDCS-R-2001-2241,August 2001and in Proceedings of the 2nd ACM international

symposium on Mobile ad hoc networking & computing 2001, Long Beach, CA, USA, October 04 - 05,

2001.

[9] S. Yi, P. Naldurg, R. Kravets, “A security-aware ad hoc outing protocol for wireless networks”, 6th World

Multi-Conference on Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics (SCI 2002), 2002.

[10] Wenjia Li, Anupam Joshi, “Security Issues in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks- A Survey”, Department of

Computer Science and Electrical Engineering, University of Maryland, Baltimore County,

http://www.cs.umbc.edu /~wenjia1/699_report.pdf, 2008

Documents

Secured Routing Strategy over MANET - IJIFR · MANET is a collection of wireless mobile nodes forming a temporary/short ... state of war an army cannot rely on fixed ... The technique