Wireless Routing Protocols and Security Analysis

Running head: WIRELESS ROUTING PROTOCOLS AND SECURITY ANALYSIS
Wireless Routing Protocols and Security Analysis
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1WIRELESS ROUTING PROTOCOLS AND SECURITY ANALYSIS
Executive Summary
Over the years networking has advanced dramatically. Among the most advanced
implementations of networking are Wireless Sensor Networks (WSN) and Vehicular Ad hoc
Networks (VANETs). The report will discuss about the different routing protocols that get
used in the configuration of these networks. This includes analysing how these protocols
work in the respective networks. Then the report will talk about the attacks to these protocols
and the various countermeasures that can be considered for mitigating these threats. After that
the report ends with concluding notes.

2WIRELESS ROUTING PROTOCOLS AND SECURITY ANALYSIS
Table of Contents
Introduction................................................................................................................................4
Routing Protocols.......................................................................................................................4
Motivation..............................................................................................................................4
How Protocols Work..............................................................................................................4
Geographic Routing (GEAR, GPSR).................................................................................4
Minimum Cost Forwarding................................................................................................5
Cluster based Protocols (PEGASIS, LEACH, TEEN).......................................................5
Energy Conserving Topology Maintenance (SPAN, GAF, CEC, AFECA)......................5
Analysis of Positives and Negatives......................................................................................6
Geographic Routing...........................................................................................................6
Minimum Cost Forwarding................................................................................................7
Cluster based Protocols......................................................................................................7
Energy Conserving Topology Maintenance.......................................................................8
Security Issues........................................................................................................................8
Attacks to Routing Protocols.....................................................................................................9
Bogus Information Attack......................................................................................................9
Selective Forwarding.............................................................................................................9
Sinkhole Attack......................................................................................................................9
Sybil.......................................................................................................................................9
Wormholes...........................................................................................................................10
HELLO floods......................................................................................................................10

3WIRELESS ROUTING PROTOCOLS AND SECURITY ANALYSIS
Countermeasures for Routing Protocol Attacks.......................................................................10
Conclusion................................................................................................................................11
References................................................................................................................................12

4WIRELESS ROUTING PROTOCOLS AND SECURITY ANALYSIS
Introduction
The following report tries to explain the working of advanced networking protocols.
These protocols help in configuration of advanced networking implementations like Wireless
Sensor Networks (WSN) and Vehicular Ad hoc Networks (VANETs) [3]. The report begins
by sharing a brief statement on the purpose of routing protocols. Then the working of
different routing protocols that get used in the configuration of WSNs and VANETs are
detailed [1]. After this the advantages and disadvantages of the routing protocols are listed.
Thereafter the report starts to talk about the attacks that are known to pose a threat to the
configuration of such protocols. Following this, the various countermeasures to be considered
for mitigating these threats are given after which the report ends with conclusions.
Routing Protocols
Motivation
The purpose of routing protocols in wireless networks is to improve the network
performance and provide better data delivery with minimum delay. The different protocols
are discussed later in the report. Routing mechanisms in the field of networking has advanced
a long way. Hence it is necessary to take deep dive about the different protocols used in these
advanced wireless network implementations.
How Protocols Work
Geographic Routing (GEAR, GPSR)
GEAR stands for Geographic and Energy Aware Routing and refers to the routing
technique used for routing data packets towards appropriate regions through conscious
neighbour selection [2]. This is done by means of recursive geographic forwarding for
disseminating data packets in destination regions.

5WIRELESS ROUTING PROTOCOLS AND SECURITY ANALYSIS
GPSR or Greedy Perimeter Stateless Routing is used in wireless networks for
enabling the nodes in figuring out their nearest neighbours by use of beacons. These should
also be positioned closer to the destination where the message is to be sent. For calculation of
the path GPSR makes use of greedy forwarding algorithm which sends information to final
destination. If this fails, perimeter formatting is used.
Minimum Cost Forwarding
The Minimum Cost Forwarding Algorithm or MCFA is meant for computing the least
cost for each of the nodes to the base station. If the node is found to be in the shortest path,
only then the data gets transmitted. The same process is repeated till the packet finally
reaches the base station. This computing and updating of the MCFA creates considerable
overhead.
Cluster based Protocols (PEGASIS, LEACH, TEEN)
PEGASIS refers to the protocol called Power Efficient Gathering in Sensor
Information Systems. This is a chain-based routing technique for Wireless Sensor Networks
(WSN) [7]. Here every sensor node must transmit data to the neighbours that are nearer to
sink node. Multiple chains can be created based on this greedy algorithm and the leading
node of each chain takes up the responsibility of transferring data to sink node. Because of
the high workload of the leader of a chain, each of the nodes in this protocol takes turns to act
as leader for balancing energy consumption. Due to multi-hop propagation energy can be
saved by avoiding long distance communication among sensor nodes and sink nodes.
Energy Conserving Topology Maintenance (SPAN, GAF, CEC, AFECA)
In this routing technique, geographic forwarding algorithms are used. This technique
is mostly used to bring in simplicity. SPAN is a type of this routing technique and can be
used in combination with other routing protocols also [6]. This requires every node to

6WIRELESS ROUTING PROTOCOLS AND SECURITY ANALYSIS
advertise their coordinators and neighbours [11]. For reducing the overhead the Span HELLO
information is piggybacked updates necessary for geographic forwarding.
GAF on the other hand makes use of location based information and virtual grids for
determining the node equivalence [12]. The location based information for GAF may be
provided by GPS, GLONASS or other location systems being developed at the moment.
However, despite of having location based information, it is of utmost importance to find
equivalent nodes in ad hoc networks also. This problem is addressed by GAF by means of
dividing the whole area in which nodes have been distributed to various smaller virtual grids.
Analysis of Positives and Negatives
Geographic Routing
The advantages of geographic routing can be the following:
 Comes with lower computational complexity
 Does not operate as loop routing
 Highly energy efficient by avoiding flooding
 Path length is measured is nearer to shortest Euclidean distance
 Suits the networks that are dynamic
The disadvantages of geographic routing can be as follows:
 It is not suited towards 3D geographic routing
 It is not suitable for communications among two random nodes
 It is not based upon self-learning algorithm
 Source node needs to save locations of all the anchors
 The path proposed may not always be the optimal one.

7WIRELESS ROUTING PROTOCOLS AND SECURITY ANALYSIS
Minimum Cost Forwarding
The key advantage of Minimum Cost Forwarding (MCF) is minimizing of energy
consumption through routing of packets over the paths with the lowest cost overhead.
In addition to ensuring that data is routed over the shortest path, SRMCF ensures that it can
recover from failures.
The major drawbacks of Minimum Cost Forwarding are found to be:
Can result in duplication of packets while routing.
Can seem to have long back-off time
Cluster based Protocols
The advantages of cluster based routing protocols can be:
 The network lifetime of cluster based routing protocols like LEACH is very good
 Cluster based routing protocols comprise of resource awareness
 Offers near optimal chain based routing through the PEGASIS protocol
 Instead of multiple clusters, node chains are created
 Enhanced retransmission has resulted to improving of flooding performance
The disadvantages of cluster based routing protocols are found to be:
 Optimal routing is generally not provided
 The power consumption is generally very high
 Do not consist of multipath and query based routing characteristics
 The degree of connectivity in the network is relatively low
 Broadcasts are not naturally supported once being replaced by unicast packets
Energy Conserving Topology Maintenance
The advantages of the different routing protocols of this kind is as follows:

8WIRELESS ROUTING PROTOCOLS AND SECURITY ANALYSIS
 The GAF routing protocol gets used in optimizing the performance of Wireless
Sensor Networks (WSN)
 The SPAN protocol is used for reducing the energy consumption among various
nodes of the network
The disadvantages of these routing protocols based on Energy Conserving Topology
Maintenance are:
 The drawbacks that are experienced from GAF routing protocol is the higher
overhead and the very limited power management.
 The drawbacks of the SPAN routing protocol is that it lacks any kind of QoS and
offers very limited scalability
Security Issues
The security issues experienced in Geographic routing are bogus information,
selective forwarding and Sybil attacks. The security issues pertaining to the Minimum Cost
Forwarding or MCF routing algorithm are bogus routing information, selective forwarding,
attacks to sinkhole node and HELLO flood attacks [13]. The security issues of clustering
based routing protocols are also selective forwarding and HELLO floods. The routing
protocols of the type energy conserving topology maintenance also suffer from bogus
information and HELLO floods along with Sybil attacks.
Attacks to Routing Protocols
Bogus Information Attack
Bogus information attacks are mostly observed in vehicular ad hoc networks or
VANETs [5]. Here the attacker sends false information within the network to negatively
affect the decisions of other drivers in the VANET [14]. The attackers can be both within the
network or exist outside the network [4]. The false information can include wrong location

9WIRELESS ROUTING PROTOCOLS AND SECURITY ANALYSIS
data or wrong speed data which forces others to change their usual route thus leading to
Bogus Information Attack.
Selective Forwarding
Selective forwarding is also sometimes known as Greyhole attacks. In this kind of
attacks, the malicious nodes attempt to stop the packets of the network as they choose to be
selective about forwarding or dropping messages that are to pass over them [8]. These attacks
are difficult to detect as the behaviour of the nodes are very selective.
Sinkhole Attack
The Sinkhole attacks refer to insider attacks where the attacker compromises one of
the nodes of the network in order to launch the attack [9]. The malicious node then attempts
towards attracting all network traffic from the nearby nodes as per the routing metric being
used by the routing protocol. After achieving this the attacker uses the compromised node to
launch the Sinkhole attack.
Sybil
These are the attacks in which the malicious nodes obtain multiple identities by
illegitimate means. Through these attacks, the malicious node attempts to create illusions of
traffic congestion through its multiple identities. Apart from the illusion, these attacks can
even inject false information to the network with data of nodes that do not even exist.
Wormholes
Wormhole attacks are serious attacks by means of which attackers are able to know
about the location of one another to strategically position themselves for launching an attack
on a network. Then the attackers continue to listen to this network and record information.
After creating a direct link (tunnel) between the nodes, the attackers receive network packets
through one node and transfers them to the other node in another side of the network.

10WIRELESS ROUTING PROTOCOLS AND SECURITY ANALYSIS
HELLO floods
Hello messages are broadcasted from different nodes to the neighbours. In HELLO
flood attacks, attackers can send broadcasts with sufficient transmission power to convince
all the nodes of the network that the attacker node is a neighbour node. However, nodes to far
from the attacker node not get convinced. This creates confusion in the network.
Countermeasures for Routing Protocol Attacks
Sinkhole Attack: The algorithms introduced to fight sinkhole attacks, exists in two different
phases. These are the network deployment phase and the network maintenance phase. The
network deployment phase dictates how the network should be configured while the network
maintenance phase indicates how to keep the network safe.
Sybil: The first solution developed against Sybil attacks is Trusted Certification. Here the
Centralized Authority CA gets used for validating the various entities. Every entity gets
identified uniquely through the unique digital signatures that are assigned to the entities by
the CA. Here, the authentication is generally ensured through asymmetric key cryptography.
Wormholes and Selective forwarding: Wormholes can be proactively prevented by posing
restrictions on the maximum travel distance, accurate synchronization of time, overhearing of
neighbours, local monitoring and maximum power of transmission in a specific direction.
Wormholes can also be reactively prevented by considering the wormhole tunnels as valid
links until it shows malicious behaviours. This countermeasure also works against selective
forwarding attacks.
HELLO flood and Bogus Information Attacks: To fight these attacks multi-path multi-
base station data forwarding can be introduced. Here, sensor nodes can maintain a wide range
of secrets or keys in multiple trees. The sensor nodes can forward the sensory data to multiple

11WIRELESS ROUTING PROTOCOLS AND SECURITY ANALYSIS
routes through the use of these secrets. The multiple base stations of the network keep track
of the specific node count. Every base station has all secrets shared by all other nodes.
Conclusion
To conclude, the report successfully explains the working of advanced networking
protocols. The protocols are observed to help in configuration of advanced networks like
WSNs and VANETs. The report is found to start by briefly touching on the purpose of
routing protocols. Then the detailed working of different routing protocols is mentioned one
by one. After this the advantages and disadvantages of the routing protocols are listed.
Thereafter the report starts to talk about the attacks that are known to pose a threat to the
configuration of such protocols. Following this, the various countermeasures to be considered
for mitigating these threats are given after which the report ends with conclusions.

12WIRELESS ROUTING PROTOCOLS AND SECURITY ANALYSIS
References
[1] A. Mathur, T. Newe, and M. Rao, Defence against black hole and selective forwarding
attacks for medical WSNs in the IoT. Sensors, 16(1), p.118., 2016
[2] A. Sánchez-Carmona, S. Robles, and C. Borrego, PrivHab+: A secure geographic routing
protocol for DTN. Computer Communications, 78, pp.56-73., 2016
[3] F. Sakiz, and S. Sen, A survey of attacks and detection mechanisms on intelligent
transportation systems: VANETs and IoV. Ad Hoc Networks, 61, pp.33-50., 2017
[4] J. Deogirikar, and A. Vidhate, February. Security attacks in IoT: A survey. In 2017
International Conference on I-SMAC (IoT in Social, Mobile, Analytics and Cloud)(I-SMAC)
(pp. 32-37). IEEE., 2017
[5] K. Monika, and A. Sharma, A Deterministic GPSR Routing Protocol for VANET.
International Journal of Advance Research, Ideas and Innovations in Technology, 2, pp.1-5.,
2016
[6] K. Nachimuthu, and S. Thalfiyanasrin, Energy Aware Multipath Routing in Wireless
Sensor Networks., 2018
[7] M.A. Salam, and N. Halemani, Performance Evaluation of Wireless Sensor Network
under Hello Flood Attack. International Journal of Computer networks & Communications
(IJCNC), 8(2)., 2016
[8] M. Stehlik, V. Matyas, and A. Stetsko, April. Towards better selective forwarding and
delay attacks detection in wireless sensor networks. In 2016 IEEE 13th International
Conference on Networking, Sensing, and Control (ICNSC) (pp. 1-6). IEEE., 2016

13WIRELESS ROUTING PROTOCOLS AND SECURITY ANALYSIS
[9] N. Patel, detection & prevention techniques of sinkhole attack in mobile ad hoc network:
A survey. international journal of latest research in engineering and technology, 2, pp.50-
54., 2016
[10] N. Zaman, L. Tang Jung, and M.M. Yasin, Enhancing energy efficiency of wireless
sensor network through the design of energy efficient routing protocol. Journal of Sensors,
2016., 2016
[11] R. Siri Maidhili, and G.M. Karthik, Authentication and overhearing to prevent internal
and external attacks in WSN. International Journal of Engineering & Technology, 7(2.8),
pp.477-487., 2018
[12] T. Senthil, and B. Kannapiran, ECTTM-Energy Conserving Trustworthy Topology
Management Mechanism for Wireless Sensor Networks. International Journal of Intelligent
Engineering and Systems, 10(4), pp.157-165., 2017
[13] T. Wang, Y. Cao, Y. Zhou, and P. Li, A survey on geographic routing protocols in
delay/disruption tolerant networks. International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks,
12(2), p.3174670., 2016.
[14] V. Nampally, and M.R. Sharma, A Survey on Security Attacks for VANET. Security
Challenges, 5(10)., 2017

14WIRELESS ROUTING PROTOCOLS AND SECURITY ANALYSIS