A Secure Payment Scheme With Low Communication and Processing Overhead for Multihop Wireless Network

Scientific Journal Impact Factor (SJIF): 1.711

International Journal of Modern Trends in Engineering and Research

www.ijmter.com

@IJMTER-2014, All rights Reserved 434

e-ISSN: 2349-9745 p-ISSN: 2393-8161

A Secure Payment Scheme with Low Communication and Processing Overhead for Multihop Wireless Network

M. Suresh1, Mrs. K.M.Padmapriya 2 1 Department of Computer Science, SSM college of Arts and science,

2 Department of Computer Science, SSM college of Arts and science, Komarapalayam

Abstract - In this proposed work a trust-based routing protocol is developed to route messages through the highly trusted nodes to minimize the probability of dropping the messages. Thus improve the network performance in terms of throughput and packet delivery ratio. The proposed design contains a novel secure reactive routing protocol for Mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs), called TRIUMF (Trust-Based Routing Protocol with controlled degree of Selfishness for Securing MANET against Packet Dropping Attack). In the proposed protocol trust among nodes is represented by trust value, which consists of cooperation score, direct trust and indirect trust. The proposed trust routing allows controlled degree of selfishness to give an incentive to the selfish nodes to declare its selfishness behavior to its neighbor nodes, which reduce the searching time of misbehaving nodes to search for the malicious nodes only. In the proposed routing protocol two node-disjoint routes between the source and destination nodes are selected based on their path trust values, one marked as primary and the other as secondary. In this work both DLL-ACK and end- to-end TCP-ACK as monitoring tools to monitor the behavior of routing path nodes: if the data packet successfully transmitted, then the path nodes trust value are updated positively; otherwise, if a malicious behavior is detected then the path searching tool starts to identify the malicious nodes and isolate them from the routing path and the network. Finally this scheme reduces the searching time of malicious nodes, and the routing protocol avoids the isolated misbehaving node from sharing in all future routes, which improves the overall network throughput.

Keywords - MANET, TRIUMF, Secure, Packet Dropping Attack, Throughput.

I. INTRODUCTION Wireless networks can be divided into two areas in much the same way that traditional wired networks

are: Local Area Networks (LANs) and Wide Area Networks (WANs). As with wired networks, wireless LANs have a higher data rate and are confined to small areas, either a building or campus. Wireless WANs can cover anything from a city to a continent. In the past wireless network manufacturers have relied on the complexity of the technology to provide security. This assumption was essentially sound when one considered that the technology was originally developed by the military. In practice this approach works to a degree, because with radio, for example traditional methods of intercepting radio transmissions cannot detect a spread spectrum signal. This model breaks down though when the same vendors equipment is used by unauthorized people to access the LAN. To overcome this flaw some manufacturers use encryption to encode transmissions and so make the signal indecipherable if intercepted.

The analyatical and simulation results demonstrate that RACE can significantly reduce the communication and processing overhead comparing to the existing receipt-based payment schemes with acceptable payment clearance delay and Evidences storage area, which is necessary for the effective implementation of the scheme. Moreover, RACE can secure the payment, and identify the cheating nodes

International Journal of Modern Trends in Engineering and Research (IJMTER)

Volume 01, Issue 05, [November - 2014] e-ISSN: 2349-9745, p-ISSN: 2393-8161


precisely and rapidly without false accusations or missed detections. In RACE, the AC can process the payment reports to know the number of relayed/dropped messages by each node.

The problem of payment schemes may be classified into tamper-proof-device (TPD)-based and receipt-based schemes. In TPD-based payment schemes, a TPD is put in in every node to store and manage its credit account and secure its operation. For receipt-based payment schemes associate offline central unit referred to as the accounting center stores and manages the nodes credit accounts. The nodes usually submit plain proofs for relaying packets, called receipts, to the AC to update their credit accounts. In Nuglets the self-generated and forwarded packets by a node ar passed to the TPD to decrease and increase the nodes open account, severally. Packet purse and packet trade models are projected. For the packet purse model, the supply nodes open account is charged the full payment before causation a packet, and each intermediate node acquires the payment for relaying the packet. For the packet trade model, every intermediate node runs associate auction to sell the packets to consecutive node within the route, and therefore the destination node pays the whole price of relaying the packets. In SIP once receiving a knowledge packet, the destination node sends a Receipt packet to the supply node to issue a bequest packet to increment the credit accounts of the intermediate nodes.

II. METHODOLOGY The cheating reports to identify the cheating nodes and correct the financial data. Our objective of

securing the payment is preventing the attackers (singular of collusive) from stealing credits or paying less, i.e., the attackers should not benefit from their misbehaviors. We should also guarantee that each node will earn the correct payment even if the other nodes in the route collude to steal credits. The proposed work is depicted in figure 1.

Figure. 1. System Design

Node deployment

Neighbor

Path selection

Clustering and routing

algorithm

End process Analysis

Check energy level

Access control mechanism




A. NETWORK FORMATION

Inter organizational networks emerge as a result of the interdependencies between organizations that ensure organizations to interact with each other and lead in time to network structures. Where hierarchical arrangements can be purposely planned, networks are reactionary since they emerge out of contextual events that initiate the formation of a collaborative network. Although network emergence is well studied, the process in which networks come into being and evolve through time is not as well known. Mainly due to the difficulties in terms of data collection and analysis. This is especially the case for public sector networks since network evolution studies are predominantly focused on the private sector. Some authors suggest that networks evolve through a cyclical approach. Ansell and Gash (2007) propose five iterative phases that are important in all cooperative phases: 1) face-to-phase dialogue, 2) trust building, 3) commitment to the process, 4) shared understanding, and 5) intermediate outcome. Another model is developed by Ring and Van de Venn (1994) who state that cooperative inter-organizational relations go through three repetitive phases: 1) negotiation phase in which organizations negotiate about joint action, 2) a commitment phase in which organizations reach an agreement and commit to future action in the relationship, and 3) an execution phase where joint action is actually performed. These three stages overlap and are repetitive throughout the inter-organizational relationship (Ring & Van de Venn, 1994). Both cyclical models attempt to explain the processes within an operating network, but they do not consider the evolutionary process organizational networks go through from their emergence till their termination.

B. ANCHOR NODE SELECTION

Choosing anchor points is a crucial step of the data gathering process since it determines the efficiency of energy transferring and the latency of data gathering. A trivial scheme is to simply visit all the sensor nodes, gather data through single-hop transmission and use the SenCar to forward data back to the static sink through long range communications. However, this scheme would trigger several new problems in our data collection and wireless recharge scheme. First, using single-hop data collection can only collect data from a very small number of nodes per interval. Only the nodes reside at the anchor points are able to transmit data while data generated at other nodes is not collected. Therefore, the fairness of data collection among all the nodes is greatly undermined in single hop data collection. In contrast, if multi-hop transmission is used, we can collect data from the larger neighborhood of anchor points thereby improving the fairness of data collection. Second, the average packet latency will be increased with single hop communication. Since if nodes are not visited by the SenCar, their data packets would be buffered until these nodes are selected as anchor points. It would result in longer average data collection latency and is not scalable for large networks. In contrast, in our proposed solution, the SenCar only visits a subset of selected sensor nodes (anchor points) and collects data through multi-hop transmissions, which can enhance data collection fairness, reduce data collection latency, and avoid stopping at unnecessary sensor locations for battery recharge. The anchor node selection procedure is shown in figure 2.




Figure.2. Anchor Node Selection Methodology

C. PATH SELECTION

We introduce mechanisms for path selection when the energy of the sensors in original primary path has dropped below a certain level. This allows us to distribute energy consumption more evenly among the sensor nodes in the network. Number of hope counts is also identified by using this method. The Energy Efficiency of the individual node is increased by this path selection method.

Figure 3. Path Selection Methodology

Anchor Point Selection

Data Gathering

Single Hop Transmission

Data Collection Latency

Path Selection

Energy Consumption

Energy Efficiency maintenance

Path Selection method

Primary Path Drop Notifications




D. TRUST BASED SECURE ROUTING PROTOCOL IMPLEMENTATION

TMR provides a method of message security using trust based multipath routing. In this approach, less trusted nodes are given lesser number of self-encrypted parts of a message, thereby making it difficult for malicious nodes to gain access to the minimum information required to break through the encryption strategy. Using trust levels, it makes multipath routing flexible enough to be usable in networks with vital nodes and absence of necessary redundancy. In addition, using trust levels, it avoids the non-trusted nodes in the routes that may use brute force attacks and may decrypt messages if enough parts of the message are available to them. Secure connection has been established between source nodes to destination node. The TMR algorithm will find out the multiple routes from source to destination using DSR algorithm. After finding multiple routes, all the routes are sorted based on the trust level. Then it will choose the best route which is having maximum trust level. In this method the message is split into parts. Then it routes the encrypted parts through best single route.

Figure 4. Secure Routing Implementation DSR Algorithm

When node S wants to send a packet to node D, but does not know a route to D, node S initiates a route discovery.

Source node S floods Route Request (RREQ) Each RREQ, has senders address, destinations address, and a unique Request ID determined by the

sender Each node appends own identifier when forwarding RREQ

Getting the data across a network is only part of the problem for a protocol. The data received has to be evaluated in the context of the progress of the conversation, so a protocol has to specify rules describing the context. These kinds of rules are said to express the syntax of the communications. Other rules determine whether the data is meaningful for the context in which the exchange takes place. These kinds of rules are said to express the semantics of the communications.

III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Packet Delivery ratio

Residual Energy

Delivery Latency

Trust based multi-path routing

Encryption Strategy

TMR Algorithm and DSR Algorithm implementation




Packet delivery ratio:

Packet delivery ratio is defined as the ratio of data packets received by the destinations to those generated by the sources mathematically, it can be defined as: PDR=S1/S2 where, S1 is the sum of data packets generated by the each source. Graphs show the fraction of data packets that are successfully delivered during simulations time versus while the PDR is increasing in the case of DSR and AODV, AODV is better among the three protocols.

Residual energy:

You could rationalize, certainly, that it just was or wasnt inviting. You could argue that the decor was all wrong or you might not have liked the individuals currently living there and subconsciously superimposed your suspicions onto the home.There also is the potential that the home is in fact occupied by an entity, spirit or specter. The ghost of some wayward soul, trapped for an eternity to forever wander the abyss of your basement, watching your every move and causing the hairs on your body to constantly stand at attention.But, there is another option that may be considered. Residual energy. Energy, negatively or positively charged left behind from former tenants of the home. Human auras are a powerful and potentially tangible substance. The human aura can literally extend up to three feet outside of a living body. It contains a multitude of colors, varying from red, blue, black, gray, pink and purple. The fluctuations of colors, of course, depend on many variables. If someone is angry, the aura will emit red. When someone is sad or in a very unstable mood, it tends to be gray. It glows pinks, lavenders and blues when balanced and happy.

Delivery latency:

(1) In general, the period of time that one component in a system is spinning its wheels waiting for another component. Latency, therefore, is wasted time. For example, in accessing data on a disk latency is defined as the time it takes to position the proper sector under the read/write head

(2) In networking, the amount of time it takes a packet to travel from source to destination. Together, latency and bandwidth define the speed and capacity of a network

(3) In VoIP terminology, latency refers to a delay in packet delivery. VoIP latency is a service issue that is usually based on physical distance, hops, or voice to data conversion.

The results obtained are shown in the following figures 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9.




Fig. 5. Comparison chart for Simulation time vs Number of Dead nodes

Figure 6. Comparison chart for Simulation time Vs Number of Live nodes




Figure 7. Comparison chart for Simulation time Vs Bandwidth usage

Figure 8. Comparison chart for Simulation time Vs Total Number of control packets




Figure 9. Comparison chart for Data packets received Vs Time

IV. CONCLUSION

The protocol is achieved by using trust based routing algorithm to optimize routing paths, providing an effective multi-path with single sink and clustering concept for data transmission to obtain reliable communications in the case of node faults. We aimed to maintain network life time in maximum, while data transmission is achieved efficiently. Our study was concluded to evaluate the performance of ant based algorithm and AODV routing protocol in terms of Packet Delivery Ratio and Normalized Routing Load. From the comparison it is concluded that overall performance of ant based algorithm is better than AODV.

REFERENCES

[1] C. Chou, D. Wei, C. Kuo, and K. Naik, An Efficient Anonymous Communication Protocol for Peer-to-Peer Applications Over Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks,IEEE J. Selected Areas in Comm., vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 192-203, Jan. 2007.

[2] M. Conti, E. Gregori, and G. Turi, A cross-layer optimization of gnutella for mobile ad hoc networks, inProc. ACM MobiHoc05, 2005, pp. 343354.

[3] G. Kortuem, J. Schneider, D. Preuitt, T. G. C. Thompson, S. Fickas, and Z. Segall, When peer-to-peer comes face-to-face: Collaborative peerto-peer computing in mobile ad hoc networks, in Proc. IEEE P2P01, 2001.

[4] G. Ding and B. Bhargava, Peer-to-peer file-sharing over mobile ad hoc networks, inProc. IEEE PERCOMW04, 2004.

[5] D. Ahmet and C.-C. Shen, Mobile ad hoc p2p file sharing, in Proc. IEEE WCNC04, 2004, pp. 114119. [6] L. M. Feeney and M. Nilsson, Investigating the energy consumption of a wireless network interface in an ad hoc

networking environment, in Proc. IEEE Infocom01, Anchorage, AK, US, 2001. [7] N. R. Potlapally, S. Ravi, A. Raghunathan, and N. K. Jha, Analyzing the energy consumption of security

protocols, in Proc. ISLPED03, 2003. [8] A. Weyland, Cooperation and Accounting in Multi-Hop Cellular Networks, PhD thesis, Univ. of Bern, Nov.

2005. [9] Perkins CE, Royer EM. Ad-hoc on-demand distance vector routing. In Proceedings of 2nd IEEE Workshop on

Mobile Computer Systems and Applications, February 1999.




[10] Johnson DB, Maltz DA. Dynamic source routing in ad hoc wireless networks. In Mobile Computing, Imielinski T, Korth H (eds). Kluwer Academic Publishers: Boston, 1996; 153181.

[11] Park VD, Corson MS. A highly adaptive distributed routing algorithm for mobile wireless networks. In Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM97, April 1997.

[12] Haas ZJ. A new routing protocol for the reconfigurable wireless networks. InProceedings of IEEE 6th International Conference on Universal Personal Communication, October 1997.

[13] Perkins CE, Bhagwat P. Highly dynamic destination-sequenced distance-vector routing (DSDV) for mobile computers. In Buchegger S, Le Boudec JY. Performance analysis of the

[14] CONFIDANT protocol. InProceedings of 3rd ACM International Symposium, on Mobile Ad Hoc Networking and Computing, June 2002. ACM SIGCOMM94 Conference on Communications Architectures, Protocols and Applications, August 1994.

[15] A. Weyland, T. Staub, and T. Braun, Comparison of MotivationBased Cooperation Mechanisms for Hybrid Wireless Networks, J. Computer Comm.,vol. 29, pp. 2661-2670, 2006.

[16] A. Weyland, T. Braun, Cooperation and Accounting Strategy for Multi-hop Cellular Networks, in: Proceedings of 13th IEEE Workshop on Local and Metropolitan Area Networks (LANMAN), Mill Valley, CA, USA, 2004, pp. 193198.

[17] L. Buttya n, J.-P. Hubaux, Stimulating cooperation in self-organizing mobile ad hoc networks, ACM Mobile Networks and Applications 8 (5) (2003) 579592.

[18] S. Zhong, J. Chen, and R. Yang, Sprite: A Simple, Cheat-Proof, Credit Based System for Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks,Proc. IEEE INFOCOM 03,vol. 3, pp. 1987-1997, Mar./Apr. 2003.

[19] L. Buttyan and J. P. Hubaux, Enforcing service availability in mobile d-hoc WANs,in IEEE/ACM Workshop on Mobile Ad Hoc Networking and Computing (MobiHOC), Boston, MA, August 2000. [Online]. Available: http://icawww.epfl.ch/Publications/Buttyan/ButtyanH00.ps

[20] L. Buttyan and J. P. Hubaux,Stimulating cooperation in self-organizing mobile ad hoc networks,ACM Journal for Mobile Networks (MONET), special issue on Mobile Ad Hoc Networks, summer 2002. [Online]. Available: http://lcawww.epfl.ch/Publications/Buttyan/TR01046.ps

[21] M. Mahmoud and X. Shen, PIS: A Practical Incentive System for Multi-Hop Wireless Networks,IEEE Trans. Vehicular Technology, vol. 59, no. 8, pp. 4012-4025, Oct. 2010.

A Secure Payment Scheme With Low Communication and Processing Overhead for Multihop Wireless Network

Documents

Transcript of A Secure Payment Scheme With Low Communication and Processing Overhead for Multihop Wireless Network