Hg3312711275

Pallavi Sharma, Manpreet kaur / International Journal of Engineering Research and
Applications (IJERA) ISSN: 2248-9622 www.ijera.com
Vol. 3, Issue 3, May-Jun 2013, pp.1271-1275
1271 | P a g e
Develop a scanning algorithm for the detection of selfish nodes in
cognitive radio networks
Pallavi Sharma Manpreet kaur
Mtech student Assistant Professor
Lovely professional university Phagwara Sukhchain Sahib College Phagwara
Abstract
Cognitive radio is a wireless based
communication technology which has
intelligence built into it. Secure communication
is a key for any wireless network . Like all other
networks, cognitive radios are susceptible to
various kinds of attacks like DOS attack , PUE
attack , tunnel attack and jamming attack .
While performing these attacks nodes in the
network becomes selfish and start maximizing
their own spectrum usage and they prevent
other users from communicating in the same
network . In this paper an algorithm is
generated which can detect selfish nodes in a
network . This analysis will help to give better
future products that could use the resources in a
more efficient way .
Keywords : Cognitive Radio , Selfish node ,
Spectrum band, Sweet spot .
I. INTRODUCTION
Cognitive radio is a radio capable of being
aware of its surroundings , learning and adaptively
changing its operating parameters . It learns from
its experiences to give reasoning and to decide
which action to take in future so that it can meet the
needs of users.A fundamental problem in facing
future wireless systems is to find suitable carrier
frequencies and bandwidths to meet the demands of
users for future services .Radio frequency spectrum
is considered to be a limited natural resource so its
utilization is a very important factor for better
future wireless products.Spectrum utilization is the
most important aspect of the cognitive radio
technology . Cognitive radios are fully
programmable wireless devices that can sense their
environment and dynamically adapt their
transmission waveform, channel access method,
spectrum use,and networking protocols as needed
for good network and application performance.[5]
Cognitive radios have the ability to implement
protocols and spectrum policies in a way which
differs from traditional communication systems
.The primary objective of cognitive radio network
is to provide reliable communication whenever and
wherever needed . Cognitive radios are used to
improve the efficiency of various resources in a
wireless communication systems . Cognitive radios
can either be deployed in licensed spectrum or
unlicensed spectrum .The creation of new rules for
spectrum sharing by using cognitive radio
protocols will change the way spectrum will be
used in the future . other aspect of cognitive radio
network is that it offers a greater flexibility to the
networks in a way that they can reorganize them
according to the requirements and also repair them
to provide more reliability.[6]
II. LITERATURE SURVEY
In year 2011, Ruiliang Chen, Jung-Min
Park, and Jeffrey H. Reed discussed primary
user emulation attack. In primary user emulation
attack the attacker transmits the signal which
shows same characteristics as of primary user.
These attacks interfere with the spectrum sensing
process and reduce the channel resources available
to unlicensed users. To overcome this threat a
technique transmitter verification scheme called
LOCDEF which helps to distinguish between
primary signals and signals transmitted by
attacker by estimating its location and observing
its signal characteristics. There is high
probability of these attacks in the cognitive
radio because of the fact that cognitive radios are
highly reconfigurable because of the software
based air interface. [1]
Trang V. Mai, Joseph A. Molnar and Dr.
Kevin Rudd, “Security vulnerabilities in case of
cognitive radio networks” discussed various attacks
in Physical layer whether it is PUE, denial of
service attack or jamming attack. Dynamic
spectrum access in cognitive radio introduces
many types of threats Data indicates that with a
simple level of sophistication physical jamming
could degrade the performance of DSA networks.
These attacks could have a long term negative
impact on the cognitive network because of its
capability to learn from the environment to
establish internal policy constraints.[2]Wang
Weifang discussed the effect of Denial of Service
(DoS) attacks in security of wireless
network.Cognitive radio networks are vulnerable to
DoS attack due to their own characteristics.
This paper analyzed the architecture of cognitive
radio networks and discussed the possible
various DoS attacks in ad hoc cognitive radio
networks in different protocol layers.[3]Husheng
Li and Zhu Han discusses the approach of
combating the primary user emulation attack .In
cognitive radio systems, primary user emulation

1272 | P a g e
(PUE) attack means that an attacker sends
primary-user-like signals during the spectrum
sensing period such that honest secondary
users leave the corresponding channels,
which causes a serious threat to cognitive radio
systems. A passive anti-PUE approach, similar to
the random frequency hopping in traditional
anti-jamming schemes, is proposed and called
dogfight in spectrum. In this scheme, the defenders
randomly choose channels to sense and avoid the
PUE attack. It is assumed that the channel statistics
like availability probabilities are known. [4].
III ATTACKS IN COGNITIVE RADIO
NETWORKS
Cognitive radio users are vulnerable to
various kinds of attacks . One reason is that
secondary users do not own spectrum usage and
also cognitive radio support opportunistic spectrum
sharing so attackers could take advantage of these
flexibility features . As a result security
considerations are very important for the successful
deployment of cognitive radio networks [5]Before
taking into consideration security countermeasures
it is very important to understand different kinds of
attacks . These kinds of attacks occur in PHY layer
and they manipulate spectral environment of
radios.
Denial of service attack : In case of denial
of service attack the attacker does not allow
authorized users to use network resources . the
attacker basically flood the network with so many
request objects which results in decrease of the
network bandwidth and degradation of wireless
network systems .[7]
PUE Attack : Primary users always have
priority to access the spectrum because they are
legitimitate users . In case primary user is detected ,
all other users immediately leave that band . but
sometimes secondary users start behaving like
primary users and imitate the characteristics of
primary users to launch primary user emulation
attack .[11]
Sybil Attack : In this attack single entity
claims to be multiple identies at a same time
resulting in ineffectiveness of many functions
performed by sensor network like routing and
resource allocation .This attack mostly occurs in
peer to peer networks where it undermine the
power and authority of established network . When
any faulty node becomes part of such network it
starts overhearing the communication and start
controlling the network in its own way .Validation
techniques can be used to prevent these attacks
.[14]
Wormhole attack : In wormhole attack the
attacker starts recording packets of data at any one
location and then redistribute that data in whole
network . it is difficult to prevent the network from
wormhole attack even if the network
communication system provides authenticity and
confidentiality .[16]To establish a wormhole attack
a direct link known as wormhole link is created
between two dedicated nodes present in network .
As soon as wormhole link becomes operational
eavesdropping of messages start at origin point and
those messages start replaying at destination point
.During the route discovery the attackers makes the
nodes believe that path through them is
shortest.Under wormhole attack malicious nodes
steal the identity of legitimitate nodes [17]. To
detect such attack , the system requires special
hardware and time based synchronization
algorithm.
Node impersonation attack : In this attack
an authorized entity called node is impersonated by
breaking an procedural mechanism . The attacker
assumes the identity of another node in the
network, thus receiving messages are directed to
the fake node. These attacks are also called
spoofing attacks . this attack is considered to
initialize the first step to enter in the network for
carring out further attacks.[8] Depending on the
access level of the impersonated node, the intruder
may even be able to reconfigure the network so that
other attackers can easily join or attacker could
remove security measures to allow subsequent
attempts of intrusion .these attcks can also inject
false routing information in the network This kind
of malicious behavior can be detected using the
hash function and the signature that is associated
with the incoming data packets .[18]
Timing attack : In case of timing attack
attacker attempts to compromise the security and
reliability of system by analyzing the time taken to
execute the cryptographic nad network secutiy
algorithms.Some information could be gathered by
analyzing the time required to execute the queries
which could differ depending on the required
input.[12]These attacks are basically used to attack
on weak computing device. Timing attacks enable
an attacker to extract secrets maintained in a
security system. The most widely accepted defense
against timing attacks is to perform RSA
blinding.This attack could be implemented without
the knowledge of victim . the effectiveness of this
attack depends upon various factors like cpu
configuration , algorithms used and accuracy of
timing measurements .
Illusion attack: In case of illusion attack
the attacker creats fraud traffic safety message and
the victim receive the message and believe it and
changes its behavior according to the message
parameters [9].
Sinkhole attack :Wireless networks are
vulnerable to attack called sinkhole attack. This
attack prevent the base station from obtaining
complete and correct sensing data.Many current
routing protocols in sensor networks are
susceptible to the sinkhole attack. In a Sinkhole

1273 | P a g e
attack , a compromised node tries to draw all or as
much traffic as possible from a particular area, by
making itself look attractive to the surrounding
nodeswith respect to the routing metric. As a result,
the adversary node manages to attract all traffic
that is destined to the base station.By taking part in
the routing process, node can launch more severe
attacks, like selective forwarding, modifying or
even dropping the packets coming through.[10]
It locates a list of suspected nodes by checking data
consistency, and then identifies the intruder in the
list through analyzing the network flow
information. Specific detection rules could be made
that can make legitimate nodes become aware of
the threat, whilethe attack is still taking place.[13]
IV PROPOSED APPROACH
After conducting a thorough survey we
have arrived at this problem statement as follows :
It is to detect selfish nodes in a cognitive network
and develop a scanning algorithm for its detection.
This research is based on the hypothesis that an
efficient algorithm should be generated that could
identify the nodes that are degrading the efficiency
of network in which false positive rates are
calculated in such a way that they help us to give
less number of false rates .
The advantage of using this approach will
be to develop a strategy to detect when the
nodes turn selfish and how they are affecting
overall routing of packets and packet delivery
ratios. It will help us to simulate the spectrum
characteristics for cognitive devices and to
maintain an hierarchy /topology of primary users
and secondary cognitive device users. It will
generate an simulated environment for scanning
and detecting selfish nodes.
Figure1 : Research design
Under methodology we have described step by
step procedure to detect selfish node in cognitive
radio network.First we need to initialise a spectrum
for cognitive radio networks. It is important to
analyze the spectrum environment in which
cognitive radio will operate. Second step is to
deploy primary and secondary devices in a
particularly defined area.After that deployment it is
important to start communication between nodes.
Deploy source , forwarder or sink. In an
cognitive radio architecture one node will
assume to be source , other node as sink and
all other nodes are forwarding nodes. Identify
sweet point in spectrum. Sweet spot is
considered to be that point in spectrum where
frequencies are low enough to provide good
coverage with few amount of transmitters in that
coverage area while accommodating large
bandwidths. At the time all communication is
happening between nodes in the background of
scenario watch dog approach is used . In case of
watch dog approach a buffer is maintained
which contains all the packets that have been sent
recently. It detects the selfish nodes in the network

1274 | P a g e
by overhearing the transmission in network . For
the detection purpose , first it is really
important to hack a certain nodes which simply
means to make a node selfish . So an external node
will attempt to hack a node in network by using
keys. When the keys will match it will display a
message hack attempt successful . In case keys
does not match external node will try to hack the
node again and will try an another attempt. In case
hacker attempt is successful it will start
communicating with that node with which it keys
matches.so it means those nodes start behaving
as selfish nodes .
For seeing the accuracy of algorithm
classifiers are used. The results will come out in
form of false positive and false negative rate
which is defined in percentage.
V RESULTS AND CONCLUSION
Figure 2 – Results
Figure 3 – Selfish Network Graph
This proposed methodology helps us to
analyze the behaviour of cognitive network
under various constraints of resources. By doing
such analysis we can give better future products
that will use the resources in a much more efficient
way. It will help us to ensure and develop
reliable cognitive networks since we will be
delivering packet delivery ratio. It will help us to
find out when does the nodes turn selfish and
misbehave in the cognitive radio. This strategy
ensures the system to detect such misbehaviours
and to avoid loss of packets.
VII . CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE SCOPE
So this results concludes that if any node
attempts to behave selfish it could be identified by
using our proposed algorithm. This algorithm
provides an accuracy of 80.22% .
Our result graph shows that selfish node
utilize all the resources of network and does not
allow other users to use that spectrum which
results in spectrum deficiency and
underutilization of network resources .
This proposed algorithm
works in certain scenario . But as the scenario will
change and new methods would be developed to
attack on a cognitive radio networks , it will
require certain modifications in it .
REFERENCES :
[1] Ruiliang Chen, Jung-Min Park, and
Jeffrey H. Reed ,“Defense against
primary user emulation attacks in
cognitive radio networks” , Virginia
Polytechnic Institute and State
University in 2008, Pages 25-37
[2] Trang V. Mai, Joseph A. Molnar and Dr.
Kevin Rudd , “Security vulnerabilities in
case of cognitive radio networks”
Publication Year: 2011 , Page(s): 1 – 4 ,
IEEE 54th international Midwest
symposium
[3] Husheng Li and Zhu Han ,”Combating
Primary User Emulation Attacks in
Cognitive Radio Systems” ( IEEE
transactions on wireless communications ,
Vol 9 , No.11, November 2010 ), Wireless
Communications, IEEE Transactions on
Volume: 9 , Issue: 11 , Publication Year:
2010 , Page(s): 3566 – 3577.
[4] Husheng Li and Zhu Han ,”Combating
Primary User Emulation Attacks in
Cognitive Radio Systems” ( IEEE
transactions on wireless communications ,
Vol 9 , No.11, November 2010 ), Wireless
Communications, IEEE Transactions on
Volume: 9 , Issue: 11 , Publication Year:
2010 , Page(s): 3566 – 3577.
[5] MacKenzie, A.B, Reed, J.H.,Athanas, P
Bostian, C.W.”Cognitive Radio and

1275 | P a g e
Networking Research at Virginia Tech
“Volume:97, Issue: 4,Publication Year:
2009,Page(s): 660 – 688.
[6] Fragkiadakis, A.; Tragos, E.;
Askoxylakis,"A Survey on Security
Threats and Detection Techniques in
Cognitive Radio Networks I."Volume:PP,
Issue: 99,Publication Year: 2012 , Page(s):
1 – 18.
[7] Lau, F. Rubin, S.H. ; Smith, M.H. ;
Trajkovic, L. "Distributed denial of
service attacks" Publication year : 2000,
Volume: 3, Page(s): 2275 – 2280
[8] Huaping Hu Comput. Sch., Nat. Univ. of
Defense Technol., Changsha, China Jing
Zhang ; Bo Liu ; Lin Chen ; Xin Chen
"Simulation and analysis of distributed
low-rate denial-of-service attacks"
Publishing year : 2010,Page(s): 620 – 626.
[9] Siqin Zhao " Defend Against Denial of
Service Attack" Publication year :2009
,Page(s): 91 – 96.
[10] Xueping Chen "Distributed denial of
service attack and defense "Publication
year :2010Volume: 3, On Page(s): V3-318
- V3-320.
[11] Shaxun Chen ,Kai Zeng ; Mohapatra, P.
"Hearing is believing: Detecting mobile
primary user emulation attack in white
space",Date of Conference: 10-15 April
2011,Page(s): 36 - 40.
[12] Zhou Yuan ,Niyato, D. ; Husheng Li ;
Zhu Han "Defense against primary user
emulation attacks using belief propagation
of location information in cognitive radio
networks"Date of Conference: 28-31
March 2011,Page(s): 599 - 604.
[13] Husheng Li ,Zhu Han "Dogfight in
Spectrum: Combating Primary User
Emulation Attacks in Cognitive Radio
Systems"Publication year : November
2010Volume: 9, Issue: 11 ,Page(s): 3566
- 3577.
[14] Yi Tan ,Kai Hong ; Sengupta, S. ;
Subbalakshmi, "Using Sybil Identities for
Primary User Emulation and Byzantine
Attacks in DSA ", Date of Conference: 5-
9 Dec. 2011, Page(s):1-5.
[15] Xia Wang Iowa State Univ., AmesWong,
J."An End-to-end Detection of Wormhole
Attack in Wireless Ad-hoc Networks"Date
of Conference: 24-27 July 2007,Page(s):
39 - 48.
[16] Yih-Chun Hu,Perrig, A. ; Johnson, D.B.
"Wormhole attacks in wireless
networks"Publication year: 2006,Volume:
24, Issue: 2 Page(s): 370 – 380
[17] Prasad, S. Dept. of Comput. Sci., North
Carolina State Univ., Raleigh, NC, USA
Thuente, D.J. Jamming attacks in 802.11g
— A cognitive radio based approach,Date
of Conference: 7-10 Nov.
2011,Page(s):1219-1224
[18] lancy, T.C. Electr. & Comput. Eng.,
Maryland Univ., College Park, MD
Goergen, N.Security in Cognitive Radio
Networks: Threats and Mitigation,Date of
Conference: 15-17 May 2008,Page(s): 1 -
8

Hg3312711275

More Related Content

What's hot (18)

Viewers also liked (16)

Similar to Hg3312711275 (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Hg3312711275