DEVELOPMENT OF AN ENHANCED TRUST MANAGEMENT SCHEME
Need help with a related project topic or New topic? Send Us Your Topic
DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE PROJECT MATERIAL
DEVELOPMENT OF AN ENHANCED TRUST MANAGEMENT SCHEME
Chapter One: Introduction
1.1 Background Of The Study
A delay or disruption tolerant network (DTN) is a form of network that allows communication between mobile nodes in an unstable and stressful environment.
The network will typically experience frequent and long-lasting disconnections, high end-to-end path latency, limited resources (power, bandwidth, etc.), and may include multiple divergent sets of protocols (Chen et al., 2011; Fall and Farrell, 2008).
DTN finds use in mobile, wireless, and terrestrial settings. Typical DTNs include mobile ad-hoc networks (MANET), vehicle ad-hoc networks (VANET), sensor networks (such as acoustic underwater networks), interplanetary networks (IPN), and opportunistic networks (oppnets), among others.
The oppnet is a self-contained network of users that communicate on somewhat bandwidth-constrained wireless networks, with or without infrastructure. According to Kaur and Kaur (2009) and Verma and Srivastava (2012), oppnet has the following essential characteristics:
1) wirelessly connected stationary or mobile nodes.
2) A complete path between two nodes attempting to communicate does not exist.
3) It does not have a set communication range.
4) Its routes are dynamically created, which means that any node can be chosen as the next hop if it is likely to send the message closer to its destination.
5) Network topology is also adaptable, meaning it can alter at any time.
2
With recent developments in routing technology, the use of oppnets is gaining ground in the following domains (Dinakar et al., 2013):
1) Tactical networks (similar to military operations).
2) Emergency services (rescue, disaster relief, and hospitalisation).
3) Education (including campus networks, e-learning, and virtual classrooms).
4) Extend network coverage to offer backup in case of failure, link portable or temporary workstations, overcome difficult or financially impractical cabling conditions, and connect remote users or networks.
Because there is no complete path between two nodes attempting to communicate, there is a problem with a lack of end-to-end connection in an oppnet, making direct initial authentication from a source node to a destination node impossible.
The absence of initial authentication allows hostile devices to enter the network, resulting in many types of security vulnerabilities.
A number of routing protocols exist in networks
including among others (Vahdat & Becker 2000; Lindgren et al., 2003; Keranen & Ott, 2009; Verma & Srivastava, 2012; Lin et al., 2008; Islam & Waldvogel 2011; Asgari et al., 2013; Hu et al., 2013)
1) Epidemic 2) Probabilistic Routing Protocol with History of Encounters and Transitivity (PRoPHET).
3) Spray-and-wait.
3 4) MaxProp
5) Direct delivery.
6) Integrated routing protocol.
7) Coding for Opportunistic Routing (CodeOR) 8) History-Based Routing Protocol for Opportunistic Networks (HIBOp).
9) Practical Opportunistic Routing (POR) 10) Probabilistic Routing Protocol for Intermittently Connected Mobile Ad-hoc Networks (PROPICMAN)
These protocols are primarily used to improve forwarding probability and reduce transmission delay, with little or no regard for security. As a result of the aforementioned nature, hostile devices are easily integrated into the network.
These malicious devices can receive and drop packets at will, masquerade and hijack or tamper with messages intended for other nodes, exaggerate the trust value of other malicious devices or reduce the trust value of a trusted node, and so on.
These behaviours may result in packet loss, increased message transmission latency, invasion of privacy, compromise of data confidentiality and integrity, and, ultimately, a drop in network performance as evidenced by a decrease in delivery probability (Barai & Bhaumik, 2016).
As a result, security considerations are crucial in the Oppnet routing protocol.
To address security challenges in networks, various approaches have been utilised, including trust-based and privacy-based protocols. Trust-based protocols are further classified as friend-vector based, familiarity based, reputation based, and hybrid-trust based (Barai & Bhaumik, 2016). As shown in Figure 1.1, privacy-based protocols are classified as cryptography-based or cryptography-free.
4
Trust based on familiarity and protocols.
Friend Types of trust include vector-based and reputation-based. Hybrid Trust
Privacy-based protocols
Cryptography-based or cryptography-free security mechanisms.
Figure 1.1: Taxonomy of Security Mechanisms in Oppnets (Barai and Bhaumik, 2016).
According to Trifunovic and Legendre (2009), trust-based protocols can be classified into three types: social trust, environmental trust, and similarity trust.
This classification categorised security mechanisms as trust-based and cryptography-based.
Security Mechanism in Oppnet: Cryptography-based.
Social trust is trust-based.
Need help with a related project topic or New topic? Send Us Your Topic