Analytical evaluation of the impacts of Sybil attacks against RPL under mobility

The Routing Protocol for Low-Power and Lossy Networks (RPL) is the standardized routing protocol for constrained environments such as 6LoWPAN networks, and is considered as the routing protocol of the Internet of Things (IoT), However, this protocol is subject to several attacks that have been analyzed on static case. Nevertheless, IoT will likely present dynamic and mobile applications. In this paper, we introduce potential security threats on RPL, in particular Sybil attack when the Sybil nodes are mobile. In addition, we present an analytical analysis and a discussion on how network performances can be affected. Our analysis shows, under Sybil attack while nodes are mobile, that the performances of RPL are highly affected compared to the static case. In fact, we notice a decrease in the rate of packet delivery, and an increase in control messages overhead. As a result, energy consumption at constrained nodes increases. Our proposed attack demonstrate that a Sybil mobile node can easily disrupt RPL and overload the network with fake messages making it unavailable.

[1]  John R. Douceur,et al.  The Sybil Attack , 2002, IPTPS.

[2]  Adam Dunkels,et al.  Powertrace: Network-level Power Profiling for Low-power Wireless Networks , 2011 .

[3]  Jonathan Loo,et al.  Specification-based IDS for securing RPL from topology attacks , 2011, 2011 IFIP Wireless Days (WD).

[4]  Dominique Barthel,et al.  Routing Metrics Used for Path Calculation in Low-Power and Lossy Networks , 2012, RFC.

[5]  Alhussein A. Abouzeid,et al.  RPL Based Routing for Advanced Metering Infrastructure in Smart Grid , 2010, 2010 IEEE International Conference on Communications Workshops.

[6]  Jonathan Loo,et al.  The impacts of internal threats towards Routing Protocol for Low power and lossy network performance , 2013, 2013 IEEE Symposium on Computers and Communications (ISCC).

[7]  Siarhei Kuryla,et al.  RPL: IPv6 Routing Protocol for Low power and Lossy Networks , 2010 .

[8]  Jonathan Loo,et al.  6LoWPAN: a study on QoS security threats and countermeasures using intrusion detection system approach , 2012, Int. J. Commun. Syst..

[9]  Carlo Maria Medaglia,et al.  An Overview of Privacy and Security Issues in the Internet of Things , 2010 .

[10]  Thiemo Voigt,et al.  Routing Attacks and Countermeasures in the RPL-Based Internet of Things , 2013, Int. J. Distributed Sens. Networks.

[11]  Thiemo Voigt,et al.  SVELTE: Real-time intrusion detection in the Internet of Things , 2013, Ad Hoc Networks.

[12]  C. Adjih,et al.  Mobility Enhanced RPL for Wireless Sensor Networks , 2012, 2012 Third International Conference on The Network of the Future (NOF).

[13]  Levente Buttyán,et al.  VeRA - Version Number and Rank Authentication in RPL , 2011, 2011 IEEE Eighth International Conference on Mobile Ad-Hoc and Sensor Systems.

[14]  Lillian L. Dai,et al.  A Comprehensive Evaluation of RPL under Mobility , 2012 .

[15]  Imrich Chlamtac,et al.  Internet of things: Vision, applications and research challenges , 2012, Ad Hoc Networks.

[16]  Thomas Narten,et al.  IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration , 1996, RFC.

[17]  Andrzej Duda,et al.  Performance comparison of the RPL and LOADng routing protocols in a Home Automation scenario , 2013, 2013 IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference (WCNC).

[18]  Remi Badonnel,et al.  A Study of RPL DODAG Version Attacks , 2014, AIMS.

[19]  Elaine Shi,et al.  Designing secure sensor networks , 2004, IEEE Wireless Communications.

[20]  Adam Dunkels,et al.  Low-power wireless IPv6 routing with ContikiRPL , 2010, IPSN '10.

[21]  Lin Yang,et al.  Current Challenges and Approaches in Securing Communications for Sensors and Actuators , 2014 .

[22]  Jean-Philippe Vasseur,et al.  The Routing Protocol for Low-Power and Lossy Networks (RPL) Option for Carrying RPL Information in Data-Plane Datagrams , 2010, RFC.

[23]  Kevin Weekly,et al.  Evaluating sinkhole defense techniques in RPL networks , 2012, 2012 20th IEEE International Conference on Network Protocols (ICNP).

[24]  Matt Crawford,et al.  Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Ethernet Networks , 1998, RFC.

[25]  Kemal Akkaya,et al.  A survey of routing protocols for smart grid communications , 2012, Comput. Networks.

[26]  Angel Lozano,et al.  A Security Threat Analysis for the Routing Protocol for Low-Power and Lossy Networks (RPLs) , 2015, RFC.

[27]  Pascal Thubert,et al.  Objective Function Zero for the Routing Protocol for Low-Power and Lossy Networks (RPL) , 2012, RFC.

[28]  Taeshik Shon,et al.  Wormhole attack prevention mechanism for RPL based LLN network , 2013, 2013 Fifth International Conference on Ubiquitous and Future Networks (ICUFN).

[29]  Pekka Nikander,et al.  Host Identity Protocol , 2005 .

[30]  T. Kavitha,et al.  Security Vulnerabilities In Wireless Sensor Networks: A Survey , 2010 .

[31]  Mahmut T. Kandemir,et al.  The Sleep Deprivation Attack in Sensor Networks: Analysis and Methods of Defense , 2006, Int. J. Distributed Sens. Networks.

[32]  Pekka Nikander,et al.  IPv6 Neighbor Discovery (ND) Trust Models and Threats , 2004, RFC.

[33]  Rituparna Chaki,et al.  Study of Security Issues in Pervasive Environment of Next Generation Internet of Things , 2013, CISIM.

[34]  Antonio Iera,et al.  The Internet of Things: A survey , 2010, Comput. Networks.

[35]  JeongGil Ko,et al.  Evaluating the Performance of RPL and 6LoWPAN in TinyOS , 2011 .

[36]  Marimuthu Palaniswami,et al.  Internet of Things (IoT): A vision, architectural elements, and future directions , 2012, Future Gener. Comput. Syst..

[37]  A. Perrig,et al.  The Sybil attack in sensor networks: analysis & defenses , 2004, Third International Symposium on Information Processing in Sensor Networks, 2004. IPSN 2004.