Optimal Jamming Attacks and Network Defense Policies in Wireless Sensor Networks

We consider a scenario where a sophisticated jammer jams an area in a single-channel wireless sensor network. The jammer controls the probability of jamming and transmission range to cause maximal damage to the network in terms of corrupted communication links. The jammer action ceases when it is detected by a monitoring node in the network, and a notification message is transferred out of the jamming region. The jammer is detected at a monitor node by employing an optimal detection test based on the percentage of incurred collisions. On the other hand, the network computes channel access probability in an effort to minimize the jamming detection plus notification time. In order for the jammer to optimize its benefit, it needs to know the network channel access probability and number of neighbors of the monitor node. Accordingly, the network needs to know the jamming probability of the jammer. We study the idealized case of perfect knowledge by both the jammer and the network about the strategy of one another, and the case where the jammer or the network lack this knowledge. The latter is captured by formulating and solving optimization problems, the solutions of which constitute best responses of the attacker or the network to the worst-case strategy of each other. We also take into account potential energy constraints of the jammer and the network. We extend the problem to the case of multiple observers and adaptable jamming transmission range and propose a intuitive heuristic jamming strategy for that case.

[1]  Albert Levi,et al.  Quarantine region scheme to mitigate spam attacks in wireless-sensor networks , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing.

[2]  Rohit Negi,et al.  DoS analysis of reservation based MAC protocols , 2005, IEEE International Conference on Communications, 2005. ICC 2005. 2005.

[3]  Elaine Shi,et al.  Detection of denial-of-message attacks on sensor network broadcasts , 2005, 2005 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (S&P'05).

[4]  Guevara Noubir,et al.  On link layer denial of service in data wireless LANs , 2005, Wirel. Commun. Mob. Comput..

[5]  J.A. Stankovic,et al.  Denial of Service in Sensor Networks , 2002, Computer.

[6]  John S. Baras,et al.  A framework for MAC protocol misbehavior detection in wireless networks , 2005, WiSe '05.

[7]  Wenyuan Xu,et al.  Channel surfing and spatial retreats: defenses against wireless denial of service , 2004, WiSe '04.

[8]  Nitin H. Vaidya,et al.  Selfish MAC layer misbehavior in wireless networks , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing.

[9]  Wenyuan Xu,et al.  The feasibility of launching and detecting jamming attacks in wireless networks , 2005, MobiHoc '05.

[10]  Yee Wei Law,et al.  Energy-efficient link-layer jamming attacks against wireless sensor network MAC protocols , 2005, TOSN.

[11]  Hari Balakrishnan,et al.  Fast portscan detection using sequential hypothesis testing , 2004, IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, 2004. Proceedings. 2004.

[12]  Ranjan K. Mallik,et al.  Analysis of an on-off jamming situation as a dynamic game , 2000, IEEE Trans. Commun..

[13]  Srdjan Capkun,et al.  Wormhole-Based Anti-Jamming Techniques in Sensor Networks , 2007 .

[14]  Marimuthu Palaniswami,et al.  Energy-efficient link-layer jamming attacks against wireless sensor network MAC protocols , 2009, SASN '05.

[15]  Srdjan Capkun,et al.  Wormhole-Based Antijamming Techniques in Sensor Networks , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing.

[16]  Carl W. Helstrom,et al.  Elements of signal detection and estimation , 1994 .

[17]  Venugopal V. Veeravalli,et al.  Multihypothesis sequential probability ratio tests - Part I: Asymptotic optimality , 1999, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[18]  J. Andel Sequential Analysis , 2022, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.