Quantifying eavesdropping vulnerability in sensor networks

ABSTRACT

With respect to security, sensor networks have a number of considerations that separate them from traditional distributed systems. First, sensor devices are typically vulnerable to physical compromise. Second, they have significant power and processing constraints. Third, the most critical security issue is protecting the (statistically derived) aggregate output of the system, even if individual nodes may be compromised. We suggest that these considerations merit a rethinking of traditional security techniques: rather than depending on the resilience of cryptographic techniques, in this paper we develop new techniques to tolerate compromised nodes and to even mislead an adversary. We present our initial work on probabilistically quantifying the security of sensor network protocols, with respect to sensor data distributions and network topologies. Beginning with a taxonomy of attacks based on an adversary's goals, we focus on how to evaluate the vulnerability of sensor network protocols to eavesdropping. Different topologies and aggregation functions provide different probabilistic guarantees about system security, and make different trade-offs in power and accuracy.

References

1. A. Arasu, S. Babu, and J. Widom. The CQL continuous query language: Semantic foundations and query execution. Technical Report 2003-67, Stanford University, 2003.
2. S. Avancha, J. L. Undercoffer, A. Joshi, and J. Pinkston. Secure sensor networks for perimeter protection. Computer Networks, 43(4):421--435, November 2003.
3. B. Babcock, S. Babu, M. Datar, R. Motwani, and J. Widom. Models and issues in data stream systems. In PODS '02: Proceedings of the twenty-first ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT-SIGART symposium on Principles of database systems, pages 1--16, New York, NY, USA, 2002. ACM Press.
4. H. Chan and A. Perrig. Security and privacy in sensor networks. IEEE Computer Magazine, pages 103--105, 2003 2003.
5. F. Chu, Y. Wang, and C. Zaniolo. An adaptive learning approach for noisy data streams. In ICDM, pages 351--354, 2004.
6. E. Cronin, M. Sherr, and M. Blaze. On the reliability of internet eavesdropping, February 2005. Personal Communication.
7. A. Deshpande, C. Guestrin, S. Madden, and W. Hong. Exploiting correlated attributes in acqusitional query processing. In ICDE 2005, 2005.
8. A. Deshpande, C. Guestrin, S. R. Madden, J. M. Hellerstein, and W. Hong. Model-driven data acquisition in sensor networks. In 30th VLDB Conference, 2004.
9. W. Du, J. Deng, Y. S. Han, S. Chen, and P. Varshney. A key management scheme for wireless sensor networks using deployment knowledge. In Proceedings of The 23rd Conference of the IEEE Communications Society, 2004.
10. M. Gruteser, G. Schelle, A. Jain, R. Han, and D. Grunwald. Privacy-aware location sensor networks. In Proceedings of HotOS'03: 9th Workshop on Hot Topics in Operating Systems, pages 163--168. USENIX, May 2003.
11. J. M. Hellerstein, W. Hong, S. Madden, and K. Stanek. Beyond average: Towards sophisticated sensing with queries. In 2nd International Workshop on Information Processing in Sensor Networks (IPSN '03), March 2003.
12. I.Miller and J.E.Freund. Probability and Statistics for Engineers, 2nd edition. Prentice Hall,Inc, Englewood Cliffs, NJ., 1977.
13. E. Jonsson and T. Olovsson. A quantitative model of the security intrusion process based on attacker behavior. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., 23(4):235--245, 1997.
14. C. Karlof and D. Wagner. Secure routing in wireless sensor networks: Attacks and countermeasures. In IEEE Int'l Workshop on Sensor Network Protocols and Applications, pages 113--127, May 2003.
15. Y. W. Law, S. Etalle, and P. H. Hartel. Assessing Security-Critical Energy-Efficient sensor networks. In Conf. on Security and Privacy in the Age of Uncertainty (SEC), pages 459--463, May 2003.
16. S. Madden, M. J. Franklin, J. M. Hellerstein, and W. Hong. Design of an acquisitional query processor for sensor networks. In SIGMOD 2003, pages 491--502, 2003.
17. T. Mitchell. Machine Learning. McGraw Hill, 1997.
18. A. Perrig, R. Szewczyk, V. Wen, D. E.Culler, and J. D. Tygar. SPINS: security protocols for sensor netowrks. In Mobile Computing and Networking, pages 189--199, 2001.
19. B. Przydatek, D. Song, and A. Perrig. SIA: secure information aggregation in sensor networks. In SenSys '03, pages 255--265, 2003.
20. S. E. Schechter. Computer security strength & risk: A quantitative approach. Harvard University Doctoral Dissertation, 2004.
21. D. Wagner. Resilient aggregation in sensor networks. In SASN: Proc. Workshop on security of ad hoc and sensor networks, pages 78--87, 2004.
22. A. D. Wood and J. A. Stankovic. Denial of service in sensor networks. Computer, 35(10):54--62, 2002.
23. Y. Yao and J. Gehrke. Query processing for sensor networks. In CIDR 2003, 2003.

Index Terms

• Security and privacy

  • Network security