skip to main content
10.1145/3196494.3196506acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication Pagesasia-ccsConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Open Access

Sensor CON-Fusion: Defeating Kalman Filter in Signal Injection Attack

Published:29 May 2018Publication History

ABSTRACT

In recent years, information systems have become increasingly able to interact with the real world by using relatively cheap connected embedded devices. In such systems, sensors are crucial components because systems can observe the real world only through sensors. Recently, there have been emerging threats to sensors, which involve the injection of false information in the physical/analog domain. To counter such attacks, sensor fusion is considered a promising approach because the robustness of a measurement can be improved by combining data from redundant sensors. However, sensor fusion algorithms were not originally designed to consider security, and thus their effectiveness is unclear. For this reason, in this paper, we evaluate in detail the security of sensor fusion. Notably, we consider a sensor fusion scenario that involves measuring inclination, with a combination of an accelerometer, gyroscope, and magnetometer using Kalman filter. Based on a theoretical analysis of the algorithm, two concrete attacks that defeat the sensor fusion are proposed. The feasibility of the proposed attacks is verified by performing experiments in emulated and real environments. We also propose a countermeasure that thwarts the new attacks. Furthermore, we logically prove that the proposed countermeasure detects all possible attacks.

References

  1. Nicholas Carlini, Pratyush Mishra, Tavish Vaidya, Yuankai Zhang, Micah Sherr, Clay Shields, David Wagner, and Wenchao Zhou. 2016. Hidden Voice Commands.. In USENIX Security Symposium. 513--530.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Ruchir Chauhan. 2014. A platform for false data injection in frequency modulated continuous wave radar. Utah State University.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Drew Davidson, Hao Wu, Robert Jellinek, Vikas Singh, and Thomas Ristenpart. 2016. Controlling UAVs with Sensor Input Spoofing Attacks. WOOT. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Peter D Hanlon and Peter S Maybeck. 2000. Multiple-model adaptive estimation using a residual correlation Kalman filter bank. IEEE Trans. Aerospace Electron. Systems Vol. 36, 2 (2000), 393--406.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Andrew J Kerns, Daniel P Shepard, Jahshan A Bhatti, and Todd E Humphreys. 2014. Unmanned aircraft capture and control via GPS spoofing. Journal of Field Robotics Vol. 31, 4 (2014), 617--636. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Denis Foo Kune, John Backes, Shane S Clark, Daniel Kramer, Matthew Reynolds, Kevin Fu, Yongdae Kim, and Wenyuan Xu. 2013. Ghost talk: Mitigating EMI signal injection attacks against analog sensors Security and Privacy (SP), 2013 IEEE Symposium on. IEEE, 145--159. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Hyung-Jik Lee and Seul Jung. 2009. Gyro sensor drift compensation by Kalman filter to control a mobile inverted pendulum robot system. In Industrial Technology, 2009. ICIT 2009. IEEE International Conference on. IEEE, 1--6. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Wei Li and Jinling Wang. 2013. Effective adaptive Kalman filter for MEMS-IMU/magnetometers integrated attitude and heading reference systems. The Journal of Navigation Vol. 66, 1 (2013), 99--113.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Faraz M Mirzaei and Stergios I Roumeliotis. 2008. A Kalman filter-based algorithm for IMU-camera calibration: Observability analysis and performance evaluation. IEEE transactions on robotics Vol. 24, 5 (2008), 1143--1156. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Yilin Mo and Bruno Sinopoli. 2010. False Data Injection Attacks in Control Systems. In First Workshop on Secure Control Systems.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Young-Seok Park, Yunmok Son, Hocheol Shin, Dohyun Kim, and Yongdae Kim. 2016. This Ain't Your Dose: Sensor Spoofing Attack on Medical Infusion Pump. WOOT. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Aanjhan Ranganathan, Boris Danev, Aurélien Francillon, and Srdjan Capkun. 2012. Physical-layer attacks on chirp-based ranging systems Proceedings of the fifth ACM conference on Security and Privacy in Wireless and Mobile Networks. ACM, 15--26. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Daniel Roetenberg, Henk Luinge, and Peter Veltink. 2003. Inertial and magnetic sensing of human movement near ferromagnetic materials Mixed and Augmented Reality, 2003. Proceedings. The Second IEEE and ACM International Symposium on. IEEE, 268--269. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Daniel Roetenberg, Henk J Luinge, Chris TM Baten, and Peter H Veltink. 2005. Compensation of magnetic disturbances improves inertial and magnetic sensing of human body segment orientation. IEEE Transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering Vol. 13, 3 (2005), 395--405.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Daniel Roetenberg, Per J Slycke, and Peter H Veltink. 2007. Ambulatory position and orientation tracking fusing magnetic and inertial sensing. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering Vol. 54, 5 (2007), 883--890.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Stergios I Roumeliotis, Gaurav S Sukhatme, and George A Bekey. 1999. Circumventing dynamic modeling: Evaluation of the error-state kalman filter applied to mobile robot localization. In Robotics and Automation, 1999. Proceedings. 1999 IEEE International Conference on, Vol. Vol. 2. IEEE, 1656--1663.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Angelo M Sabatini. 2006. Quaternion-based extended Kalman filter for determining orientation by inertial and magnetic sensing. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering Vol. 53, 7 (2006), 1346--1356.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. NXP Semiconductors. 2016 a. AN5023 - Sensor Fusion Kalman Filters.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. NXP Semiconductors. 2016 b. IoT Sensing Software Development Kit: Embedded Software Framework. (2016). https://www.nxp.com/support/developer-resources/software-development-tools/sensor-developer-resources/sensor-toolbox-sensor-development-ecosystem/iot-sensing-software-development-kit-embedded-software-framework:IOT-SENSING-SDK Retrieved December 15, 2017 from tempurlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. NXP Semiconductors. 2016 c. Sensor Toolbox Development Platform for FXAS21002C and FXOS8700C 9-Axis Solution. (2016). http://www.nxp.com/products/developer-resources/hardware-development-tools/freedom-development-boards/sensor-toolbox-development-platform-for-fxas21002c-and-fxos8700c-9-axis-solution:FRDM-STBC-AGM01 Retrieved December 15, 2017 from tempurlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Yasser Shoukry, Paul Martin, Paulo Tabuada, and Mani Srivastava. 2013. Non-invasive spoofing attacks for anti-lock braking systems International Workshop on Cryptographic Hardware and Embedded Systems. Springer, 55--72. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Yunmok Son, Hocheol Shin, Dongkwan Kim, Young-Seok Park, Juhwan Noh, Kibum Choi, Jungwoo Choi, Yongdae Kim, et almbox.. 2015. Rocking Drones with Intentional Sound Noise on Gyroscopic Sensors. USENIX Security Symposium. 881--896. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Ciza Thomas (Ed.).. 2011. Sensor Fusion - Foundation and Applications. InTech.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Timothy Trippel, Ofir Weisse, Wenyuan Xu, Peter Honeyman, and Kevin Fu. 2017. WALNUT: Waging doubt on the integrity of mems accelerometers with acoustic injection attacks. In Security and Privacy (EuroS&P), 2017 IEEE European Symposium on. IEEE, 3--18.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Zhengbo Wang, Kang Wang, Bo Yang, Shangyuan Li, and Aimin Pan. 2017. Sonic Gun to Smart Devices - Your Devices Lose Control Under Ultrasound/Sound BlackHat USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Chen Yan, Wenyuan Xu, and Jianhao Liu. 2016. Can you trust autonomous vehicles: Contactless attacks against sensors of self-driving vehicle. DEF CON Vol. 24 (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Xiaoping Yun and Eric R Bachmann. 2006. Design, implementation, and experimental results of a quaternion-based Kalman filter for human body motion tracking. IEEE transactions on Robotics Vol. 22, 6 (2006), 1216--1227. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Guoming Zhang, Chen Yan, Xiaoyu Ji, Taimin Zhang, Tianchen Zhang, and Wenyuan Xu. 2017. Dolphinatack: Inaudible voice commands. arXiv preprint arXiv:1708.09537 (2017). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Rui Zhang and Leonhard M Reindl. 2011. Pedestrian motion based inertial sensor fusion by a modified complementary separate-bias Kalman filter. In Sensors Applications Symposium (SAS), 2011 IEEE. IEEE, 209--213.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Sensor CON-Fusion: Defeating Kalman Filter in Signal Injection Attack

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      ASIACCS '18: Proceedings of the 2018 on Asia Conference on Computer and Communications Security
      May 2018
      866 pages
      ISBN:9781450355766
      DOI:10.1145/3196494

      Copyright © 2018 Owner/Author

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 29 May 2018

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      ASIACCS '18 Paper Acceptance Rate52of310submissions,17%Overall Acceptance Rate418of2,322submissions,18%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader