IJRIT International Journal of Research in Information Technology, Volume 2, Issue 5, May 2014, Pg: 626-631

International Journal of Research in Information Technology (IJRIT) www.ijrit.com

ISSN 2001-5569

Management of Superior Key Sharing Liability in Wireless Networks: A Review K. Naveen Kumar1, D. Baswaraj2 1

M.Tech. Student, Computer Science & Engineering, CMR Institute of Technology, Hyderabad (India) (Email: [email protected]) 2 Associate Professor. Computer Science & Engineering, CMR Institute of Technology, Hyderabad (India) (Email: [email protected]) ABSTRACT: The collection of spatially tribute autonomous sensors with restricted resources that work together and supervise the physical or environmental conditions is a Wireless Sensor Network. These networks are prone to various kinds of attacks because of their operating nature. Key management is a corner stone intended for numerous security services such as privacy and confirmation which are necessary to make safe communications in wireless sensor networks. Symmetric schemes were mainly categorised into two categories such as probabilistic and deterministic schemes. A scheme of scalable key management was introduced which make sure a superior secure coverage of extensive wireless network with a low key storage transparency and a superior network resiliency. In order to improve the key sharing likelihood while upholding high network scalability, the initial design blocks were build and pre-load every node by means of a number of blocks chosen in a careful way.

Keywords: Wireless sensor network, Deterministic scheme, Key management.

I. INTRODUCTION A wireless sensor network consists of spatially isolated independent sensors to organize physical or environmental circumstances to thoughtfully outdo their information all the way through the network to the key location. They can be deployed to fulfil the applications of both the military and civil in the harsh environments. The organization of secure links connecting nodes is then a demanding problem in wireless sensor networks [10]. Symmetric key establishment is one of the main appropriate paradigms intended for securing exchanges in sensor networks. Because of the lack of communications in sensor networks, no trusted third party was at hand which can feature pair wise secret keys to the nodes of neighboring. A host of research effort dealt with the issue of symmetric key pre-distribution which is intended for sensor networks and lots of solutions have been K. Naveen Kumar , IJRIT

626

IJRIT International Journal of Research in Information Technology, Volume 2, Issue 5, May 2014, Pg: 626-631

projected. In majority of existing solutions, the design of key rings is powerfully connected to the size of network, these solutions moreover undergo from low scalability otherwise humiliate other performance metrics together with safe connectivity, storage transparency as well as resiliency in large networks. For the enhancement of possibility of key sharing although upholding high network scalability, by means of a number of blocks chosen in a careful way, the unital design blocks were build and pre-load every node.

NOVEL SCHEME OF UNITAL-BASED KEY PREDISTRIBUTION In order to improve the key sharing likelihood while upholding high network scalability, the unital design blocks were build and pre-load every node by means of a number of blocks chosen in a careful way. A host of research effort dealt with the issue of symmetric key pre-distribution which is intended for sensor networks and lots of solutions have been projected. In the Key Pre-distribution, previous to the step of deployment, blocks of d order unital design, where every block matches up to a key set. We pre-load subsequently every node with t completely disjoint blocks where v is a parameter of protocol. In the basic approach every node is pre-loaded by means of only one unital block and it was proved that each two nodes contribute to at mainly one key [6]. Preloading every two nodes by v disjoint unital blocks describes that every two nodes contribute among zero and v2 keys in view of the fact that each two unital blocks contribute to at most individual element. Subsequent to the deployment step, each two neighbors swap over the identifiers of their keys with the intention of concluding the common keys. If two nodes of neighboring contribute to one or more keys, we recommend to calculate the pairwise secret key since the hash of all their common keys concatenated towards each other [8]. This approach improves the network resiliency in view of the fact that the attacker has to negotiate additional overlap keys to break a protected link. When neighbors do not contribute to any key, they have to discover a secure path composed of consecutive protected links. The main benefit of this approach is the enhancement of the key sharing probability.

II. LITERATURE SURVEY

J. Zhang et.al., [1] suggests quite a lot of solutions for the problems of Key management in sensor networks have been expansively considered [2]. Key management is a corner stone intended for numerous security services such as privacy and confirmation which are necessary to make safe communications in wireless sensor networks. Symmetric schemes were mainly categorised into two categories such as probabilistic and deterministic schemes as shown in fig1. In deterministic schemes, each two nodes of neighboring are capable to set up a direct safe link which makes sure total protected connectivity coverage. In probabilistic schemes, the safe connectivity is not definite for the reason that it is conditioned by means of the continuation of shared keys connecting the nodes of neighboring. In the schemes of probabilistic key management, each two nodes of neighboring can set up a protected link with some likelihood. If two nodes of neighboring cannot set up a protected link, they set up a safe path composed of consecutive secure links.

K. Naveen Kumar , IJRIT

627

IJRIT International Journal of Research in Information Technology, Volume 2, Issue 5, May 2014, Pg: 626-631

Fig1: An overview of Classification of symmetric key management schemes.

Eschenauer et.al., [4] proposed the basic Random Key Pre-distribution scheme; in which each node is pre-loaded by means of a key ring of m keys arbitrarily particular from a huge pool T of keys. Subsequent to the step of deployment, each node l swaps over with each of its neighbour q the record of key identifiers that it preserves. This permits node q to recognize the keys that it distributes with node l. If two neighbours contribute to at least one key, they set up a protected link and figure their session secret key which is one of the general keys. They have to decide a secure path which is composed by means of consecutive protected links. The values of the size of key ring size m and the size of key pool |T| are selected in such a way that the connection of two key rings is not vacant with a high likelihood. This basic advance is CPU and energy proficient but it requires a huge memory space to accumulate the key ring. If the network nodes are increasingly corrupted, the attacker may possibly find out a large part global key pool. A huge number of links will be negotiated.

Walid Bechkit and Yacine Challal [3] suggests that to improve the key sharing likelihood while upholding high network scalability, the unital design blocks were build and pre-load every node by means of a number of blocks chosen in a careful way. A host of research effort dealt with the issue of symmetric key predistribution which is intended for sensor networks and lots of solutions have been projected. In the Key Predistribution, previous to the step of deployment, blocks of d order unital design, where every block matches up to a key set. We pre-load subsequently every node with t completely disjoint blocks where v is a parameter of protocol. In the basic approach every node is pre-loaded by means of only one unital block and it was proved that each two nodes contribute to at mainly one key. Pre-loading every two nodes by v disjoint unital blocks describes that every two nodes contribute among zero and v2 keys in view of the fact that each two unitals blocks contribute to at most individual element. Subsequent to the deployment step, each two neighbors swap over the identifiers of their keys with the intention of concluding the common keys. If two nodes of neighbouring contribute to one or more keys, we recommend to calculate the pair wise secret key since the hash of all their common keys concatenated towards each other. This approach improves the network resiliency in view of the fact that the attacker has to negotiate additional overlap keys to break a protected link. When

K. Naveen Kumar , IJRIT

628

IJRIT International Journal of Research in Information Technology, Volume 2, Issue 5, May 2014, Pg: 626-631

neighbours do not contribute to any key, they have to discover a secure path composed of consecutive protected links. The main benefit of this approach is the enhancement of the key sharing probability.

Choi et al., [5] proposed an enhanced approach allowing storing only (n+1)/2 keys at every node. An order relation was introduced to set up among node identifiers and a hash function based key establishment was introduced with the intention of accumulating only half of the keys of node symmetric while calculating the other half at every node. This approach allows decreasing the necessary stored keys to the half of the size of the network remains non scalable sufficient. Deterministic schemes make sure that each node is intelligent to set up a pair-wise key with all neighbors. A naïve scheme of deterministic key pre-distribution can be considered by means of assigning to each link (l,q) a distinctive key Kl,q and pre-loading every node by (n −1) pairwise keys in which it is concerned where n is the size of the network.

Seyit A., Camtepe and B. Yener [2] suggests that communication in wireless sensor networks normally takes place in ad hoc means and exhibits resemblances towards wireless ad hoc networks. Wireless sensor networks are vibrant in the sense that range of radio and connectivity of network alters by time. Nodes of sensor dies and the novel sensor nodes may possibly be added towards the network. Wireless sensor networks are more restrained denser and may possibly suffer of redundant data. The architectures of wireless sensor networks are structured in the structures in hierarchical and distributed means. Wireless nature of communication, lack of infrastructure in addition to uncontrolled circumstances enhances capabilities of adversaries in wireless sensor networks. Stationary adversaries which are equipped by means of energetic communication devices may possibly access entire wireless networks from a distant location. W. Bechkit ey.al., [10] suggests four metrics to evaluate the performance against existing ones: Network scalability: corresponds to the utmost number of generated key rings which match up to the maximum number of sustained nodes. A huge scale secure deployment of sensor networks depends robustly on this metric of performance. Storage overhead: computes the memory necessary to accumulate keys in each node. For the reason that of their minute size, sensor nodes are extremely constrained in term of resource of memory and this metric is demanding. The size of key identifier can be measured as the 2-logarithm of the greatest number of keys used by means of the protocol which is insignificant compared to the size of the key. Likelihood of sharing a session key: computed as the likelihood that a agreed pair of nodes of neighboring are capable to set up a straight secure link all the way through one or more general shared keys of pre-deployed [9]. This metric can also be observed as the division of protected direct links between possible links within the network. Average protected path length: when two nodes of neighboring contain no general keys, they have to set up a secure path composed of consecutive secure links. This metric computes followed by the average length within hop count of these protected paths. S. Zhu et.al., [11] proposed a framework of LEAP which makes use of a general transitory key which is preloaded into every node earlier than employment of the wireless sensor network. The transitory key is applied to produce keys of pairwise session and is unoccupied from the memory of nodes by means of the conclusion of a short time period subsequent to their deployment. LEAP is on the basis of supposition that a sensor node, subsequent to its deployment, is protected throughout a time Tmin and cannot be negotiated K. Naveen Kumar , IJRIT

629

IJRIT International Journal of Research in Information Technology, Volume 2, Issue 5, May 2014, Pg: 626-631

throughout this time period. LEAP is designed to maintain protected communications in sensor networks; consequently, it provides the essential security services such as privacy and authentication. In addition, LEAP is to get together quite a lot of security and performance needs that are significantly more demanding to sensor networks.

III. CONCLUSION Symmetric key establishment is one of the main appropriate paradigms intended for securing exchanges in sensor networks. A scheme of scalable key management was introduced which make sure a superior secure coverage of extensive wireless network with a low key storage transparency and a superior network resiliency. Four metrics were considered to evaluate the performance against existing ones such as Network scalability, Storage overhead, Likelihood of sharing a session key and Average protected path length. Each two nodes of neighboring are capable to set up a direct safe link which makes sure total protected connectivity coverage in deterministic schemes. The safe connectivity is not definite in probabilistic schemes, since it is conditioned by means of the continuation of shared keys connecting the nodes of neighboring. As future work, we plan to intensify the analysis of our parameter choice with the intention of suggesting values given the best trade-off. We attend to analyze additional network performances like the network flexibility against attacks of node capture.

REFERENCES [1] J. Zhang and V. Varadharajan, “Wireless sensor network key management survey and taxonomy,” J. Netw. Comput. Appl., vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 63–75, 2010.

[2] Seyit A. Camtepe and B. Yener, “Key distribution mechanisms for wireless sensor networks: a survey,” Technical Report TR-05-07, Mar. 2005.

[3] W. Bechkit, Y. Challal, and A. Bouabdallah, “A new scalable key predistribution scheme for WSN,” in Proc. 2012 IEEE ICCCN, pp. 1–7.

[4] L. Eschenauer and V. D. Gligor, “A key-management scheme for distributed sensor networks,” in Proc. 2002 ACM CCS, pp. 41–47.

[5] T. Choi, H. B. Acharya, and M. G. Gouda, “The best keying protocol for sensor networks,” in Proc. 2011 IEEE WOWMOM, pp. 1–6.

[6] S. Zhu, S. Setia, and S. Jajodia, “Leap: efficient security mechanisms for large-scale distributed sensor networks,” in Proc. 2003 ACM CCS, pp. 62–72.

[7] National Institute of Standards and Technology, Secure Hash Standard, Federal Information Processing Standards Publication, 1995. K. Naveen Kumar , IJRIT

630

IJRIT International Journal of Research in Information Technology, Volume 2, Issue 5, May 2014, Pg: 626-631

[8] Seyit A. Camtepe and B. Yener, “Combinatorial design of key distribution mechanisms for wireless sensor networks,” IEEE/ACM Trans. Networks., vol. 15, pp. 346–358, 2007

[9] W. Du, J. Deng, Y. Han, S. Chen, and P. Varshney, “A key management scheme for wireless sensor networks using deployment knowledge,” in Proc. 2004 IEEE INFOCOM, pp. 586–597.

[10] Walid Bechkit, “A Highly Scalable Key Pre-Distribution Scheme for WSN,” IEEE Transaction on Wireless Communication, VOL. 12, NO. 2, February 2013. [11] S. Zhu, S. Setia, and S. Jajodia, “Leap: efficient security mechanisms for large-scale distributed sensor networks,” in Proc. 2003 ACM CCS, pp. 62–72.

K. Naveen Kumar received his B.Tech. degree Engineering

in Computer Science and

from CMR Institute of Technology , JNTUH, Hyderabad (AP) in 2011.

Currently pursuing M. Tech. in Computer Science and Engineering in CMR Institute of Technology, JNTUH, Hyderabad (AP).

D. Baswaraj received his B.E. degree in Computer Engineering from University of Poona, Pune (Maharashtra) in 1991, M.Tech. in Computer Science and Engineering from VTU, Belgaum (Karnataka) in 2004 and Currently pursuing Ph.D. in the Computer Science and Engineering faculty at JNTUH, Hyderabad (AP). Currently he is an Associate Professor in the department of CSE, CMR Institute of Technology, Hyderabad. There are 25 research articles published in National/International conferences/Journals added to his credentials.

K. Naveen Kumar , IJRIT

631