Advertisement

A spectrum sharing model that counters eavesdropping

  • Yee-Loo FooEmail author
Article
  • 3 Downloads

Abstract

Cybersecurity has become a major concern in the modern world. A serious threat to wireless networks is eavesdropping. On the other hand, usable spectrum is diminishing due to the presence of various wireless services. To address the problem, highly spectral efficient methods have been introduced e.g. spectrum sharing. Cognitive radio networks could sense unused spectrum and make use of it. In this paper, the cognitive radio is to perform a second task, i.e. jamming the eavesdropper. This paper is significant in revealing the cognitive radio’s energy efficiency in this setting, where a cognitive transmitter (CT) can transmit its own data when it senses the absence of primary transmitter (PT). If PT is present, CT is to jam an eavesdropper (EA) by transmitting artificial noise. Our main contribution is finding the CT’s optimal energy efficiency. Through the proposed formulas, we have determined the fractions of time and power required by CT to achieve the optimal energy efficiency, subject to constraints like minimum required secrecy rate Rs, etc. Our major findings are: (1) only a small portion of a time frame (66 μs in our setting) is required for sensing. CT can utilize the remaining time for sending its data or jamming EA. (2) To achieve a target energy efficiency of 0.5 bps/Hz/J, PT should not be actively transmitting more than 35% of the time, and Rs should not be larger than 1.2 bps/Hz.

Keywords

Telecommunication systems security Physical layer security Cognitive radio networks Spectrum efficiency Spectrum sharing Energy efficiency 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Wyner, A. D. (1975). The wire-tap channel. The Bell System Technical Journal, 54(8), 1355–1387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bloch, M., Barros, J., Rodrigues, M. R. D., & McLaughlin, S. W. (2008). Wireless information-theoretic security. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 54(6), 2515–2534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Spectrum policy task force. (2002). Federal Communications Commission, ET Docket No. 02-135. Technical Report.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lu, W., Gu, K., Jia, M., Lu, Z., & Peng, H. (2017). Joint resource optimization for secure transmission in cooperative CR networks. EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking, 2017, 193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gu, C., & Zhang, C. (2017). Joint distributed beamforming and jamming schemes in decode-and-forward relay networks for physical layer secrecy. EURASIP journal on wireless communications and networking.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s13638-017-0997-x.
  6. 6.
    Nguyen, N.-P., Thanh, T. L., Duong, T. Q., & Nallanathan, A. (2017). Secure communications in cognitive underlay networks over Nakagami-m channel. Physical Communication, 25(part 2), 610–618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Xu, D., & Li, Q. (2017). Improving physical-layer security for primary users in cognitive radio networks. IET Communications, 11(15), 2303–2310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Li, Q., & Xu, D. (2017). Minimizing secrecy outage probability for primary users in cognitive radio networks. AEU—International Journal of Electronics and Communications, 83, 353–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Costa, M., & Ephremides, A. (2016). Energy efficiency versus performance in cognitive wireless networks. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 34(5), 1336–1347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Deng, R., Chen, J., Yuen, C., Cheng, P., & Sun, Y. (2012). Energy-efficient cooperative spectrum sensing by optimal scheduling in sensor-aided cognitive radio networks. IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, 61(2), 716–725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Xie, R., Yu, F. R., Ji, H., & Li, Y. (2012). Energy-efficient resource allocation for heterogeneous cognitive radio networks with femtocells. IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, 11(11), 3910–3920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pei, Y., Liang, Y. C., Teh, K. C., & Li, K. H. (2011). Energy-efficient design of sequential channel sensing in cognitive radio networks: Optimal sensing strategy, power allocation, and sensing order. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 29(8), 1648–1659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zheng, L., Sang, L., Liu, J., Lu, B., & Dong, Z. (2018). Maximising the degrees of freedom of the physical-layer secured relay networks with artificial jamming. IET Communications, 12(6), 665–671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sharma, S., Roy, S. D., & Kundu, S. (2019). Secrecy performance of a two-way communication network with two half-duplex DF relays. IET Communications, 13(5), 620–629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Alibeigi, M., & Taherpour, A. (2019). Optimisation of secrecy rate in cooperative device to device communications underlaying cellular networks. IET Communications, 13(5), 512–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Liang, Y. C., Zeng, Y., Peh, E. C. Y., & Hoang, A. T. (2008). Sensing-throughput tradeoff for cognitive radio networks. IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, 7(4), 1326–1337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Althunibat, S., & Granelli, F. (2016). On results’ reporting of cooperative spectrum sensing in cognitive radio networks. Telecommunication Systems, 62(3), 569–580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of EngineeringMultimedia UniversityCyberjayaMalaysia

Personalised recommendations