Spectrum Sharing Paradigm Under Primary Interference and Nakagami-m Fading: Security Analysis
- 12 Downloads
The spectrum sharing paradigm is a promising countermeasure to the spectrum under-utilization problem. However, it causes both primary interference (inflicted by primary transmitters upon secondary receivers) and secondary interference (inflicted by secondary transmitters upon primary receivers) and un-secures information transmission. Most works ignored the primary interference and considered the Rayleigh fading in evaluating the information security of the spectrum sharing paradigm. This paper generalizes these works with considerations of the primary interference and the Nakagami-m fading. First, the exact expression of the secrecy outage probability is proposed for the spectrum sharing paradigm under considerations of both primary/secondary interferences, the Nakagami-m fading, and the peak transmit and interference power constraints. Then, computer simulations are provided to corroborate the proposed expression. Finally, numerous simulation/theory results are generated to assess the security performance in key system parameters such as the fading severity degree, the primary interference level, the peak transmit power, the peak interference power, the security threshold.
KeywordsSecrecy outage Spectrum sharing paradigm Primary interference Nakagami-m fading
This research is funded by Vietnam National University - Ho Chi Minh City (VNU-HCM) under grant number B2019-20-01.
- 3.Barros, J. & Rodrigues, M. (2006). Secrecy capacity of wireless channels. In Proceedings of IEEE international symposium on information theory: Seattle, WA, USA (pp. 356–360).Google Scholar
- 4.Simon, M. K., & Alouini, M. S. (2005). Digital communication over fading channels. Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
- 7.Wang, D., Ren, P., Du, Q., Sun, L., & Wang, Y. (2016). Cooperative relaying and jamming for primary secure communication in cognitive two-way networks. In Proceedings of IEEE VTC, Nanjing, China (vol. 15–18, pp. 1–5).Google Scholar
- 9.Raghuwanshi, S., Maji, P., Roy, S. D., & Kundu, S. (2016) Secrecy performance of a dual hop cognitive relay network with an energy harvesting relay. In Proceedings of IEEE ICACCI, Jaipur, India (vol. 21–24, pp. 1622–1627).Google Scholar
- 11.Sibomana, L., Tran, H., & Zepernick, H. J. (2015). On physical layer security for cognitive radio networks with primary user interference. In Proceedings of IEEE MILCOM, Tampa, FL (vol. 26–28, pp. 281–286).Google Scholar
- 12.Mou, W., Yang, W., Xu, X., Li, X., & Cai, Y. (2016) Secure transmission in spectrum-sharing cognitive networks with wireless power transfer. In Proceedings of IEEE WCSP, Yangzhou, Jiangsu, China (vol. 13–15, pp. 1–5).Google Scholar
- 14.Khuong, H. V., Thiem, D. D., Ngoc, P. T. D., Tuan, N. T., Son, P. N., & Son, V. Q. (2017) Security performance analysis of underlay cognitive radio systems under interference from primary network and channel information inaccuracy. In Proceedings of IEEE ATC, Quy Nhon, Vietnam (vol. 18–20, pp. 108–113).Google Scholar
- 18.Yulong, Z., Xuelong, L., & Ying-Chang, L. (2014). Secrecy outage and diversity analysis of cognitive radio systems. IEEE JSAC, 32(11), 2222–2236.Google Scholar
- 19.Hui, Z., Hequn, L., Yaping, L., Chaoqing, T., & Gaofeng, P. (2015) Physical layer security of maximal ratio combining in underlay cognitive radio unit over Rayleigh fading channels. In Proceedings of IEEE ICCSN, Chengdu, China (Vol. 6–7, pp. 201–205).Google Scholar
- 21.Wenli, L., Li, G., Tianyu, K., Jianwei, Z., & Jiaru, L. (2015) Secure cognitive radio system with cooperative secondary networks. In Proceedings of IEEE ICT, Sydney, Australia (vol. 27–29, pp. 6–10).Google Scholar