Advertisement

Mobile Networks and Applications

, Volume 13, Issue 5, pp 516–532 | Cite as

Potential Cognitive Radio Denial-of-Service Vulnerabilities and Protection Countermeasures: a Multi-dimensional Analysis and Assessment

  • Timothy X Brown
  • Amita Sethi
Article

Abstract

Cognitive radios sense spectrum activity and apply spectrum policies in order to make decisions on when and in what bands they may communicate. These activities go beyond what is done when traditional radios communicate. This paper examines the denial of service vulnerabilities that are opened by these additional activities and explores potential protection remedies that can be applied. An analysis of how vulnerable are victim cognitive radios to potential denial of service attacks is presented along different axis, namely the network architecture employed, the spectrum access technique used and the spectrum awareness model. The goal is to assist cognitive radio designers to incorporate effective security measures now in the early stages of cognitive radio development.

Keywords

cognitive radio denial of service vulnerability countermeasure 

References

  1. 1.
    Akyildiz IF, Lee WY, Vuran MC, Mohanty S (2006) NeXt generation dynamic spectrum access cognitive radio wireless networks: a survey. Comput Networks 50:2127–2159MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barbeau M (2005) WiMax/802.16 threat analysis. In: Proceedings of the 1st ACM international workshop on quality of service & security in wireless and mobile networks, Quebec, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brown TX (2005) An analysis of licensed channel avoidance strategies for unlicensed devices. In: Proceedings of IEEE DySPAN, Nov. 8–11Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brown TX, James JE, Sethi A (2006) Jamming and sensing of encrypted wireless ad hoc networks. In: Proceedings of the seventh ACM international symposium on mobile ad hoc networking and computing (MobiHoc), Florence, 22–25 MayGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brown TX, Sethi A (2007) Potential cognitive radio denial of service attacks and remedies. In: Proceedings of the international symposium on advanced radio technologies 2007 (ISART 2007), Boulder, 26–28 FebGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brown TX, Sethi A (2007) Potential cognitive radio denial-of-service vulnerabilities and protection countermeasures: a multi-dimensional analysis and assessment. In: Proceedings of the second international conference on cognitive radio oriented wireless networks and communications 2007 (CrownCom 2007), Orlando, 31 July–3 AugGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brown TX, Sicker D (2007) Can cognitive radio support broadband wireless access? In: Proceedings of the IEEE DySPAN, April 17–20Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chapin JM, Lehr WH (2007) Time-limited leases for innovative radios. In Proceedings of the IEEE DySPAN, April 17–20Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    DARPA XG Working Group (2003) “The XG vision,” Request for comments, version 1.0, Prepared by BBN Technologies, Cambridge, Mass., USA. JulyGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    DARPA XG Working Group (2003) “The XG architectural framework,” Request for comments, version 1.0, Prepared by BBN Technologies, Cambridge, Mass., USA. JulyGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    End-to-End Reconfigurability (E2R) Phase II website (e2r2.motlabs.com)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    ETSI (2003) Telecommunications and internet protocol harmonization over networks (TIPHON) release 4; part I: threat analysis. Technical specification ETSI TS 102 165-1 V4.1.1Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    FCC ET Docket No. 02-135, “Spectrum policy task force report,” Nov. 2002. (http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-228542A1.pdf)
  14. 14.
    FCC ET Docket No. 03-108, “Facilitating opportunities for flexible, efficient, and reliable spectrum use employing cognitive radio technologies,” FCC Report and Order adopted on March 10, 2005, (http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6517509341)
  15. 15.
    FCC ET Docket No. 04-186, “Unlicensed operation in the TV broadcast bands,” ET Docket No. 02-380, “Additional spectrum for unlicensed devices below 900 mhz and in the 3 ghz band,” FCC report and order and further notice of proposed rulemaking, adopted on October12, 2006Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Heusse M, Rousseau F, Berger-Sabbatel G, Duda A (2003) Performance anomaly of 802.11b. In: Proceedings of the INFOCOM 2003, v. 2, 30 Mar.–3 Apr. 2003, pp 836–843Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Householder A, Manion A, Pesante L, Weaver GM (2001) Managing the threat of denial-of-service attacks. CERT Coordination Center, v10.0, OctoberGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hubaux J, Buttyán L, Čapkun S (2001) The quest for security in mobile ad hoc networks. In: Proceedings of the ACM symposium on mobile ad hoc networking and computing (MobiHOC), New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    IEEE 802.22 Working Group on Wireless Regional Area Networks, (http://www.ieee802.org/22/)
  20. 20.
    Ma L, Han X, Shen C-C (2005) Dynamic open spectrum sharing MAC protocol for wireless ad hoc network. In: Proceedings of the IEEE DySpan, Nov. 8–11, pp 203–213Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mathur CN, Subbalakshmi KP (2007) Security issues in cognitive radio networks. In: Cognitive networks: towards self-aware networks, JulyGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Menon R, Buehrer RM, Reed JH (2005) Outage probability based comparison of underlay and overlay spectrum sharing techniques. In: Proceedings of the IEEE DySpan, Nov. 8–11, pp 101–109Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Newsome J, Shi E, Song D, Perrig A (2004) The Sybil attack in sensor networks: analysis & defenses. In: Proceedings of third international symposium on information processing in sensor networks, IPSN, 26–27 Apr., pp 259–268Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pilosof S, Ramjee R, Raz D, Shavitt Y, Sinha P (2003) Understanding TCP fairness over a wireless LAN. In: Proceedings of the INFOCOM 2003 v. 2, 30 Mar.–3 Apr., pp 863–872Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sankaranarayanan S, Papadimitratos P, Mishra A, Hershey S (2005) A bandwidth sharing approach to improve licensed spectrum utilization. In Proceedings of the IEEE DySPAN, Nov. 8–11, pp 279–288Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Shirey R (2000) RFC 2828: internet security glossary. IETF, MayGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Stallings W (2006) Network security essentials: applications and standards, 3rd edn. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, p 432Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ståhlberg M (2000) Radio jamming attacks against two popular mobile networks. In: Lipmaa H, Pehu-Lehtonen H, (eds) Helsinki University of Technology, HelsinkiGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Volpe JA (2001) Vulnerability assessment of the transportation infrastructure relying on the Global Positioning System. Final report for the National Transportation Systems Center, US Department of Transportation, Aug. 29 (http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/gps/geninfo/pressrelease.htm)
  30. 30.
    Wenyuan X, Wade T, Yanyong Z, Timothy W (2005) The feasibility of launching and detecting jamming attacks in wireless networks. In: Proceedings of ACM international symposium on mobile ad hoc networking and computing, Illinois, pp 46–57Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Interdisciplinary Telecommunications, Electrical and Computer EngineeringUniversity of ColoradoBoulderUSA
  2. 2.Interdisciplinary TelecommunicationsUniversity of ColoradoBoulderUSA

Personalised recommendations