A secured routing algorithm against black hole attack for better intelligent transportation system in vehicular ad hoc network

Original Research
  • 4 Downloads

Abstract

The societal costs accompanying the developments are usually related to traffic congestion and accidents. The condition can be enhanced by providing timely information on traffic conditions using vehicular ad-hoc networks. vehicular ah hoc network (VANET), which is an essential technology in the realization of intelligent transportation system (ITS), has key challenges such as infrequent link connection duration and high packet drop ratio. In this paper, an algorithm is proposed which provides security against attacks on routing protocols and better network connectivity. In this algorithm, attacker node or the chain of attacker node can be identified, and IPs of these attacker nodes are blacklisted which implies if any RREP (route reply packet)come from the blacklisted node then that RREP will be discarded. The proposed algorithm is implemented using NCTUns network simulator and comparison of leading VANET protocols ad hoc on-demand distance vector (AODV), B-AODV (AODV with black hole attack) with the proposed secured algorithm is done. Extensive simulation scenarios are considered, and final results show that proposed algorithm has 40% higher throughput in comparison to AODV protocol, which makes it more efficient in a dense vehicular environment having V2V communication. Also, the proposed algorithm has 10% lower packet drop and a lesser number of collisions which renders it more reliable for the vehicle vehicle (V2V) environment. It proves that proposed secured routing algorithm performs better than standard AODV in the presence of malicious nodes causing black hole attack.

Keywords

VANET RSU Throughput Packet delivery Black hole Packet drop 

References

  1. 1.
    Giordano S (2002) Mobile ad hoc networks. In: Stojmenovic I (ed) Handbook of wireless networks and mobile computing. Wiley, New York, pp 325–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kenney JB (2011) Dedicated short-range communications (DSRC) standards in the United States. Proc IEEE 99:1162–1182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tyagi P, Dembla D (2015) Performance analysis and quality-of-service monitoring of protected and unprotected TCP networks using NCTUns simulator: IEEE 2015 Communication Systems and Network Technologies; 4–6 April 2015. IEEE, Gwalior, pp 273–277Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Guo P, Wang J, Li B, Lee S (2014) Variable threshold value authentication architecture for wireless mesh networks. J Internet Technol 15:929–936Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Papadimitratos P, Buttyan L, Holczer T, Schoch E, Freudiger J, Raya M, Ma Z, Kargl F, Kung A, Hubaux JP (2008) Secure vehicular communication systems: design and architecture. IEEE Commun Mag 46:100–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Perkins CE, Royer F, Das SR (2003) Ad hoc on-demand distance vector (AODV) routing. IETF RFC- 3561 MANET Working group 2003Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hyoung-Kee C, In-Hwan K, Jae-Chern Y (2010) Secure and efficient protocol for a vehicular ad-hoc network with privacy preservation. Eurasip J Wirel Commun Netw 2011:1–15Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Raya M, Papadimitratos P, Hubaux J-P (2006) Securing vehicular communications. IEEE Wcnc 13:8–11Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tyagi P, Dembla D (2014) Taxonomy of security attacks and issues in vehicular ad-hoc networks (VANETs). Int J Comput Appl 91:22–27Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sivakumar T, Manoharan R (2017) ERP: an efficient reactive routing protocol for dense vehicular ad hoc networks. Turk J Electr Eng Comput Sci 25:1762–1772CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cerri D, Ghioni A (2002) Securing AODV: the A-SAODV secure routing prototype. IEEE Commn Mag 46:120–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gopal U, Subramanian K (2017) A secure cross-layer AODV routing method to detect and isolate (SCLARDI) black hole attacks for MANET. Turk J Electr Eng Comput Sci 25:2761–2769CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mohamed E, Abdelmalek A (2015) Impact analysis of black hole attacks on mobile Ad Hoc networks performance. Int J Grid Comput Appl (IJGCA) 6:1–10Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Deng H, Li W, Agrawal DP (2002) Routing security in wireless ad hoc networks. IEEE Commun Mag 40:70–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Huang D, Misra S, Verma M, Xue G (2011) PACP: an efficient pseudonymous authentication-based conditional privacy protocol for VANETs. Transp Res Rec 12:736–746Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ramaswamy S, Fu H, Sreekantaradhya M, Dixon J, Nygard K (2003) Prevention of cooperative black hole attack in wireless ad hoc networks. In: IEEE 2003 International Conference on Wireless Networks Las Vegas, Nevada, pp 570–575Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Vijayakumar P, Azores M, Kannan A, Deborah LJ (2016) Dual authentication and key management techniques for secure data transmission in vehicular ad hoc networks. Transp Res Rec 17:1–14Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mohamed H, Ibrahim S (2015) A comparison of VANET authentication schemes: public key vs. symmetric key. IEEE Commun Mag 40:70–75Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wang SY (2003) The design and implementation of the NCTUns network simulator. Comput Netw 42:175–197CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Bharati Vidyapeeth's Institute of Computer Applications and Management 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Electronics and CommunicationJECRC UniversityJaipurIndia
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceJECRC UniversityJaipurIndia

Personalised recommendations