An Anti-jamming Strategy When it Is Unknown Which Receivers Will Face with Smart Interference

  • Andrey GarnaevEmail author
  • Wade Trappe
  • Athina Petropulu
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10866)


The paper considers a communication system consisting of a communication node utilizing multiple antennas in order to communicate with a group of receivers, while potentially facing interference from one or more jammers. The jammers impact the scenario by possibly interfering some of the receivers. The objective of the jammers is to reduce the throughput of nearby receivers, while taking into account the cost/risk of jamming. The fact that jammers face a cost implies that they might not choose to interfere, and thus the communication node faces uncertainty about which of its receivers will be jammed. This uncertainty is modeled by the communicator having only a priori probabilities about whether each receiver will face hostile interference or not, and if he does face such jamming, whether the jamming attack is smart or not. The goal of the communication node is to distribute total power resources to maximize the total throughput associated with communicating with all of the receivers. The problem is formulated as a Bayesian game between the communication system and the jammers. A waterfilling equation to find the equilibrium is derived, and its uniqueness is proven. The threshold value on the power budget is established for the receivers to be non-altruistic.


Multicast communication Jamming Bayesian game 


  1. 1.
    Sharma, R.K., Rawat, D.B.: Advances on security threats and countermeasures for cognitive radio networks: a survey. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 17, 1023–1043 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zou, Y., Zhu, J., Hanzo, X.W.L.: A survey on wireless security: technical challenges, recent advances, and future trends. Proc. IEEE 104, 1727–1765 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Grover, K., Lim, A., Yang, Q.: Jamming and anti-jamming techniques in wireless networks: a survey. J. Int. J. Ad Hoc Ubiquitous Comput. 17, 197–215 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Han, Z., Niyato, D., Saad, W., Basar, T., Hjrungnes, A.: Game Theory in Wireless and Communication Networks: Theory, Models, and Applications. Cambridge University Press, New York (2012)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Yuan, L., Wang, K., Miyazaki, T., Guo, S., Wu, M.: Optimal transmission strategy for sensors to defend against eavesdropping and jamming attack. In: IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC), Paris, France (2017)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jia, L., Yao, F., Sun, Y., Niu, Y., Zhu, Y.: Bayesian Stackelberg game for antijamming transmission with incomplete information. IEEE Commun. Lett. 20, 1991–1994 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Slimeni, F., Scheers, B., Le Nir, V., Chtourou, Z., Attia, R.: Learning multi-channel power allocation against smart jammer in cognitive radio networks. In: International Conference on Military Communications and Information Systems (ICMCIS), Brussels, Belgium, pp. 1–7 (2016)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Yang, D., Xue, G., Zhang, J., Richa, A., Fang, X.: Coping with a smart jammer in wireless networks: a Stackelberg game approach. IEEE Trans. Wirel. Commun. 12, 4038–4047 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jeung, J., Jeong, S., Lim, J.: Adaptive rapid channel-hopping scheme mitigating smart jammer attacks in secure WLAN. In: Military Communications Conference (MILCOM), pp. 1231–1236 (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lu, D., Wu, R., Li, P., Su, Z.: GPS smart jammer suppressin algorithm based on spatial APES. In: International Symposium on Intelligent Signal Processing and Communication Systems, pp. 88–91 (2007)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Xiao, L., Liu, J., Li, Q., Mandayam, N.B., Poor, H.V.: User-centric view of jamming games in cognitive radio networks. IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. 10, 2578–2590 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Garnaev, A., Trappe, W.: The eavesdropping and jamming dilemma in multi-channel communications. In: IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC), Budapest, Hungary, pp. 2160–2164 (2013)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Aziz, F.M., Shamma, J.S., Stuber, G.L.: Resilience of LTE networks against smart jamming attacks. In: IEEE Global Communications Conference (GLOBECOM), pp. 734–739 (2014)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Garnaev, A., Trappe, W.: Bandwidth scanning when facing interference attacks aimed at reducing spectrum opportunities. IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. 12, 1916–1930 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    D’Oro, S., Galluccio, L., Morabito, G., Palazzo, S., Chen, L., Martignon, F.: Defeating jamming with the power of silence: a game-theoretic analysis. IEEE Trans. Wirel. Commun. 14, 2337–2352 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Namvar, N., Saad, W., Bahadori, N., Kelley, B.: Jamming in the internet of things: a game-theoretic perspective. In: IEEE Global Communications Conference (GLOBECOM), Washington, DC, pp. 1–6 (2016)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cumanan, K., Ding, Z., Xu, M., Poor, H.V.: Secure multicast communications with private jammers. In: 17th IEEE International Workshop on Signal Processing Advances in Wireless Communications (SPAWC), Edinburgh, UK (2016)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Thaler, R.H.: Misbehaving: The Making of Behavioral Economics. Allen Lane (2015)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    de Lamare, R.C.: Massive MIMO systems: signal processing challenges and future trends. URSI Radio Sci. Bull. 2013(347), 8–20 (2013)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Zhao, Y., Haggman, S.-G.: Intercarrier interference self-cancellation scheme for OFDM mobile communication systems. IEEE Trans. Commun. 49, 1185–1191 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tang, T., Heath Jr., R.W.: Space-time interference cancellation in MIMO-OFDM systems. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 54, 1802–1816 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Garnaev, A., Trappe, W.: To eavesdrop or jam, that is the question. In: Mellouk, A., Sherif, M.H., Li, J., Bellavista, P. (eds.) ADHOCNETS 2013. LNICSSITE, vol. 129, pp. 146–161. Springer, Cham (2014). Scholar
  23. 23.
    Garnaev, A., Trappe, W., Petropulu, A.: Equilibrium strategies for an OFDM network that might be under a jamming attack. In: 51st Annual Conference on Information Systems and Sciences (CISS), Baltimore, MD, pp. 1–6 (2017)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Altman, E., Avrachenkov, K., Garnaev, A.: Closed form solutions for water-filling problem in optimization and game frameworks. Telecommun. Syst. J. 47, 153–164 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Garnaev, A., Trappe, W.: An OFDM-based dual radar/communication system facing uncertain jamming power. In: IEEE Conference on Communications and Network Security (CNS), Las Vegas, NV, pp. 1–9 (2017)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrey Garnaev
    • 1
    • 3
    Email author
  • Wade Trappe
    • 1
  • Athina Petropulu
    • 2
  1. 1.WINLABRutgers UniversityNorth BrunswickUSA
  2. 2.Department of Electrical and Computer EngineeringRutgers UniversityPiscatawayUSA
  3. 3.Saint Petersburg State UniversitySaint PetersburgRussia

Personalised recommendations