Impact Analysis of Black Hole, Flooding Attacks and Enhancements in MANET Using SHA-3 Keccak Algorithm

  • T. Sairam VamsiEmail author
  • T. Sudheer Kumar
  • M. Vamsi Krishna
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering book series (LNEE, volume 655)


In present-day wireless communication scenario, Mobile ad hoc network (MANET) plays a very important role, as it consists of many autonomous nodes which communicate together to form a proper communication network. Each node in a network will move in random path, so that nodes direction will change frequently. But, some of the nodes may misbehave which leads to many problems in that network. These nodes are called as malicious nodes which create severe data loss by dropping data packets, and network may loss its privacy due to these intruders. So, providing security is the major challenge, because the networks are more vulnerable to many attacks. Some major attacks like flooding and black hole affect the E2E delay, packet delivery ratio (PDR), and throughput of the network. So, this paper mainly explains on enhancements in security in AODV using efficient techniques called SHA-3 Keccak and dynamic threshold routing algorithm.


MANET Black hole Flooding AODV SHA-3 Keccak 


  1. 1.
    Moudni H, Er-rouidi M, Mouncif H, El Hadadi B (2016) Performance analysis of AODV routing protocol in MANET under the influence of routing attacks. In: International conference on electrical and information technologies (ICEIT), tangiers, pp 536–542Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ramya P, SairamVamsi T (2018) Impact analysis of blackhole, flooding, and grayhole attacks and security enhancements in mobile ad hoc networks using SHA3 algorithm. In: Anguera J, Satapathy S, Bhateja V, Sunitha K (eds) Microelectronics, electromagnetics and telecommunications. Lecture notes in electrical engineering, vol 471. Springer, Singapore; Fahmy AHH, Bahaa-Eldin A (2015) Agent-based trusted on-demand routing protocol for mobile ad-hoc networks. Wirel Netw 21(2):467–483Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mane Dadaso, Gothwal Deepali (2013) Improved security for attacks in MANET using AODV. Int J Innov Eng Technol (IJIET) 2(3):37–44Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mahmoud MMEA, Shen XS (2014) Secure routing protocols. Security for multi-hop wireless networks. Springer, New York, pp 63–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zhao Z, Hu H, Ahn GJ, Wu R (2010) Risk aware mitigation for MANET routing attacks. IEEE Trans Dependable Secur Comput 9(2):250–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Tseng F-H, Chou L-D, Chao H-C (2011) A survey of black hole attacks in wireless mobile ad hoc networks. Hum-Centric Comput Inf Sci 1(1):1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Yi P et al (2005) A new routing attack in mobile ad hoc networks. Int’l J Info Tech 11(2)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Palanisamy V, Annadurai P (2009) Impact of rushing attack on multicast in mobile ad hoc network. Int J Comput Sci Inf Secur 4(1–2)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Shanmuganathan V, Anand T (2012) A survey on gray hole attack in MANET. IRACST–Int J Comput Netw Wirel Commun (IJCNWC) 2250–3501Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mahajan V, Natu M, Sethi A (2008) Analysis of wormhole intrusion attacks in MANETs. In: IEEE military communications conference, pp 1–7Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2021

Authors and Affiliations

  • T. Sairam Vamsi
    • 1
    Email author
  • T. Sudheer Kumar
    • 1
  • M. Vamsi Krishna
    • 2
  1. 1.Shri Vishnu Engineering College for WomenBhimavaramIndia
  2. 2.Centurion University of Technology and ManagementParalakhemundiIndia

Personalised recommendations