Advertisement

Secure Data Aggregation in Wireless Sensor Networks

  • Yee Wei LawEmail author
  • Marimuthu Palaniswami
  • Raphael Chung-Wei Phan
Chapter
Part of the Computer Communications and Networks book series (CCN)

Abstract

The biggest advantage of building “intelligence” into a sensor is that the sensor can process data before sending them to a data consumer. The kind of processing that is often needed is to aggregate the data into a more compact representation called an aggregate, and send the aggregate to the data consumer instead. The main security challenges to such a process are (1) to prevent Byzantine-corrupted data from rendering the final aggregate totally meaningless and (2) to provide end-to-end confidentiality between the data providers and the data consumer. This chapter surveys the state of the art in techniques for addressing these challenges.

Keywords

Source Node Elliptic Curf Aggregation Function Message Authentication Code Result Verification 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Ahituv N, Lapid Y, Neumann S (1987) Processing encrypted data. Communications of the ACM, 30(9):777–Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Buttyán L, Schaffer P, Vajda I (2006a) RANBAR: RANSAC-based resilient aggregation in sensor networks. In: Proceedings of the Fourth ACM Workshop on Security of Ad Hoc and Sensor Networks (SASN ’06), pp. 83–90. ACM, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Buttyán L, Schaffer P, Vajda I (2006b) Resilient aggregation with attack detection in sensor networks. In: Proceedings of the Fourth Annual IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops (PERCOMW’06). IEEE, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Castelluccia C, Mykletun E, Tsudik G (2005) Efficient aggregation of encrypted data in wireless sensor networks. In: Mobile and Ubiquitous Systems: Networking and Services (MobiQuitous ’05). IEEE, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chan H, Perrig A, Song D (2006) Secure hierarchical in-network aggregation in sensor networks. In: Proceedings of the 13th ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS ’06), pp. 278–287. ACM, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chen W-P, Hou JC (2005) Chapter 15: Data gathering and fusion in sensor networks. In: Handbook of Sensor Networks: Algorithms and Architectures. Wiley, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dolev D, Dwork C, Naor M (1991) Non-malleable cryptography. In: Proceedings of the 23rd Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC ’91), pp. 542–552. ACM, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Domingo-Ferrer J (2002) A provably secure additive and multiplicative privacy homomorphism. In: Information Security: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference (ISC ‘02), Sao Paulo, Brazil, September 30–October 2, volume 2433 of LNCS, pp. 471–483. Springer, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Du W, Deng J, Han YS, Varshney PK (2003) A witness-based approach for data fusion assurance in wireless sensor networks. In: IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference (GLOBECOM ’03), volume 3, pp. 1435–1439. IEEE, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Girao J, Westhoff D, Schneider M (2005) CDA: Concealed data aggregation for reverse multicast traffic in wireless sensor networks. In: IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC ’05), pp. 3044–3049, Seoul, Korea, May 2005. IEEE, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Goldwasser S, Micali S (1984) Probabilistic encryption. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 28:270–Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    He W, Liu X, Nguyen H, Nahrstedt K, Abdelzaher T (2007) PDA: privacy-preserving data aggregation in wireless sensor networks. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Communications (INFOCOM ’07), pp. 2045–2053, Anchorage, Alaska, USA, 6–12 May 2007. IEEE, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mahimkar A, Rappaport TS (2004) SecureDAV: a secure data aggregation and verification protocol for sensor networks. In: IEEE Global Tele-communications Conference (GLOBECOM ’04), volume 4, pp. 2175–2179. IEEE, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mykletun E, Girao J, Westhoff D (2006) Public key based crypto-schemes for data concealment in wireless sensor networks. In: IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC ’06), volume 5, pp. 2288–2295. IEEE, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Naor M, Yung M (1990) Public-key cryptosystems provably secure against chosen ciphertext attacks. In: Proceedings of the Twenty-Second Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC ’90). ACM, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Önen M, Molva R (2007) Secure data aggregation with multiple encryption. In: Wireless Sensor Networks, volume 4373 of LNCS, pp. 117–132. Springer, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Patel JK, Read CB (1982) Handbook of the Normal Distribution, 1st edn. Marcel Dekker, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Przydatek B, Song D, Perrig A (2003) SIA: secure information aggregation in sensor networks. In: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems, pp. 255–265. ACM, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rabbat M, Nowak R (2004) Distributed optimization in sensor networks. In: IPSN ’04: Proceedings of the Third International Symposium on Information Processing in Sensor Networks, pp. 20–27. ACM, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rackoff C, Simon DR (1991) Non-interactive zero-knowledge proof of knowledge and the chosen ciphertext attack. In: Advances in Cryptology: Proceedings of the 11th Annual International Cryptology Conference (CRYPTO ‘91), Santa Barbara, CA, USA, August 11–15, 1991, volume 576 of LNCS, pp. 433–444. Springer, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rivest RL, Adleman L, Dertouzos ML (1978) On data banks and privacy homomorphisms. In: Proceedings of Foundations of Secure Computation, pp. 169–179. Academic, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Shrivastava N, Buragohain C, Agrawal D, Suri S (2004) Medians and beyond: new aggregation techniques for sensor networks. In: Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems (SenSys ’04), pp. 239–249. ACM, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wagner D (2003) Cryptanalysis of an algebraic privacy homomorphism. In: Information Security: Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference (ISC ’03), Bristol, UK, October 1–3, 2003, volume 2851 of LNCS, pp. 234–239. Springer, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wagner D (2004) Resilient aggregation in sensor networks. In: Proceedings of the Second ACM Workshop on Security of Ad Hoc and Sensor Networks (SASN ’04), pp. 78–87. ACM, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Westhoff D, Girao J, Acharya M (2006) Concealed data aggregation for reverse multicast traffic in sensor networks: Encryption, key distribution, and routing adaptation. IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, 5(10):1417–Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Yang Y, Wang X, Zhu S, Cao G (2006) SDAP: a secure hop-by-Hop data aggregation protocol for sensor networks. In: Proceedings of the Seventh ACM International Symposium on Mobile Ad Hoc Networking and Computing (MobiHoc ’06), pp. 356–367. ACM, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Yu Y, Leiwo J, Premkumar B (2008) A study on the security of privacy homomorphism. International Journal of Network Security, 6(1):33–39. Preliminary version appeared in Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Information Technology – New Generations (ITNG ’06), pp. 470–475, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA, 2006. IEEE, New York, NYGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yee Wei Law
    • 1
    Email author
  • Marimuthu Palaniswami
  • Raphael Chung-Wei Phan
  1. 1.Department of Electrical and Electronic EngineeringThe University of MelbourneParkvilleAustralia

Personalised recommendations