Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Machine Learning Techniques for IoT Intrusions Detection in Aerospace Cyber-Physical Systems

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Machine Learning and Data Mining in Aerospace Technology

Part of the book series: Studies in Computational Intelligence ((SCI,volume 836))

Abstract

Aeronautical systems are no longer traditional masterpieces of autonomous mechanical engineering. Today, they are characterized by many intelligent technologies that include sensors, wireless standards and data analysis tools. Known as Aerospace Cyber-physical Systems (CPS), these CPSes are undergoing a massive transformation to increase the safety, efficiency and reliability of their operations. The physical system has created the Internet of Things IoT by integrating sensors, controllers and actuators. Nevertheless, the cyberspace of these aerospace CPSes offers many opportunities for malicious actors who threaten the security and privacy of vehicles/aircraft and their applications. Unprotected or poorly protected systems can easily be exploited for malicious purposes. Indeed, aerospace CPSes are always under threat from an increasing number of cyber-attacks through sensory or wireless channels, hardware, software or actuators. Recently, due to the significant advances and impressive results of machine learning techniques in the fields of image recognition, natural language processing and speech recognition for various long-standing artificial intelligence tasks, there has been a great interest in applying them to intrusion detection in the field of cybersecurity. In this chapter, we present different machine learning techniques for IoT intrusion detection in aerospace cyber-physical systems. The application of machine learning for cybersecurity in IoT requires the availability of substantial data on IoT attacks, but the lack of data on IoT attacks is a significant problem. In our study, the Cooja IoT simulator was used to generate high fidelity attack data in IoT 6LoWPAN networks. The efficient network architecture for all machine models is chosen based on comparing the performance of various network topologies and network scenarios. The experimental results show that Machine learning models for intrusion detection give better results by more than 99% in terms of accuracy, efficiency and detection rate. Also, it requires a low energy consumption overhead and memory, which proves that the proposed models can be used in constrained environments such as IoT sensors.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. L.A. Aguilar, The need for greater focus on the cybersecurity challenges facing small and midsize businesses. Public Statement, US Securities and Exchange Commission (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  2. R. von Solms, J. van Niekerk, From information security to cyber security. Comput. Secur. 38, 97–102 (2013). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2013.04.004

  3. A. Plonk, A. Carblanc, Malicious software (malware): a security threat to the internet economy (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  4. T. Ramalingam, B. Christophe, F.W. Samuel, Assessing the potential of IoT in aerospace, in Conference on e-Business, e-Services and e-Society, ed. by A.K. Kar, P.V. Ilavarasan, M.P. Gupta, Y.K. Dwivedi, M. Mäntymäki, M. Janssen, S. Al-Sharhan (Springer, Cham, 2017), pp. 107–121

    Google Scholar 

  5. D. Janakiram, V.A. Reddy, A.V.U.P. Kumar, Outlier detection in wireless sensor networks using Bayesian belief networks, in 2006 1st International Conference on Communication Systems Software & Middleware (2006), pp. 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/COMSWA.2006.1665221

  6. J. Jha, L. Ragha, Intrusion detection system using support vector machine. Int. J. Appl. Inf. Syst. 2013 (Icwac), 25–30 (2013). https://doi.org/10.5120/758-993

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. S. Kaplantzis, A. Shilton, N. Mani, Y.A. Sekercioglu, Detecting selective forwarding attacks in wireless sensor networks using support vector machines, in 2007 3rd International Conference on Intelligent Sensors, Sensor Networks and Information (2007), pp. 335–340. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISSNIP.2007.4496866

  8. Y. Maleh, A. Ezzati, Lightweight intrusion detection scheme for wireless sensor networks. IAENG Int. J. Comput. Sci. 42(4) (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Y. Zhang, N. Meratnia, P.J.M. Havinga, Distributed online outlier detection in wireless sensor networks using ellipsoidal support vector machine. Ad Hoc Netw. 11(3), 1062–1074 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adhoc.2012.11.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Y. Maleh, A. Ezzati, M. Belaissaoui, An enhanced DTLS protocol for Internet of Things applications, in Proceedings—2016 International Conference on Wireless Networks and Mobile Communications, WINCOM 2016: Green Communications and Networking (2016). https://doi.org/10.1109/WINCOM.2016.7777209

  11. E.M. Atkins, J.M. Bradley, Aerospace cyber-physical systems education, in AIAA Infotech@Aerospace (I@A) Conference. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (2013). https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2013-4809

  12. S. Berkovich, Physical world as an Internet of Things, in Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Computing for Geospatial Research & Applications (New York, NY, USA, ACM, 2011), pp. 66:1—66:2. https://doi.org/10.1145/1999320.1999389

  13. G. Schuh, T. Potente, C. Thomas, A. Hauptvogel, Cyber-physical production management. In IFIP International Conference on Advances in Production Management Systems. 477–484 (2013, September). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.

    Google Scholar 

  14. J. Shi, J. Wan, H. Yan, H. Suo, A survey of cyber-physical systems. In 2011 international conference on wireless communications and signal processing (WCSP).1–6. IEEE. (2011, November)

    Google Scholar 

  15. D. Strang, R. Anderl, Assembly process driven component data model in cyber physical production systems. In Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering and Computer Science. 2, (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  16. A. Humayed, J. Lin, F. Li, B. Luo, Cyber-physical systems security—a survey. IEEE Internet Things J. 4(6), 1802–1831 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1109/JIOT.2017.2703172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. H. Kim, Security and vulnerability of SCADA systems over ip-based wireless sensor networks. Int. J. Distrib. Sens. Netw. (2012). https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/268478

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. K. Ashton, That “Internet of Things” Thing. RFiD J. 22(7), (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Z. Shelby, C. Bormann, 6LoWPAN: The Wireless Embedded Internet—Shelby—Wiley Online Library (Wiley, 2011)

    Google Scholar 

  20. G. Mulligan, The 6LoWPAN architecture. In Proceedings of the ACM 4th Workshop on Embedded Networked Sensors, 78–82 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Y. Maleh, A. Ezzati, M. Belaissaoui (eds.), Security and Privacy in Smart Sensor Networks. IGI Global (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  22. H.K. Patil, T.M. Chen, Wireless sensor network security, in Computer and Information Security Handbook (Elsevier, 2017), pp. 317–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-803843-7.00018-1

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  23. H. Suo, J. Wan, C. Zou, J. Liu, Security in the Internet of Things: A Review. In 2012 International Conference on Computer Science and Electronics Engineering, 3, 648–651 (2012).https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCSEE.2012.373

  24. Z. Benenson, P.M. Cholewinski, F.C. Freiling, Vulnerabilities and attacks in wireless sensor networks, in Wireless Sensor Network Security, pp. 22–43 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  25. S. Raza, L. Wallgren, T. Voigt, SVELTE: real-time intrusion detection in the Internet of Things. Ad Hoc Netw. 11(8), 2661–2674 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adhoc.2013.04.014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. R.J. Cai, X.J. Li, P.H.J. Chong, A novel self-checking trad ad hoc routing scheme against active black hole attacks. Secur. Commun. Netw. 9(10), 943–957 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1002/sec.1390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. S.A. Kumar, T. Vealey, H. Srivastava, Security in Internet of Things: challenges, solutions and future directions, in 2016 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) (2016), pp. 5772–5781. https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2016.714

  28. Y. Maleh, A. Ezzati, M. Belaissaoui, DoS attacks analysis and improvement in DTLS protocol for Internet of Things. Proc. Int. Conf. Big Data Adv. Wirel. Technol. 54(1–54), 7 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1145/3010089.3010139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. C. Perkins, E. Belding-Royer, S. Das, Ad hoc on-demand distance vector (AODV) routing. RFC 3561 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  30. C.E. Perkins, P. Bhagwat, Highly dynamic destination-sequenced distance-vector routing (DSDV) for mobile computers. ACM SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. 24(4), 234–244 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1145/190809.190336

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. P. Pongle, G. Chavan, Real time intrusion and wormhole attack detection in Internet of Things. Int. J. Comput. Appl. 121(9) (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Z. Shelby, C. Bormann, 6LoWPAN: The Wireless Embedded Internet. 6LoWPAN: The Wireless Embedded Internet (2009). https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470686218

  33. S. Thirumuruganathan, A detailed introduction to K-nearest neighbor (KNN) algorithm. WWW Document (2010). https://saravananthirumuruganathan.wordpress.com/2010/05/17/a-Detailed-Introduction-to-K-Nearest-Neighbor-Knn-Algorithm/

  34. T. Winter, P. Thubert, A. Brandt, T.H. Clausen, J.W. Hui, R. Kelsey, J. Vasseur, Rpl: Ipv6 routing protocol for low power and lossy networks (2011). Http://tools. Ietf. Org/html/draft-Ietf-Roll-Rpl-19, (July), 1–164. https://doi.org/10.2313/NET-2011-07-1

  35. S. Thirumuruganathan, A Detailed Introduction to K-Nearest Neighbor (KNN) Algorithm. (2010). WWW Document. Available at: https://Saravananthirumuruganathan.Wordpress.Com/2010/05/17/a-Detailed-Introduction-to-k-Nearest-Neighbor-Knn-Algorithm/.

  36. S.K. Pal, S. Mitra, Multilayer perceptron, fuzzy sets, and classification. IEEE Trans. Neural Networks. 3(5), 683–697 (1992)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. L. Atlas, R. Cole, Y. Muthusamy, A. Lippman, J. Connor, D. Park, R.J. Marks, A performance comparison of trained multilayer perceptrons and trained classification trees. Proceedings of the IEEE (1990), 78(10), 1614–1619. https://doi.org/10.1109/5.58347

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. M. Mathews, M. Song, S. Shetty, R. Mckenzie, Detecting compromised nodes in wireless sensor networks (2007), pp. 273–278. https://doi.org/10.1109/SNPD.2007.538

  39. L.M. Belue, K.W. Bauer, Determining input features for multilayer perceptrons. Neurocomputing. 7(2), 111–121 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1016/0925-2312(94)E0053-T

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. B.A. Bagula, Z. Erasmus, Iot Emulation with Cooja, (March), 1–44 (2015). Retrieved from http://wireless.ictp.it/school_2015/presentations/firstweek/ICTP-Cooja-Presentation-version0.pdf

  41. A. Dunkels, B. Gronvall, T. Voigt, Contiki—a lightweight and flexible operating system for tiny networked sensors, in 29th Annual IEEE International Conference on Local Computer Networks (2004), pp. 455–462. https://doi.org/10.1109/LCN.2004.38

  42. A. Al-Fuqaha, M. Guizani, M. Mohammadi, M. Aledhari, M. Ayyash, Internet of Things: a survey on enabling technologies, protocols, and applications. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 17(4), 2347–2376 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1109/COMST.2015.2444095

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. M.N. Napiah, M.Y.I. Bin Idris, R. Ramli, I. Ahmedy, Compression header analyzer intrusion detection system (CHA—IDS) for 6LoWPAN communication protocol. IEEE Access 6, 16623–16638 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2798626

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. N. Moustafa, J. Slay, UNSW-NB15: a comprehensive data set for network intrusion detection systems (UNSW-NB15 network data set), in Military Communications and Information Systems Conference (MilCIS) (2015), pp. 1–6

    Google Scholar 

  45. M. Tavallaee, E. Bagheri, W. Lu, A.A. Ghorbani, A detailed analysis of the KDD CUP 99 data set, in 2009 IEEE Symposium on Computational Intelligence for Security and Defense Applications (2009), pp. 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/CISDA.2009.5356528

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The National Port Agency, Casablanca, Morocco

    Yassine Maleh

  2. Faculty of Science and Technology, Hassan 1st University, Settat, Morocco

    Yassine Maleh

Authors
  1. Yassine Maleh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yassine Maleh .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Computers and Artificial Intelligence, Information Technology Department, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt

    Aboul Ella Hassanien

  2. Faculty of Science, Helwan University, Cairo, Egypt

    Ashraf Darwish

  3. Center of Excellence in Earth Systems Modeling and Observations, Schmid College of Science and Technology, Chapman University, Orange, CA, USA

    Hesham El-Askary

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Maleh, Y. (2020). Machine Learning Techniques for IoT Intrusions Detection in Aerospace Cyber-Physical Systems. In: Hassanien, A., Darwish, A., El-Askary, H. (eds) Machine Learning and Data Mining in Aerospace Technology. Studies in Computational Intelligence, vol 836. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20212-5_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation