Final Dissertation
Final Dissertation
award of the Degree of Master of Technology In Department of computer science Engineering (With specialization in computer science)
Supervisor:
Mr. Sunil Dhankhar H.O.D, Department of CSE
SubmittedBy:
Sarita Badiwal Enroll No: 10ERWCS616
Candidates Declaration
I hereby declare that the work, which is being presented in the Dissertation, entitled Analysis of black hole attack on MANETs using different MANET routing protocols in partial fulfillment for the award of Degree of Master of Technology in Dept. of Computer Science Engineering with Specialization in Computer Science, and submitted to the Department of Computer Science Engineering, Rajasthan College of Engineering for Women, Rajasthan Technical University, is a record of my own investigations carried under the Guidance of Mr. Sunil Dhankhar, Department of Computer Science Engineering, Rajasthan College of Engineering for Women. I have not submitted the matter presented in this Dissertation anywhere for the award of any other Degree.
(Sarita Badiwal) Computer Science, Enrolment No.: 10ERWCS616 Rajasthan College of Engineering for women,
Mr. Sunil Dhankar Head of Department Dept. of Computer Science Engineering, Rajasthan College of Engineering for women. .
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the dissertation report entitled, Analysis of black hole attack on MANETs using different MANET routing protocols submitted by Sarita Badiwal in partial fulfillments for the requirements for the award of Master of Technology in Computer Science Engineering at Rajasthan College Of Engineering For Women, Jaipur (Rajasthan Technical University) is an authentic work carried out by them under my supervision and guidance.
Date:
Ms. Neeraj Choudhary (M. Tech Coordinator) Dept. of Computer Science Engineering, Rajasthan College of Engineering for Women
Date:
Mr. Sunil Dhankhar, (Head of Dept.) Dept. of Computer Science Rajasthan College of Engineering for women.
ABSTRACT
Wireless networks are gaining popularity to its peak today, as the users wants wireless connectivity irrespective of their geographic position. There is an increasing threat of attacks on the Mobile Adhoc Networks (MANET). Black hole attack is one of the security threat in which the traffic is redirected to such a node that actually does not exist in the network. Its an analogy to that of the black hole in the universe in which things disappear. The node presents itself in such a way to the node that it can attack others nodes and networks knowing that it has the shortest path [4]. MANETs must have a secure way for transmission and communication which is quite challenging and vital issue. In order to provide secure communication and transmission, researcher worked specifically on the security issues in MANETs, and many secure routing protocols and security measures within the networks were proposed. Previously the works done on security issues in MANET were based on reactive routing protocol like Ad Hoc On Demand Distance Vector (AODV). Different kinds of attacks were studied, and their effects were elaborated by stating how these attacks disrupt the performance of MANET. The scope of this thesis is to study the effects of Black hole attack in MANET using both Proactive routing protocol i.e. Optimized Link State Routing (OLSR) and Reactive routing protocol (DSR). Comparative analyses of Black hole attack for both protocols were taken into account. The impact of the attack on the performance of MANET is evaluated finding out which protocol is more vulnerable to the attack and how much is the impact of the attack on both protocols. The measurements were taken in the light of throughput, end to end delay and network load. Simulation is done in Optimized Network Engineering Tool (OPNET). Keywords: MANET, Black Hole, Routing protocols.
CONTENTS
S.No. Title Page No.
Acknowledgment Abstract Introduction 1.1 Problem Statement 1.2 Aims and Objectives 1.3 Research Questions Wireless Networks 2.1 Network 2.2 Why Wireless Network 2.3 IEEE Standard for Wireless Networks 2.4 Ad Hoc Networks 2.5 Applications of MANETs 2.6 Short Comings of Mobile Ad Hoc Networks 2.7 MANETs Routing Protocols 2.8 Classification of MANETs Routing Protocols 2.9 Dynamic Source Routing protocol Security issues in MANET 3.1 Flaws in MANET 3.2 Classification of Attacks Black Hole Attack 4.1 Black Hole Attack 4.2 Other Attacks on MANETS Research Methodology 5.1 Quantitative Approach 5.2 Qualitative Approach 5.3 Mixed Approach 5.4 Authors Approach 5.5 Research Design 5.6 Simulation Tool Performance Analysis 6.1 Performance Metrics 6.2 Simulation Tool 6.3 Modeling of Network 6.4 Collection of Results and Statistics 6.5 Simulation Setup Results 7.1 Packet End-to-End Delay 7.2 Throughput 7.3 Network Load Countermeasures 8.1 Mitigation Techniques against Black Hole Attack
i ii 1 1 2 2 3 3 3 5 5 7 7 7 8 9 14 14 16 18 18 20 24 24 24 24 24 24 25 27 27 27 27 28 28 30 30 32 34 37 37
9 10
39 40
1 INTRODUCTION
Mobile Ad Hoc Networks are autonomous and decentralized wireless systems. MANETs consist of mobile nodes that are free in moving in and out in the network. Nodes are the systems or devices i.e. mobile phone, laptop, personal digital assistance, MP3 player and personal computer that are participating in the network and are mobile. These nodes can act as host/router or both at same time. They can form arbitrary topologies depending on their connectivity with each other in the network. These nodes have the ability to configure themselves and because of their self configuration ability, they can be deployed urgently without the need of any infrastructure. Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) has MANET working group (WG) that is devoted for developing IP routing protocols. Routing protocols is one of the challenging and interesting research areas for researchers. Many routing protocols have been developed for MANETS. Security in Mobile Ad Hoc Network is the most important concern for the basic functionality of network. Availability of network services, confidentiality and integrity of the data can be achieved by assuring that security issues have been met. MANET often suffer from security attacks because of the its features like open medium, changing its topology dynamically, lack of central monitoring and management, cooperative algorithms and no clear defense mechanism. These factors have changed the battle field situation for the MANET against the security threats. MANET work without a centralized administration where node communicates with each other on the base of mutual trust. This characteristic makes MANET more vulnerable to be exploited by an attacker from inside the network. Wireless links also makes the MANET more susceptible to attacks which make it easier for the attacker to go inside the network and get access to the ongoing communication [9, 21]. Mobile nodes present within the range of wireless link can overhear and even participate in the network. MANETs must have a secure way for transmission and communication and this is quite challenging and vital issue as there is increasing threats of attack on the Mobile Network. Security is the cry of the day. In order to provide secure communication and transmission engineer must understand different types of attacks and their effects on the MANETs. Wormhole attack, Black hole attack, Sybil attack, flooding attack, routing table overflow attack, Denial of Service (DoS), selfish node misbehaving, impersonation attack are kind of attacks that a MANET can suffer from. MANET is more open to these kinds of attacks because communication is based on mutual trust between the nodes, there is no central point for network management, no authorization facility, vigorously changing topology and limited resources.
Previously the works done on security issues i.e. attacks (Black Hole attack) involved in MANET were based on reactive routing protocol like Ad Hoc On Demand Distance Vector (AODV). Black Hole attack is studied under the AODV routing protocol and its effects are elaborated by stating how these attacks disrupt the performance of MANET. Very little attention has been given to the fact to study the impact of Black Hole attack in MANET using both Reactive and Proactive protocols and to compare the vulnerability of both these protocols against the attack. There is a need to address both these types of protocols as well as the impacts of the attacks on the MANETs.
MANET. ive and Reactive routing protocols. protocols are more vulnerable to Black Hole attack. ent of Black Hole attack.
2 WIRELESS NETWORKS
Wireless networks are gaining popularity to its peak today, as the users wants wireless connectivity irrespective of their geographic position. Wireless Networks enable users to communicate and transfer data with each other without any wired medium between them. One of the reasons of the popularity of these networks is widely penetration of wireless devices. Wireless applications and devices mainly emphasize on Wireless Local Area Networks (WLANs). This has mainly two modes of operations, i.e. in the presence of Control Module (CM) also known as Base Stations and Ad Hoc connectivity where there is no Control Module. Ad Hoc networks do not depends on fixed infrastructure in order to carry out their operations. The operation mode of such network is stand alone, or may be attach with one or multiple points to provide internet and connectivity to cellular networks. These networks exhibits the same conventional problems of wireless communications i.e. bandwidth limitations, battery power, enhancement of transmission quality and coverage problems.
2.1 Network
Before going into the details of wireless network it is important to understand what a network is and different kind of networks available today. Any collection of devices/ computers connected with each other by means of communication channels that help the users to share resources and communicate with other users. There are two main types of network i.e. wired network and wireless network.
Wireless networks can be configured according to the need of the users. These can range from small number of users to large full infrastructure networks where the number of users is in thousands. Wireless networks are very useful for areas where the wire cannot be installed like hilly areas. On the basis of coverage area the wireless network can be divided into. a) Personal Area network b) Local Area Network c) Wide Area Network
Wireless networks can be configured according to the need of the users. These can range from small number of users to large full infrastructure networks where the number of users is in thousands. Wireless networks are very useful for areas where the wire cannot be installed like hilly areas. On the basis of coverage area the wireless network can be divided into. a) Personal Area network b) Local Area Network c) Wide Area Network
In static ad hoc networks the geographic location of the nodes or the stations are fixed. There is no mobility in the nodes of the networks, thats why they are known as static ad hoc networks.
VANET is a type of Mobile ad hoc network where vehicles are equipped with wireless and form a network without help of any infrastructure. The equipment is placed inside vehicles as well as on the road for providing access to other vehicles in order to form a network and communicate.
Mobile Ad hoc Network is the rapid growing technology from the past 20 years. The gain in their popularity is because of the ease of deployment, infrastructure less and their dynamic nature. MANETs created a new set of demands to be implemented and to provide efficient better end to end communication. MANETs works on TCP/IP structure to provide the means of communication between communicating work stations. Work stations are mobile and they have limited resources, therefore the traditional TCP/IP model needs to be refurbished or modified, in order to compensate the MANETs mobility to provide efficient functionality. Therefore the key research area for the researchers is Routing. Routing protocols in MANETs is a challenging and attractive tasks, researchers are giving tremendous amount of attention to this key area.
1) Reactive Protocols:
Reactive protocols also known as on demand driven reactive protocols. The fact they are known as reactive protocols is, they do not initiate route discovery by themselves, until they are requested, when a source node request to find a route. These protocols setup routes when demanded [3, 4]. When a node wants to communicate with another node in the network, and the source node dont have a route to the node it wants to communicate with, reactive routing protocols will establish a route for the source to destination node. Normally reactive protocols
(RREQ) to its neighboring nodes B, C and D as shown in the figure. However, node C also receives the same broadcast packets from nodes B and D. It then drops both of them and broadcasts the previously received RREQ packet to its neighbors. The other nodes follow the same procedure. When the packet reaches node G, it inserts its own address and reverses the route in the record and unicasts it back on the reversed path to the destination which is the originator of the RREQ. The destination node unicasts the best route (the one received first) and caches the other routes for future use. A route cache is maintained at every node so that, whenever a node receives a route request and finds a route for the destination node in its own cache, it sends a RREP packet itself instead of broadcasting it further.
Destination node F G Network link Route Request RREQ Route Reply RREP D C E Duplicate packet
A Source node
Figure 2.2: Route Discovery in DSR1 Route Maintenance The route maintenance phase is carried out whenever there is a broken link between two nodes. A broken link can be detected by a node by either passively monitoring in promiscuous mode or actively monitoring the link. As shown in Figure 2.3, when a link break (F-G) happens, a route error packet (RERR) is sent by the intermediate node back to the originating node. The source node
1
This figure is originally from Ad hoc Wireless Networks: Protocols and Systems [11]
re-initiates the route discovery procedure to find a new route to the destination. It also removes any route entries it may have in its cache to that destination node.
Destination node F G Broken link Selected route Route Error RERR D C E
A Source node
Figure 2.3: Route Maintenance in DSR2 DSR benefits from source routing since the intermediate nodes do not need to maintain upto-date routing information in order to route the packets that they receive. There is also no need for any periodic routing advertisement messages. However, as size of the network increases, the routing overhead increases since each packet has to carry the entire route to the destination along with it. The use of route caches is a good mechanism to reduce the propagation delay but overuse of the cache may result in poor performance [7]. Another issue of DSR is that whenever there is a link break, the RERR packet propagates to the original source, which in turn initiates a new route discovery process. The link is not repaired locally. Several optimizations to DSR have been proposed, such as non- propagating route requests (when sending RREQ, nodes set the hop limit to one preventing them from re-broadcasting), gratuitous route replies (when a node overhears a packet with its own address listed in the header, it sends a RREP to the originating node bypassing the preceding hops), etc. A detailed explanation of DSR optimizations can be found in [8].
2
This figure is originally from Ad hoc Wireless Networks: Protocols and Systems [11]
2) Proactive Protocols:
Another type of MANET routing protocols. Proactive routing protocols works the other way around as compared to reactive routing protocols. These protocols maintain constantly updated topology of the network. Every node in the network knows about the other node in advance keeping it simple, the whole network is known to all the nodes making that network. All the routing information is usually kept in number of different tables [6]. Whenever there is a change in the network topology, these tables are update according to the changes. The nodes exchange topology information with each other; they can have route information any time when they needed [6].
Hello
This control message is transmitted for sensing the neighbor and for Multi Point Distribution Relays (MPR) calculation.
3) Hybrid Protocols:
Hybrid protocols exploit the strengths of both reactive and proactive protocols, and combine them together to get better results. The network is divided into zones, and use different protocols in two different zones i.e. one protocol is used within zone, and the other protocol is used between them. Zone Routing Protocol (ZRP) is the example of Hybrid Routing Protocol. ZRP uses proactive mechanism for route establishment within the nodes neighborhood, and for communication amongst the neighborhood it takes the advantage of reactive protocols. These local neighborhoods are known as zones, and the protocol is named for the same reason as zone routing protocol. Each zone can have different size and each node may be within multiple overlapping zones. The size of zone is given by radius of length P, where P is number of hops to the perimeter of the zone [8].
join a network automatically if the network is in the radio range of the node, thus it can communicate with other nodes in the network. Due to no secure boundaries, MANET is more susceptible to attacks. The attacks may be passive or active, leakage of information, false message reply, denial of service or changing the data integrity. The links are compromised and are open to various link attacks. Attacks on the link interfere between the nodes and then invading the link, destroying the link after performing malicious behavior. There is no protection against attacks like firewalls or access control, which may result the vulnerability of MANET to attacks. Spoofing of nodes identity, data tempering, confidential information leakage and impersonating node are the results of such attacks when security is compromised [10].
shrinkable. Keeping this property of the MANET the protocols and all the services that a MANET provides must be adaptable to such changes.
where attacker can modify, fabricate and replays the massages. Attackers in passive attacks do not disrupt the normal operations of the network [13]. In Passive attack, the attacker listen to network in order to get information, what is going on in the network. It listens to the network in order to know and understand how the nodes are communicating with each other, how they are located in the network. Before the attacker launch an attack against the network, the attacker has enough information about the network that it can easily hijack and inject attack in the network.
an active data route element. At this stage it is now capable of conducting attack with the start of data transmission. This is an internal attack because node itself belongs to the data route. Internal attack is more vulnerable to defend against because of difficulty in detecting the internal misbehaving node. External Black hole attack External attacks physically stay outside of the network and deny access to network traffic or creating congestion in network or by disrupting the entire network. External attack can become a kind of internal attack when it take control of internal malicious node and control it to attack other nodes in MANET. External black hole attack can be summarized in following points 1. Malicious node detects the active route and notes the destination address. 2. Malicious node sends a route reply packet (RREP) including the destination address field spoofed to an unknown destination address. Hop count value is set to lowest values and the sequence number is set to the highest value. 3. Malicious node send RREP to the nearest available node which belongs to the active route. This can also be send directly to the data source node if route is available. 4. The RREP received by the nearest available node to the malicious node will relayed via the established inverse route to the data of source node. 5. The new information received in the route reply will allow the source node to update its routing table. 6. New route selected by source node for selecting data. 7. The malicious node will drop now all the data to which it belong in the route. C E B D F ARREP RREP DATA DATA DATA DROPPED Fig. 4.2 Black hole attack specification In AODV black hole attack the malicious node A first detect the active route in between the sender E and destination node D. The malicious node A then send the RREP which contains the spoofed destination address including small hop count and large sequence number than normal to node C. This node C forwards this RREP to the sender node E. Now this route is used by the sender to send the data and in this way data will arrive at the 20
malicious node. These data will then be dropped. In this way sender and destination node will be in no position any more to communicate in state of black hole attack.
disruption [16]. The selfish nodes can refuse by advertising non existing routes among its neighbor nodes or less optimal routes. The concern of the node is only to save and preserves it resources while the network and traffic disruption is the side effect of this behavior. The node can use the network when it needs to use it and after using the network it turn back to its silent mode. In the silent mode the selfish node is not visible to the network. The selfish node can sometime drop the packets. When the selfish node see that the packets need lot of resources, the selfish node is no longer interested in the packets it just simply drop the packets and do not forward it in the network.
In wormhole attack, the attacker gets themselves in strong strategic location in the network. They make the use of their location i.e. they have shortest path between the nodes as shown in the Fig. 4.5 above. They advertise their path letting the other nodes in the network to know they have the shortest path for the transmitting their data. The wormhole attacker creates a tunnel in order to records the ongoing communication and traffic at one network position and channels them to another position in the network [12].When the attacker nodes create a direct link between each other in the network. The wormhole attacker then receives packets at one end and transmits the packets to the other end of the network. When the attackers are in such position the attack is known as out of band wormhole [17]. The other type of wormhole attack is known as in band wormhole attack [17]. In this type of attack the attacker builds an overlay tunnel over the existing wireless medium. This attack is potentially very much harmful and is the most preferred choice for the attacker. 22
5 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Research methodology defines how the development work should be carried out in the form of research activity. Research methodology can be understand as a tool that is used to investigate some area, for which data is collected, analyzed and on the basis of the analysis conclusions are drawn. There are three types of research i.e. quantitative, qualitative and mixed approach as defined in [29].
2) Literature Study
Once the problem was identified the second phase is to review the state of the art. It is important to understand the basic and expertise regarding MANETs and Security Issues involve in MANETs. Literature study is conducted to develop a solid background for the research. Different simulation tools and their functionality are studied.
3) Building Simulation
The knowledge background developed in the literature phase is put together to develop and build simulation. Different scenarios are developed according to the requirements of the problems and are simulated.
4) Result Analysis
The last stage and important and most of the time is given to this stage. Results obtained from simulation are analyzed carefully and on the basis of analysis, conclusions are drawn.
Future Work
Wireless Ad-Hoc networks are widely used networks due to their flexible nature i.e. easy to deploy regardless of geographic constraints. These networks are exposed to both external and internal attacks as there is not centralized security mechanism. A lot of research work is still need in this area. We tried to discover and analyze the impact of Black Hole attack in MANETs using DSR and OLSR protocols. There is a need to analyze Black Hole attack in other MANETs routing protocols such as ADOV, TORA and GRP. Other types of attacks such as Wormhole, Jellyfish and Sybil attacks are needed to be studied in comparison with Black Hole attack. They can be categorized on the basis of how much they affect the performance of the network. Black Hole attack can also attack the other way around i.e. as Sleep Deprivation attack. The detection of this behavior of Black Hole attack as well as the elimination strategy for such behavior has to be carried out for further research.
References
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_area_network , last visited 12, Apr, 2010. [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_ad_hoc_network, last visited 12, Apr, 2010. [3] C.E.Perkins and E.M.Royer, Ad-Hoc On Demand Distance Vector Routing, Proceedings of the 2nd IEEE Workshop on Mobile Computing Systems and Applictions, pp.90-100, Feb, 1999. [4] C.M barushimana, A.Shahrabi, Comparative Study of Reactive and Proactive Routing Protocols Performance in Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks, Workshop on Advance Information Networking and Application, Vol. 2, pp. 679-684, May, 2003. [5] http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc3561.html [6] M.Abolhasan, T.Wysocki, E.Dutkiewicz, A Review of Routing Protocols for Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks, Telecommunication and Infromation Research Institute University of Wollongong, Australia, June, 2003. [7] http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc3626.html [8] http://www.netmeister.org/misc/zrp/zrp.html#SECTION00041000000000000000, last visited 12 Apr, 2010. [9] P.V.Jani, Security within Ad-Hoc Networks, Position Paper, PAMPAS Workshop, Sept. 16/17 2002. [10] M.Parsons and P.Ebinger, Performance Evaluation of the Impact of Attacks on mobile Ad-Hoc networks [11] D.B.Roy, R.Chaki and N.Chaki, A New Cluster-Based Wormhole Intrusion Detection Algorithm for Mobile Ad-Hoc Neworks, International Journal of Network Security and Its Application (IJNSA), Vol. 1, No.1, April, 2009. [12] N.Shanti, Lganesan and K.Ramar, Study of Different Attacks On Multicast Mobile Ad-Hoc Network. [13] C.Wei, L.Xiang, B.yuebin and G.Xiaopeng, A New Solution for Resisting Gray Hole Attack in Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks, Second International Conference on Communications and Networking in china, pp.366370, Aug, 2007. [14] S.Marti, T.J.Giuli, K.Lai, M.Baker, Mitigating Routing Misbehavior in Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks. [15] Zhu, C. Lee, M.J.Saadawi, T., RTT-Based Optimal Waiting time for Best Route Selection in Ad-Hoc Routing Protocols, IEEE Military Communications Conference, Vol. 2, pp. 1054-1059, Oct, 2003. [16] M.T.Refaei, V.Srivastava, L.Dasilva, M.Eltoweissy, A Reputation-Based Mechanism for Isolating Selfish nodes in Ad-Hoc Networks, Second Annual International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Systems, Networking and Services, pp.3-11, July, 2005. [17] V.Mahajan, M.Natue and A.Sethi, Analysis of Wormhole Intrusion attacks in MANETs, IEEE Military Communications Conference, pp. 1-7, Nov, 2008. [18] F.Stanjano, R.Anderson, The Resurrecting Duckling: Security Issues for Ubiquitous Computing, Vol. 35, pp. 22-26, Apr, 2002. [19] H.L.Nguyen,U.T.Nguyen, Study of Different Types of Attacks on Multicast in Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks, International Conference on Networking, Systems, Mobile Communications and Learning Technologies, Apr,2006.
[1].David B. Jhonson ,David A.Maltz and Josh Broch ,, DSR: The Dynamic Secure Routing protocol for Multi-Hop Wireless Adhoc Networks.http://www.monarch.cs.cmu.edu. [2] D. Djenouri, L. Khelladi and N. Badache, A Survey of Security Issues in Mobile Ad Hoc and Sensor Networks, IEEE Communication Surveys & Tutorials, Vol. 7, No. 4,4th Quarter 2005. [3] E. A. Mary Anita and V. Vasudevan, Black Hole attack Prevention in multicast routing Protocols For MANETs Using Certificate Chaining, IJCA, Vol.1, No.12, pp. 2229,2010 [4]Hesiri Weerasinghe and Huirong Fu, Member of IEEE, Preventing Cooperative Black Hole Attacks in Mobile Adhoc
Networks: Simulation ImplementationAndEvaluation,IJSEA,Vol2,No.3,July 2008. [5] Marti, S., Giuli, T. J., Lai, K., & Baker, M. (2000),Mitigating routing misbehavior in mobile ad-hoc networks, Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking (MobiCom), ISBN 158113-197-6, pp. 255-265. [6] Piyush Agrawal, R. K. Ghosh, Sajal K. Das, Cooperative Black andGray Hole Attacks in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks In Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Ubiquitous information management and communication, Pages 310-314, Suwon, Korea, 2008.