Intrusion Detection Techniques in Mobile Networks
Intrusion Detection Techniques in Mobile Networks
Abstract: The rapid proliferation of wireless networks and mobile computing applications has changed the
landscape of network security. The recent denial of service attacks on major Internet sites have shown us, no open computer network is immune from intrusions. The wireless ad-hoc network is particularly vulnerable due to its features of open medium, dynamic changing topology, cooperative algorithms, lack of centralized monitoring and management point, and lack of a clear line of defense. The traditional way of protecting networks with firewalls and encryption software is no longer sufficient and effective. Many intrusion detection techniques have been developed on fixed wired networks but have been turned to be inapplicable in this new environment. We need to search for new architecture and mechanisms to protect wireless networks and mobile computing application. In this paper, we examine the vulnerabilities of wireless networks and say that we must include intrusion detection in the security architecture for mobile computing environment. We have showed such architecture and evaluated key mechanisms in this architecture such as applying mobile agents to intrusion detection, anomaly detection and misuse detection for mobile ad-hoc networks. Keywords Algorithm, Architecture, Computing Network, Dynamic Changing Topology, Wireless Networks.
I.
Introduction
In the last three years, the networking revolution has finally come of age. More than ever before, we see that the Internet is changing computing, as we know it. The possibilities and opportunities are limitless; unfortunately, so too are the risks and chances of malicious intrusions. It is very important that the security mechanisms of a system are designed so as to prevent unauthorized access to system resources and data. However, completely preventing breaches of security appear, at present, unrealistic. We can, however, try to detect these intrusion attempts so that action may be taken to repair the damage later. This field of research is called Intrusion Detection. 1.1 Computer Security and its Role One broad definition of a secure computer system is given by Garfinkel and Spafford as one that can be depended upon to behave as it is expected to. It is always a point of benefit to integrate security with dependability and how to obtain a dependable computing system. Dependability is the trustworthiness of a system and can be seen as the quality of the service a system offers. Integrating security and dependability can be done in various ways. One approach is to treat security as one characteristic of dependability on the same level as availability, reliability and safety as shown in the figure. Dependability
Availability Reliability Safety Security A narrower definition of security is the possibility for a system to protect objects with respect to confidentiality, authentication, integrity and non-repudiation. Confidentiality: Transforming data such that only authorized parties can decode it. Authentication: Proving or disproving someones or somethings claimed identity. Integrity checking: Ensuring that data cannot be modified without such modification being detectable Non repudiation: Proving that a source of some data did in fact send data that he might later deny sending
www.iosrjournals.org
38 | Page
1.2.2
Intentional Threat: An intentional threat is an action performed by an entity with the intention to violate security. Examples of attacks are interruption, modification, interception and fabrication of data as shown in the figure
Information Destination
b) Interruption
c) Interception
d) Modification
e) Fabrication
1.3
attacks. Firstly, the use of wireless links renders the network susceptible to attacks ranging from passive eavesdropping to active interfering as attacks on these links can from any direction and target at any node. This means that a wireless ad-hoc network will not have a clear line of defense, and every node has to be prepared for encounters with an adversary directly or indirectly. Secondly, mobile nodes are autonomous units that are capable of roaming independently. Since tracking down a particular mobile node in a global scale network cannot be done easily, attacks by compromised node from within the network are more damaging and harder to detect. Third, decision-making in mobile computing environment is sometimes decentralized and some wireless network algorithms rely on the cooperative participation of all nodes and the infrastructure. Furthermore, mobile computing has introduced new type of computational and communication activities that seldom appear in fixed or wired environment. Applications and services in a mobile wireless network can be a weak link as well. To summarize, a mobile wireless network is vulnerable due to its features of open medium, dynamic changing topology, cooperative algorithms, lack of centralized monitoring and management point, and lack of a clear line of defense.
www.iosrjournals.org
39 | Page
A computer system should provide confidentiality, integrity and assurance against denial of service. However, due to increased connectivity (especially on the Internet), and the vast spectrum of financial possibilities that are opening up, more and more systems are subject to attack by intruders. These subversion attempts try to exploit flaws in the operating system as well as in application programs and have resulted in spectacular incidents like the Internet Worm incident of 1988. There are two ways to handle subversion attempts. One way is to prevent subversion itself by building a completely secure system. We could, for example, require all users to identify and authenticate themselves; we could protect data by various cryptographic methods and very tight access control mechanisms. However this is not really feasible because: 1. In practice, it is not possible to build a completely secure system. Miller gives a compelling report on bugs in popular programs and operating systems that seems to indicate that (a) bug free software is still a dream and (b) no-one seems to want to make the effort to try to develop such software. Apart from the fact that we do not seem to be getting our money's worth when we buy software, there are also security implications when our E-mail software, for example, can be attacked. Designing and implementing a totally secure system is thus an extremely difficult task. 2. The vast installed base of systems worldwide guarantees that any transition to a secure system, (if it is ever developed) will be long in coming. 3. Cryptographic methods have their own problems. Passwords can be cracked, users can lose their passwords, and entire crypto-systems can be broken. 4. Even a truly secure system is vulnerable to abuse by insiders who abuse their privileges. 5. It has been seen that that the relationship between the level of access control and user efficiency is an inverse one, which means that the stricter the mechanisms, the lower the efficiency becomes. The history of security research has taught us a valuable lesson no matter how many intrusion prevention measures are inserted in a network, there are always some weak links that one could exploit to break in. We thus see that we are stuck with systems that have vulnerabilities for a while to come. If there are attacks on a system, we would like to detect them as soon as possible (preferably in real-time) and take appropriate action. This is essentially what an Intrusion Detection System (IDS) does. An IDS does not usually take preventive measures when an attack is detected; it is a reactive rather than pro-active agent. It plays the role of an informant rather than a police officer.
II.
In the last three years, the networking revolution has finally come of age. More than ever before, we see that the Internet is changing computing, as we know it. The possibilities and opportunities are limitless; unfortunately, so too are the risks and chances of malicious intrusions. It is very important that the security mechanisms of a system are designed so as to prevent unauthorized access to system resources and data. However, completely preventing breaches of security appear, at present, unrealistic. We can, however, try to detect these intrusion attempts so that action may be taken to repair the damage later. This field of research is called Intrusion Detection A simple firewall can no longer provide enough security as in the past. Today's corporations are drafting intricate security policies whose enforcement requires the use of multiple systems, both proactive and reactive (and often multi-layered and highly redundant). The premise behind intrusion detection systems is simple: Deploy a set of agents to inspect network traffic and look for the signatures of known network attacks. However, the evolution of network computing and the awesome availability of the Internet have complicated this concept somewhat. With the advent of Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) attacks, which are often launched from hundreds of separate sources, the traffic source no longer provides reliable temporal clues that an attack is in progress. Worse yet, the task of responding to such attacks is further complicated by the diversity of the source systems, and especially by the geographically distributed nature of most attacks. Intrusion detection techniques while often regarded as grossly experimental, the field of intrusion detection has matured a great deal to the point where it has secured a space in the network defense landscape alongside firewalls and virus protection systems. While the actual implementations tend to be fairly complex, and often proprietary, the concept behind intrusion detection is a surprisingly simple one: Inspect all network activity (both inbound and outbound) and identify suspicious patterns that could be evidence of a network or system attack.
We have developed a similar set of requirements along two themes: functional and performance requirements.
www.iosrjournals.org
42 | Page
III.
There have been a few approaches to anomaly intrusion detection systems, some of which are described below.
www.iosrjournals.org
43 | Page
Problem:
The problem with this is that some intrusion scenarios that are not described by the rules will not be flagged intrusive. Thus, if an event sequence A - B - C exists that is intrusive, but not listed in the rule base, it will be classified as unrecognized.
Solution:
The above problem can be partially solved by flagging any unknown events as intrusions (increasing the probability of false positives), or by flagging them as non-intrusive (thus increasing the probability of false negatives). In the normal case, however, an event is flagged intrusive if the left hand side of a rule is matched, but the right hand side is statistically very deviant from the prediction.
IV.
There has been significant research in misuse detection systems in the recent past. Some of these systems are explained in depth in this section.
V.
Intrusion detection for traditional, wired networks has been the topic of significant research over the past few years. A problem arises, however, when taking the research for wired networks and directly applying it to wireless networks. Key assumptions are made when designing IDS s for wired networks, such as the difficulty for an attacker to penetrate the physical security of the system, the amount of network bandwidth available to the IDS, etc. Specific problems faced when building IDS for a mobile network are addressed below: Lack of Physical Wires Bandwidth Issues Difficulty of Anomaly/Normality Distinction Secure Communication Between IDS Agents Lack of Centralized Access/Audit Point Possibility of a Node Being Compromised Difficulty In Obtaining Enough Audit Data
VI.
Conclusion
The diligent management of network security is essential to the operation of networks, regardless of whether they have segments or not. It is important to note that absolute security is an abstract concept it does not exist anywhere. All networks are vulnerable to insider or outsider attacks, and eavesdropping. No one wants to risk having the data exposed to the casual observer or open malicious mischief. Regardless of whether the network is wired or wireless, steps can and should always be taken to preserve network security and integrity. We have said that any secure network will have vulnerabilities that an adversary could exploit. This is especially true for wireless ad-hoc networks. Intrusion Detection can compliment intrusion prevention techniques (such as encryption, authentication, secure MAC, secure routing, etc.) to improve the network security. However new techniques must be developed to make intrusion detection work better for the wireless networks. We have shown that an architecture for better intrusion detection in wireless networks should be distributed and cooperative by applying Mobile Agents to the network and given few of the implemented approaches for intrusion detection.
References:
Sundaram A., "An Introduction to Intrusion Detection", http://www.acm.org/crossroads/xrds2-4/intrus.html [2]. Marti S., Giuli T.J., Lai K. Baker M., Mitigating Routing Misbehavior in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks, Proceedings of the Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking, MOBICOM 2000, pp 255-265. [3]. Andrew B.Smith, An Examination of an Intrusion Detection Architecture for eless Ad-Hoc Networks. [4]. C. Krugel , T.Toth. , Applying Mobile Agent Technology to Intrusion Detection
[1].
www.iosrjournals.org
45 | Page