Performance Analysis of TARF For Wireless Sensor Network

IPASJ International Journal of Electronics & Communication (IIJEC)
Web Site: http://www.ipasj.org/IIJEC/IIJEC.htm

Email: editoriijec@ipasj.org
ISSN 2321-5984
A Publisher for Research Motivation........
Volume 3, Issue 4, April 2015
Performance Analysis of TARF for Wireless

Sensor Network
Harmanjit kaur1, Gunjan Ghandhi2
1.
M.Tech E.C.E, Lovely Professional University, jalandhar India
2.
Assistant Professor of E.C.E, Lovely Professional University, jalandhar India
ABSTRACT
In this paper we are study the multihop routing in wireless sensor network (WSNs) provides small protection against identity
deception through replaying routing information. An adversary may exploit this defect to launching various harmful and
devastating attacks against the routing protocols. Traditionally, cryptographic techniques at developing trust aware routing
protocols do not effectively addressing this problem. To secure wireless sensor network from several attacks exploiting the
replay of outing information, a Trust Aware routing framework is designed. TARF provides energy efficiency & dependable
route without tight time synchronization or geographical information.
1. INTRODUCTION
Wireless sensor network is a large network and consists from hundreds or thousands of sensor nodes. These sensor
nodes interacting directly with the environment by sensing physical parameters like pressure, temperature, humidity,
wind speed & direction etc [1]. Wireless sensor network cover wide range of application including forest fire, military
surveillance, healthcare monitoring, industry monitoring, etc [2]-[3]-[4]-[5]. Wireless sensor network are ideal
candidates for applications such as forest fire monitoring and military surveillance to report detected events of interest.
A sensor node sends a message wirelessly to a base station via a multipath with a narrow radio communication range
[6]. However the multihop routing of WSN often becomes the target of malicious attacks. An attacker may attack nodes
physically drop the message or misdirect message in routes, create traffic collision on each forwarded packet while data
transmission [7].Due to identity inception, an attacker can launch various malicious intrusions and un-identifiable
attacks which are hard to detect during the normal cause of transmission [8].This paper focuses on the kind of attacks
in which adversaries misdirect network traffic by identity deception through replaying routing information. Based on
identity deception the adversaries are capable of launching harmful & hard to detect attacks to misdirect traffic [9].
2. ASSUMPTIONS
One of the mainly fundamental functions of wireless sensor network is secure routing for data collection tasks. In data
collection task, with the help of other intermediate nodes a sensor node sends its data to a remote base station then
there could be more than one base station. Our direction finding approach is not affected by number of base stations.
An adversary may fake the identity of any legal node through replaying that nodes outgoing routing packets and
spoofing the acknowledgement packets, even remotely through a wormhole. Additionally to merely simplify the
introduction of TARF, assume no data cumulatively is needed.
Figure 1. Multihop routing for data collection of WSN
Page 32


ISSN 2321-5984
Our approach is to be applied to cluster based wireless sensor network with static clusters where data cumulatively by
clusters before being relayed [9] cluster based WSN allows for the great saving of bandwidth and energy through
aggregating data from child nodes and performing transmission and routing for children nodes. in cluster based WSNs
the cluster headers themselves form a sub network; after certain data arrive at a cluster header, the aggregated
information will be routed to a base station only though such a sub network consisting of the cluster headers. Our
framework can be functional to this sub network to achieve secure routing for cluster based WSNs. TARF may run on
cluster headers only and these communicate with their child nodes directly. Since a static cluster has known
relationship between a cluster header and its child nodes, even any link level security features may be further employed.
Finally, we assume a data packet has following fields: - the sender node id, the sender sequence number, next hopnode id, source id and source sequence number.
3. DESIGN OF TARF
TARF is implemented for securing the multihop routing in wireless sensor network against intruders misdirecting the
multihop routing by evaluating the trustworthiness of neighboring nodes. It identifies such intruders with their low
trustworthiness and routes data through paths circumventing those intruders to achieve satisfactory throughput. TARF
is also well adaptable, highly scalable and energy efficient. Before introducing the detailed design we first introduce
several necessary notations here.
Neighbor
For a node N, a neighbor of N is a node which is reachable from N with one hop transmission.
Energy cost- For a node N, the energy cost of a neighbor is the average energy cost to successfully deliver a unit sized
data packet with the neighbor as its next node, from N to the base station, energy cost is denoted as E in this paper.
Trust level- For a node N the trust level of a neighbor is a decimal no in [0,1] representing NS opinion of that
neighbors level of trustworthiness. Specifically, the trust level of the neighbor in Ns estimation of the probability that
this neighbor correctly delivers data received to the base station. That trust level is denoted as T throughout this paper .
3.1 Overview
For a TARF node N to route data packet to base station, node N decides to which neighboring node I should forward
the data packet. Node N decides the following three things:-1) a broadcast message sent to all the nodes regarding data
transfer 2) all shortest paths from source to destination 3) considering both the trustworthiness & energy efficiency, to
which neighbor node it should forward the data packet. Once the data packet is forward to that next hop node the
remaining task to deliver the data to the base station is fully delegated to it. Node N is totally unaware what type of
routing decision its next hop node makes. N maintains a neighborhood table with energy cost value and trust level
values for certain known neighbors. It is sometimes necessary to delete some neighbors entries to keep the acceptable
size of table. In addition, in TARF for data packet transmission there are two types of routing information that are need
to be exchanged: broadcast message from base station about the delivery of data & energy cost report message from
each node. Neither the message needs acknowledgment. A broadcasting message is broadcast to the whole network
from the base station. The freshness of the broadcasting message is ensured through its field of source sequence number
[9]. Another type of exchanged routing information is the energy cost report message from each node, which is only
broadcast to its neighbors once. In addition, any node receives such an energy cost reporting message will not forward
it. In WSN for each node N, to maintain such a neighborhood table with trust level values & energy cost values for
known neighbors two components run on node i.e. energy watcher & trust manager (figure.2).
Figure 2. Each node selects a next-hop node based on its neighborhood table, and broadcast its energy cost within its
neighborhood. To maintain this neighborhood table, Energy Watcher and Trust Manager on the node keep track of
related events (on the left) to record the energy cost and the trust level values of its neighbors.
Page 33


ISSN 2321-5984
Energy watcher is responsible for recording the energy cost value for each known neighbor. Based on Ns observation
of one hop transmission to reach its neighbors and energy cost report from these neighbors. A malicious node may
falsely report an extremely low energy to lure its neighbors into selecting this malicious node as their next hop node.
However many times these TARF enable neighbors eventually abandon that malicious next hop node based on its low
trustworthiness as tracked by trust manager. Mainly trust manager is responsible for tracking the trust level values of
neighbors based on network loop discovering and broadcast message from base station about the delivery of data. Once
N is able to decide its next hop neighbor according to its neighborhood table it sends its energy report message; it
broadcast to its all neighbors its energy cost to deliver a packet from the node to the base station. Energy cost report
serves as the input of its receivers, energy watcher.
3.2 Energy watcher
Another way of evaluating the routing behavior is the energy consumed while routing a data packet. Here we describe
how a node Ns energy watcher computes the energy cost ENB, for its neighbor b in Ns neighborhood table and how n
decides its own energy cost EN.
Before moving further we will clarify some notations. ENB is the average energy cost of successfully delivers a unit
sized data packet to the base station from the node N, with b a next hop node being responsible for the remaining route.
One hop retransmission may occur until the acknowledgement is received or the number of transmission reaches
certain threshold. When comparing ENB the cost caused by on hop retransmission should be included. Suppose N
decides its next ho node as A, after comparing the energy cost & trust level values. Then Ns energy cost is EN=ENA.
Denote EN
B as the average energy cost of successfully delivers a data packet to its neighbor b from n with one
hop.
3.3 Trust manager
The main function of trust manager is to decide the trust level of each neighbor based on the following events:discovery of network loops & broadcast from the base station about undelivered data packets. For each neighbor b of N;
TNb denotes the trust level of b in Ns neighborhood table. At the initial each neighbors is given a trust level as 0.5.
After any event occurs, the relevant neighbors trust level is updated. Trust model based on following assumption. 1)
After initialization WSNs is safe 2) Each node stores multiple routing paths to the base station after routing discovery.
For data transmission, nodes need to select routing paths that is say to next node. Lets take an example to illustrate
how trust manager works. A, B, C & D nodes all are honest nodes not compromised nodes. Node B as current next hop
node of node A & node B has an attacker node as its next hop node. Any data packet passing by node A will not arrive
at the base station because attacker drops every packet received.
Figure 3. A model for trust manager

After a while, node A discovers that the data packet it forwarded did not get delivered to the base station. Then the trust
manager on node A starts to degrade is current next hop node Bs trust value although, it is absolutely honest node.
When that trust level becomes too low then node A select its current next hop node C. in this way node A finds a
successful and better route.
How TARF implementation can be integrated with existing protocols, we incorporated TARF into a collection of tree
routing protocol (CTP). This CTP protocol is robust, efficient & reliable in a network with highly dynamic link
topology. In order to choose next hop node it quantifies link quality estimation.
4. Implementation
MATLAB is used to evaluate the performance of TARF and CTP. In our simulation model network consists from
random 35 nodes with 300*300 rectangular areas. The graph between the dead nodes and time shows that the dead
nodes in CTP are higher as compare to TARF, in fig 4. At 1000 CTP shows that it has large no of dead nodes as
compare with TARF. On the other side the data transmission in TARF is higher as compare to CTP, fig shows at 1000
Page 34

ISSN 2321-5984
data transmission rate of CTP is approx 4500 but TARF has data transmission rate higher. After some time the data
transmission rate of CTP becomes zero.
Figure 4. Graph shows the dead nodes and data transmission between TARF and CTP
Table no 1.
Parameter
Value
Number of nodes
35 nodes
Initial energy of node
0.5j
Transmitter electronics, ETX
50nj/bit
Receiver electronics, ERX
50nj/bit
Emp
0.0013pj/bit
Efs
10pj/bit
Area
300*300m
Eagg
5nj/bit
5. CONCLUSION & DISCUSSIONS

The most important area in field of technology and science is wireless sensor networks (WSNs). A trust aware routing
framework designed for WSN to secure multihop routing against harmful and devastating attacks. This mechanism is
currently in progress and the feature fast delivery of data is added by finding the paths with minimum cost in this
protocol. Data security is enhanced by the encryption and masking technique.
REFERENCES
[1]. Meenakshi Diwakar and Sushil Kumar, An Energy Efficient level based Clustering Routing protocol for Wireless
Sensor Networks International Journal Of Advanced Smart Sensor Network Systems ( IJASSN ), Vol 2, No.2,(
2012)
[2]. Son, B., Her, Y., Kim, J., A Design and Implementation of Forest-Fires Surveillance System based on Wireless
Sensor Networks for South Korea Mountains, IJCSNS International Journal of Computer Science and Network
Security, vol.6 No.9B, 124130, September 2006.
[3]. Mainwaring et al,Wireless Sensor Networks for Habitat Monitoring, International Workshop on Wireless Sensor
Networks and Applications (ACM), Sep. 2002,
[4]. Chintalapudi, K.; Fu, T.; Paek, J.; Kothari, N.; Rangwala, S.; Caffrey, J.; Govindan, R.; Johnson,E.; Masri, S.,
"Monitoring civil structures with a wireless sensor network," Internet Computing,IEEE , vol.10, no.2, pp. 26-34,
March-April 2006
[5]. Ian F. Akyildiz, Tommaso Melodia, Kaushik R. Chowdhury, A survey on wireless multimedia sensor networks,
The International Journal of Computer and Telecommunications Networking, Vol. 51 , Iss. 4, March 2007, pp.
921-960
Page 35


ISSN 2321-5984
[6]. Wood, A., Stankovic, J.: Denial of service in sensor networks. Computer 35(10), 5462(2002)
[7]. Guoxing Zhan, Weisong Shi, and Julia Deng, TARF: A Trust-Aware Routing Framework for Wireless Sensor
Networks Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg (2010)
[8]. C. Karlof and D. Wagner,"Secure routing in wireless sensor networks: attacks and countermeasures," in
Proceedings of the 1st IEEE International Workshop on Sensor Network Protocols and Applications, 2003
[9] Guoxing Zhan, Weisong Shi, Julia Deng, Design And Implementation Of Tarf: A Trust-Aware Routing
Framework For Wsns, IEEE transactions on dependable and secure computing, vol. 9, no. 2, (2012)
[10] G. Zhan, W. Shi, and J. Deng, Design, implementation and evaluation of tarf: A trust-aware routing framework
for dynamic wsns, http://mine.cs.wayne.edu/_guoxing/tarf.pdf, Wayne State University, Tech. Rep. MIST-TR2010-003, Oct. 2010.
Page 36

Performance Analysis of TARF For Wireless Sensor Network

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Performance Analysis of TARF For Wireless Sensor Network

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

IPASJ International Journal of Electronics & Communication (IIJEC)

Web Site: http://www.ipasj.org/IIJEC/IIJEC.htm

A Publisher for Research Motivation........

Volume 3, Issue 4, April 2015