partha mukherjee & sandip sen department of math & cs university of tulsa comparing...
Post on 15-Jan-2016
214 views
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Partha Mukherjee & Sandip Sen Department of Math & CS University of Tulsa Comparing Reputation Schemes for Detecting Malicious Nodes in Sensor Networks](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062804/56649d615503460f94a42a58/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Partha Mukherjee & Sandip Sen
Department of Math & CS
University of Tulsa
Comparing Reputation Schemes for Detecting Malicious Nodes in Sensor Networks
![Page 2: Partha Mukherjee & Sandip Sen Department of Math & CS University of Tulsa Comparing Reputation Schemes for Detecting Malicious Nodes in Sensor Networks](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062804/56649d615503460f94a42a58/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Motivation
ASSUMPTION : A network of sensors deployed for sensing data over a regionCorrelation between data sensed at different nodes
Correlation pattern may change over time Colluding malicious nodes may attempt to subvert the data
reported by the sensor network GOAL : Comparing the performances of the reputation
mechanisms used to detect malicious / erroneous nodes in the network
![Page 3: Partha Mukherjee & Sandip Sen Department of Math & CS University of Tulsa Comparing Reputation Schemes for Detecting Malicious Nodes in Sensor Networks](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062804/56649d615503460f94a42a58/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Sensor Networks
Monitor physical / environmental conditions Resource constraints Sensed/aggregated data reported back to Base station
Susceptible to security breaches/compromise
![Page 4: Partha Mukherjee & Sandip Sen Department of Math & CS University of Tulsa Comparing Reputation Schemes for Detecting Malicious Nodes in Sensor Networks](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062804/56649d615503460f94a42a58/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Sensor Network Organization
Sensor field consists of nodes laid out on a grid
Nodes organized in a hierarchy Assumption: time-varying data sensed by different nodes
are correlatedExample: Temperatures at different grid points over the
day
![Page 5: Partha Mukherjee & Sandip Sen Department of Math & CS University of Tulsa Comparing Reputation Schemes for Detecting Malicious Nodes in Sensor Networks](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062804/56649d615503460f94a42a58/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Schemes used to detect malicious nodes
Reinforcement learningQ-learning approach
Statistically grounded scheme:-reputation approach
Discount factors: weights on past / present experiences• Un-weighted
• Linear
• Exponential
Varying parameters:Patterns in the sensed dataDelay of onset of malicious data
![Page 6: Partha Mukherjee & Sandip Sen Department of Math & CS University of Tulsa Comparing Reputation Schemes for Detecting Malicious Nodes in Sensor Networks](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062804/56649d615503460f94a42a58/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Detecting Malicious Nodes
Collect sufficient data when sensor network is operating normally for mining correlation patterns Use neural networks to model correlation between data sensed by
siblings in the sensor node hierarchy The value sensed at any node is predicted from the values sensed by
its siblings Offline training of the nets using back-propagation
Use learning techniques to discover patterns Each malicious node adds a random offset in the range [0,]
to the reported value
![Page 7: Partha Mukherjee & Sandip Sen Department of Math & CS University of Tulsa Comparing Reputation Schemes for Detecting Malicious Nodes in Sensor Networks](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062804/56649d615503460f94a42a58/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Detecting Malicious Nodes
At each reporting time step error between actual and predicted data sensed by a node is calculated
This sequence of “errors” is used to incrementally update the reputation of the node
Node labeled malicious if reputation falls below threshold
![Page 8: Partha Mukherjee & Sandip Sen Department of Math & CS University of Tulsa Comparing Reputation Schemes for Detecting Malicious Nodes in Sensor Networks](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062804/56649d615503460f94a42a58/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Detecting Malicious nodes
Choose Reputation Threshold, For each node:
Compute relative error at time t : t
Compute error statistic : (t)Update Reputations :
Q-Learning : tQL = (1 - ). (t-1)
QL + . (t)
• Balance Factor : - Reputation : t
= (t + 1) / (t + t + 1)
• Cooperative Response : , Non-cooperative Response : – Un-weighted :– Linear : – Exponential : Exponential discount factor :
Node is malicious : if QL < or if <
€
t = (1− f (ε j ))j=1
t
∑ ,
€
t = f (ε j )j=1
t
∑
€
t = (1− f (ε j ))j=1
t
∑ .1
t − j +1,
€
t = f (ε j )j=1
t
∑ .1
t − j +1
€
t = (1− f (ε j ))j=1
t
∑ .λ t− j +1,
€
t = f (ε t ).λ t− j +1
j=1
t
∑
![Page 9: Partha Mukherjee & Sandip Sen Department of Math & CS University of Tulsa Comparing Reputation Schemes for Detecting Malicious Nodes in Sensor Networks](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062804/56649d615503460f94a42a58/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Experiment
Computation of sensed dataBased on generation function : g
Model fluctuationAdd Gaussian Noise : N
Variation of the sensed parameter is represented by the stochastic function ƒƒ(x,y,t) = g(x,y) + h(t) + N(0,)h : T [l, u]
![Page 10: Partha Mukherjee & Sandip Sen Department of Math & CS University of Tulsa Comparing Reputation Schemes for Detecting Malicious Nodes in Sensor Networks](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062804/56649d615503460f94a42a58/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Experiment
Considered two generation functions g to generate data patterns over the 85 node sensor networkg1: exp(-(x2 + y2))
g2 : (x + y) / 2
Considered error-free time interval setD = {0,10,20,30,40,50}
Considered exponential discount factor set = {0.2,0.4,0.6,0.8}
![Page 11: Partha Mukherjee & Sandip Sen Department of Math & CS University of Tulsa Comparing Reputation Schemes for Detecting Malicious Nodes in Sensor Networks](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062804/56649d615503460f94a42a58/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Q-learning and -reputation Schemes with Linear and Two Extreme Discount Factors
Q-learning scheme detects the erroneous nodes earlier than -reputation for distribution exp(-(x2 + y2))
![Page 12: Partha Mukherjee & Sandip Sen Department of Math & CS University of Tulsa Comparing Reputation Schemes for Detecting Malicious Nodes in Sensor Networks](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062804/56649d615503460f94a42a58/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Q-learning and -reputation Schemes with Linear and Two Extreme Discount Factors
Q-learning scheme detects the erroneous nodes earlier than -reputation for distribution (x + y)/2
![Page 13: Partha Mukherjee & Sandip Sen Department of Math & CS University of Tulsa Comparing Reputation Schemes for Detecting Malicious Nodes in Sensor Networks](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062804/56649d615503460f94a42a58/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Comparison Between -Reputation Schemes with Different discount factors
-reputation schemes of lower discount factors detects the erroneous nodes earlier for distribution exp(-(x2 + y2))
![Page 14: Partha Mukherjee & Sandip Sen Department of Math & CS University of Tulsa Comparing Reputation Schemes for Detecting Malicious Nodes in Sensor Networks](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062804/56649d615503460f94a42a58/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Comparison Between -Reputation Schemes with Different discount factors
-reputation schemes of lower discount factors detects the erroneous nodes earlier for distribution (x + y)/2
![Page 15: Partha Mukherjee & Sandip Sen Department of Math & CS University of Tulsa Comparing Reputation Schemes for Detecting Malicious Nodes in Sensor Networks](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062804/56649d615503460f94a42a58/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Conclusions Q-Learning is more efficient than β-Reputation for higher
values of initial error free time steps β-Reputation is more efficient than Q-learning to detect first
malicious node when the initial delay of attack is in between 0 to 4 iterations
Among β-Reputation schemes with discount factors, schemes with lower discount values exhibit higher efficiency. The un-weighted one ( = 1) is least efficient
The combination of learning and reputation management makes this scheme work with the following observationsAll faulty nodes are detected (No false positives)No normal node labeled faulty (No false negatives)
![Page 16: Partha Mukherjee & Sandip Sen Department of Math & CS University of Tulsa Comparing Reputation Schemes for Detecting Malicious Nodes in Sensor Networks](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062804/56649d615503460f94a42a58/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Future Work
Testing with different complex data patterns. Testing with different topologies. Exploring the possibility of developing more robust scheme. Handling sophisticated collusion.
Hierarchical structure : If nodes in higher level collude.
![Page 17: Partha Mukherjee & Sandip Sen Department of Math & CS University of Tulsa Comparing Reputation Schemes for Detecting Malicious Nodes in Sensor Networks](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062804/56649d615503460f94a42a58/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
THANK YOU