International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) – Volume 31 Number 1- January 2016
Providing Mutual Authentication and Light Weight
Encryption Schema in Mobile Adhoc Network
BhagyaRaju Sanchana1 , Chintada Sunil Kumar 2
1
Final M.Tech Student, 2Asst.professor
Dept of CSE, Sarada Institute of Science, Technology and Management (SISTAM), Srikakulam,
Andhra Pradesh
1,2
Abstract:
Mobile Ad Hoc Networks (MANETs) are
important wireless communication paradigms. The
mobile and infrastructure less nature of MANETs
makes them suitable for collecting emergency data
in disastrous areas and performing mission-critical
communication in battle fields. A critical issue in
MANETs is how to reduce energy consumption and
maintain a longer life time for mobile nodes. In this
paper we are proposed mainly two concepts for
performing mutual authentication of each user in the
mobile adhoc network and other concept for
performing encryption and decryption of
transferring data. Before performing encryption and
decryption of data each user will perform the mutual
authentication. After that each node will exchange
data using data exchange protocol. By considering
those concepts we can provide less time complexity
for data encryption process and also improve
network efficiency. Because by implementing
proposed system we can provide light weight
encryption process and also reduce number of keys
usage in the network. In this paper we can also
implement the mutual authentication of each user in
the network. By implementing this concept we can
reduce time complexity for authentication each node
in the mobile adnoc network. So that by
implementing those concepts we can reduce number
of keys and also improve efficiency of mutual
authentication of node.
Keywords: Encryption and Decryption, Symmetric
keys, mutual authentication, security, data exchange
I.
Introduction
MOBILE Ad Hoc Networks (MANETs)
are very important wireless communication. Mobile
ad hoc networks (MANETs) is an infrastructure less,
dynamic network consisting of collection of wireless
mobile nodes that communicates with each other
without the use of any centralized authority. Mobile
ad hoc network is now becoming interesting
research topic in the area of wireless communication.
Vehicles in the particular range from a network to
communicate with each other without any need of a
base station. MANET provide comfort and safety
applications such as lane changing, traffic sign
violation, weather information, road condition,
ISSN: 2231-5381
location of restaurants or fuel station, parking and
interactive communication such as internet access
[2]. As shown in figure 1 MANET provides multiple
services, energy is required. Thus, energy saving is
an important issue in Mobile ad hoc network. There
are several energy efficient schemes used to
overcome this problem [3], [4] and [5]. Many
researchers show that network coding can reduce
energy consumption in MANET with less
transmission [6]. Network coding can be defined as
coding performed at a node in a network, where
coding means casual mapping from inputs to outputs.
Idea behind it is to mix and forward data to output
links [7]. A node in the network encodes the packet
with the network coding and then forwards it to
another node. Network coding requires less energy
for this process of encoding. Figure 2 clarify the use
of network coding in ad hoc network. Suppose there
are six nodes forming hexagon and transmission
range of each node reaches to its right and left
neighbor. Each message would require four
transmissions without network coding. When
network coding is used for three messages the total
number of nine transmissions are needed, i.e., three
transmissions per message. It would save ¼ energy
without considering energy required for the process
of encryption and decryption.
Mobile ad hoc network is the network which
provides seamless connectivity between devices
when they move with their neighbor wireless nodes.
For sending packets it does not have any access
point and routers. In a MANET each device is free
to move independently, and so it can frequently
change its link at any time. MANETs nodes can
communicate directly between each other so that
MANETs can emerged as a dominant mode of
communication at any place. Some of the
characteristics of MANETs includes infrastructureless network, dynamic network topology and selforganization etc. In ad hoc networks all nodes are
responsible for running the network services
meaning that every nodes are also works as a router
to forward the networks packets to their destination.
Data communication in a MANET differs from that
of wired networks in different aspects. The
bandwidth availability and computing resources like
hardware and battery power are restricted in mobile
ad hoc networks. An ad hoc network is a
decentralized type of wireless network. The ad hoc
http://www.ijettjournal.org
Page 37
International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) – Volume 31 Number 1- January 2016
network is the network that links with each other for
communication having fixed infrastructure. It is
made up of multiple nodes connected by links. A
MANET can be created either by mobile nodes or by
both static and dynamic mobile nodes. Mobile ad
hoc network is created by cluster of is a form a
Mobile Ad Hoc Network (MANET) is formed.
II.
RELATED WORK
There are two main keying protocols that were
proposed in the past to reduce the number of stored
keys in each sensor in the network. We refer to these
two protocols as the probabilistic keying protocol
and the grid keying protocol. In the probabilistic
keying protocol [4], each sensor in the network
stores a small number of keys that are selected at
random from a large set of keys. When two adjacent
sensors need to exchange data messages, the two
sensors identify which keys they have in common
then use a combination of their common keys as a
symmetric key to encrypt and decrypt their
exchanged data messages. Clearly, this protocol can
probabilistically defend against eavesdropping.
Unfortunately, the probabilistic keying protocol
suffers from the following problem. The stored keys
in any sensor x are independent of the identity of
sensor x and so these keys cannot be used to
authenticate sensor x to any other sensor in the
network. In other word, the probabilistic protocol
cannot defend against impersonation.
In the grid keying protocol [5], [6], [7], and [8], each
sensor is assigned an identifier which is the
coordinates of a distinct node in a two-dimensional
grid. Also each symmetric key is assigned an
identifier which is the coordinates of a distinct node
in two-dimensional grid. Then a sensor x stores a
symmetric key K if the identifiers of x and K satisfy
certain given relation. When two adjacent sensors
need to exchange data messages, the two sensors
identify which keys they have in common then use a
combination of their common keys as a symmetric
key to encrypt and decrypt their exchanged data
messages. The grid keying protocol has two
advantages (over the probabilistic protocol). First,
this protocol can defend against impersonation
(unlike the probabilistic protocol) and can defend
against eavesdropping (like the probabilistic
protocol). Second, each sensor in this protocol needs
to store only O(log n) symmetric keys, where n is
the number of sensors in the network. Unfortunately,
it turns out that the grid keying protocol is
vulnerable to collusion. Specifically, a small gang of
adversarial sensors in the network can pool their
stored keys together and use the pooled keys to
decrypt all the exchanged data messages in the
sensor network. This situation raises the following
important questions: Is it possible to design a keying
protocol, where each sensor stores less than n-1
ISSN: 2231-5381
symmetric keys and yet the protocol is
deterministically secure against impersonation,
eavesdropping, and collusion.
The remaining concepts of this paper are as
follows. Section 2 is to specify related work of our
proposed system. Section 3 implementation
procedure of our proposed system. Section 4 is
conclusion of our proposed system. Section 5 is
reference of can be specify in this paper.
III.
PROPOSED SYSTEM
In this paper, system describe in MANET Energy
saving & security in data is an important issue in
MANET. This can be solved by network coding
which might reduce energy consumption also by
using less transmission this system proposed data
sharing
using
data
encryption
method.
Encryption/decryption cost along with transmission
time is factor of energy consumption in wireless
network. In MANET unreliable wireless media,
mobility, lack of infrastructure is a big challenge.
Let n denote the number of sensors in our network.
Without loss of generality, we assume that n is an
odd positive integer. Each sensor in the network has
a unique identifier in the range 0 : : : n-1. We use ix
and iy to denote the identifiers of sensors x and y,
respectively, in this network. Each two sensors, say
sensors x and y, share a symmetric key denoted Kx;y
or Ky;x. Only the two sensors x and y know their
shared key Kx;y. And if sensors x and y ever become
neighbours in the network, then they can use their
shared symmetric key Kx;y to perform two functions:
1) Mutual Authentication: Sensor x authenticates
sensor y, and sensor y authenticates sensor x.
2) Confidential Data Exchange: Encrypt and later
decrypt all the exchanged data messages between x
and y. (Note that sensors x and y can become
neighbours in the network in two occasions. First,
the two sensors x and y could be mobile and their
movements cause them to become adjacent to one
another. Second, the two sensors could be stationary
and they are deployed adjacent to one another.)
In the remainder of this section, we show that if
the shared symmetric keys are designed to have a
“special structure”, then each sensor needs to store
only (n+1)=2 shared symmetric keys. But before we
present the special structure of the shared keys , we
need to introduce two new concepts: “universal
keys” and “a circular relation, named below, over
the sensor identifiers”.
Each sensor x in the network stores a
symmetric key, called the universal key of sensor x.
The universal key of sensor x, denoted ux, is known
only to sensor x.
Let ix and iy be two distinct sensor identifiers.
(Recall that both ix and iy are in the range 0 : : : n-1,
where n is the odd number of sensors in the sensor
http://www.ijettjournal.org
Page 38
International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) – Volume 31 Number 1- January 2016
network.) Identifier ix is said to be below identifier
iy iff exactly one of the following two conditions
holds:
1) ix < iy and (iy - ix) < n=2
2) ix > iy and (ix - iy) > n=2
The below relation is better explained by an example.
Consider the case where n = 5. In this case, the
sensor identifiers s are 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4, and we have:
_ Identifier 0 is below identifiers 1 and 2.
_ Identifier 1 is below identifiers 2 and 3.
_ Identifier 2 is below identifiers 3 and 4.
_ Identifier 3 is below identifiers 4 and 0.
_ Identifier 4 is below identifiers 0 and 1
A MUTUAL AUTHENTICATION PROTOCOL:
Before the sensors are deployed in a network,
each sensor x is supplied with the following items:
1) One distinct identifier ix in the range 0 : : : n-1
2) One universal key ux
3) (n-1)/2 symmetric keys Kx;y = H(ix | uy) each of
which is shared between sensor x and another sensor
y, where ix is below iy After every sensor is
supplied with these items, the sensors are deployed
in random locations in the network.
Now if two sensors x and y happen to become
adjacent to one another, then these two sensors need
to execute a mutual authentication protocol so that
sensor x proves to sensor y that it is indeed sensor x
and sensor y proves to sensor x that it is indeed
sensor y.
The mutual authentication protocol consists of the
following six steps.
Step 1: Sensor x selects a random nonce nx and
sends a hello message that is received by sensor y.
Step 6: Sensor y computes H(ix | iy | ny | Kx;y ) and
compares it with the received H(ix | iy | ny | Kx;y). If
they are equal, then y concludes that the sensor
claiming to be sensor x is indeed sensor x. Otherwise,
no conclusion can be reached.
A DATA EXCHANGE PROTOCOL:
After two adjacent sensors x and y have
authenticated one another using the mutual
authentication protocol described in the previous
section, sensors x and y can now start exchanging
data messages according to the following data
exchange protocol. (Recall that nx and ny are the
two nonces that were selected at random by sensors
x and y, respectively, in the mutual authentication
protocol.)
Step 1: Sensor x concatenates the nonce ny with the
text of the data message to be sent, encrypts the
concatenation using the symmetric key Kx;y, and
sends the result in a data message to sensor y.
x------> y : data(ix, iy, Kx;y(ny | text))
Step 2: Sensor y concatenates the nonce nx with the
text of the data message to be sent, encrypts the
concatenation using the symmetric key Kx;y, and
sends the result in a data message to sensor x.
x <----- y : data(iy, ix,Kx;y (nx | text))
Sensors x and y can repeat Steps 1 and 2 any
number of times to exchange data between
themselves.
x------> y : hello(ix; nx)
Step 2: Sensor y selects a random nonce ny and
sends a hello message that is received by sensor x.
x <----- y : hello(iy; ny)
Step 3: Sensor x determines whether ix is below iy.
Then it either fetches Kx;y from its memory or
computes it. Finally, sensor x sends a verify message
to sensor y.
x------> y : verify(ix, iy, H(ix | iy | ny | Kx;y))
Step 4: Sensor y determines whether iy is below ix.
Then it either fetches Kx;y from its memory or
computes it. Finally, sensor y sends a verify message
to sensor x.
X<------ y : verify(iy, ix, H(iy | ix | nx | Kx;y))
Step 5: Sensor x computes H(iy | ix | nx | Kx;y) and
compares it with the received H(iy | ix | nx | Kx;y). If
ISSN: 2231-5381
they are equal, then x concludes that the sensor
claiming to be sensor y is indeed sensor y. Otherwise,
no conclusion can be reached.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
Typically, each sensor in a sensor network
with n sensors needs to store n-1 shared symmetric
keys to communicate securely with each other. Thus,
the number of shared symmetric keys stored in the
sensor network is n(n-1). However, the optimal
number of shared symmetric keys for secure
communication, theoretically, isn2_ = n(n-1)=2.
Although there have been many approaches that
attempt to reduce the number of shared symmetric
keys, they lead to a loss of security: they are all
vulnerable to collusion. In this paper, we show the
protocols for sensor networks, that needs to store
only (n + 1)=2 shared symmetric keys to each sensor.
The number of shared symmetric keys stored in a
sensor network with n sensors is n(n + 1)=2, which
is close to the optimal number of shared symmetric
keys for any key distribution scheme that is not
vulnerable to collusion. It may be noted that in
addition to the low number of keys stored, and the
http://www.ijettjournal.org
Page 39
International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) – Volume 31 Number 1- January 2016
ability to resist collusion between sensors, our
keying protocol has two further advantages. Firstly,
it is uniform: we store the same number of keys in
each sensor. Secondly, it is computationally cheap,
and thus suitable for a low-power computer such as
a sensor: when two sensors are adjacent to each
other, the computation of a shared symmetric key
requires only hashing, which is a cheap computation
and can be done fast. As our protocol has many
desirable properties, such as efficiency, uniformity
and security, we call this protocol the best protocol
for sensor networks.
V.
REFERENCES
[1 ]. A. Rahim, I. Ahmad, Z. S. Khan, M. Sher, M. Shoaib, A.
Javed, R. Mahmood “A Comparative Study of Mobile And
Vehicular Ad Hoc Networks,” International Journal of Recent
Trends in Engineering, Vol 2, No. 4, November 2009.
[2]. S. Singh, C. Raghavendra, and J. Stepanek, „„PowerAware
broadcasting in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks,
in Proc. IEEE
PIMRC, 1999, pp. 1-10.
[3]. J. Wieselthier, G. Nguyen, and A. Ephremides, Algorithms
for Energy-Efficient Multicasting in Static Ad Hoc Wireless
Networks,
Mobile Network. Appl., vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 251-263,
June 2001.
[4]. B. Chen, K. Jamieson, H. Balakrishnan, and R. Morris, Span:
An Energy-Efficient Coordination Algorithm for Topology
Maintenance in Ad Hoc Wireless Networks
Wireless Network,
vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 481.
[5]. R. Ahlswede, N. Cai, S.-Y.R. Li, and R.W. Yeung, Network
Information Flow,
IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 46, no. 4, pp.
1204-1216,
July
2000.
[6]. J.P. Vilela, L. Lima, and J. Barros, „„Lightweight Security for
Network Coding,
in Proc. IEEE ICC, May 2008, pp. 17501754.
Cryptographic Algorithms and Security Protocols,’’ IEEE Trans.
Mobile Comput., vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 128-143, Feb. 2006.
BIOGRAPHIES:
BhagyaRaju Sanchana
is student in M.Tech
(CSE) in Sarada Institute
of Science Technology
and
Management,
Srikakulam,
Andhra
Pradesh. He has received
his
B.Tech(CSE)
GMRIT,
Rajam,
Srikakulam.
His
interesting areas are network security, image
processing and web technologies.
Chintada Sunil Kumar
working as a Asst
Professor of CSE in
Sarada
Institute
of
Science,
Technology
and
Management
(SISTAM), Srikakulam,
Andhra Pradesh. He
received his M.Tech
(CSE)
from
Jntuk,
Kakinada.
Andhra
Pradesh. His interest
research areas are Database management
sysytems,Computer Architecture, Image Processing,
Computer Networks, Distributed Systems. He
published 4 international journals and he was
attended number of conferences and workshops.
[7] .L. Eschenauer and V. D. Gligor, “A key-management scheme
for distributed sensor networks,” in Proceedings of the 9th ACM
conference on Computer and communications
security (CCS), 2002, pp. 41–47.
[8] L. Gong and D. J. Wheeler, “A matrix key-distribution
scheme,” Journal of Cryptology, vol. 2, pp. 51–59, January 1990.
[9] S. S. Kulkarni, M. G. Gouda, and A. Arora, “Secret
instantiation in ad-hoc networks,” Special Issue of Elsevier
Journal of Computer Communications on Dependable Wireless
Sensor Networks, vol. 29, pp. 200–215, 2005.
[10] A. Aiyer, L. Alvisi, and M. Gouda, “Key grids: A protocol
family for assigning symmetric keys,” in Proceedings of IEEE
International Conference on Network Protocols (ICNP), 2006, pp.
178–186.
[11] E. S. Elmallah, M. G. Gouda, and S. S. Kulkarni,
“Logarithmic keying,” ACM Transactions on Autonomic
[12]. Systems, vol. 3, pp. 18:1–18:18, December 2008.
[13]. L. Li, R. Ramjee, M. Buddhikot, and S.Miller, ‘‘Network
Coding- Based Broadcast in Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks,’’ in Proc.
IEEE INFOCOM, 2007, pp. 1739-1747.
[14] N.R. Potlapally, S. Ravi,A.Raghunathan, andN.K. Jha,
‘‘AStudy of the Energy Consumption Characteristics of
ISSN: 2231-5381
http://www.ijettjournal.org
Page 40