240 likes | 251 Views
"This study by Maxim Raya, Mohammad Hossein Manshaei, Márk Félegyházi, Jean-Pierre Hubaux at CCS 2008 delves into addressing misbehavior in ad hoc networks, emphasizing ephemeral networks, A.B.M., packet forwarding, routing, large-scale, high mobility, and data dissemination. It discusses solutions like reputation systems, local revocation, and tools of the revocation trade to combat attacker nodes' abuse in game theory models, with application examples like VANET. The text presents various strategies for revocation, from abstaining to voting or self-sacrifice, considering costs and equilibrium theorems for optimal outcomes, including variables like number of voters, stages, and damage. Evaluation methods like RevoGame and TraNS are detailed, highlighting the social costs, false positives, and global ramifications of local revocations, concluding that local revocation strategies can effectively manage misbehavior in ephemeral networks with a cost-aware approach, fostering strategic balance among different options."
E N D
RevocationGames inEphemeral Networks Maxim Raya, Mohammad Hossein Manshaei, MárkFélegyházi, Jean-Pierre Hubaux CCS 2008
Misbehavior in Ad Hoc Networks Traditional ad hoc networks Ephemeral networks A B M • Packet forwarding • Routing • Large scale • High mobility • Data dissemination Solution to misbehavior: Reputation systems ?
Reputation vs. Local Revocation • Reputation systems: • Often coupled with routing/forwarding • Require long-term monitoring • Keep the misbehaving nodes in the system • Local Revocation • Fast and clear-cut reaction to misbehavior • Reported to the credential issuer • Can be repudiated
Tools of the Revocation Trade • Wait for: • Credential expiration • Central revocation • Vote with: • Fixed number of votes • Fixed fraction of nodes (e.g., majority) • Suicide: • Both the accusing and accused nodes are revoked Whichtool to use?
How much does it cost? • Nodes are selfish • Revocation costs • Attacks cause damage How to avoid the free rider problem? Game theory can help: models situations where the decisions of players affect eachother
Example: VANET • CA pre-establishes credentials offline • Each node has multiple changing pseudonyms • Pseudonyms are costly • Fraction of detectors =
Revocation Game • Key principle: Revoke only costly attackers • Strategies: • Abstain (A) • Vote (V): votes are needed • Self-sacrifice (S) • benign nodes, including detectors • attackers • Dynamic (sequential) game
Game with fixed costs 1 A S V A: Abstain S: Self-sacrifice V: Vote 2 2 A A S V S V 3 3 3 A S V A S V A S V Costof abstaining Cost of self-sacrifice Cost of voting All costs are in keys/message
Game withfixedcosts: Example 1 Equilibrium 1 A S V 2 2 Backward induction A A S V S V 3 3 3 A S V A S V A S V Assumptions:c > 1
Game withfixedcosts: Example 2 Equilibrium 1 A S V 2 2 A A S V S V 3 3 3 A S V A S V A S V Assumptions:v < c < 1, n = 2
Game with fixed costs: Equilibrium Theorem 1: For any given values of ni,nr,v, and c, the strategy of player i that results in a subgame-perfect equilibrium is: ni=Number of remaining nodes that can participate in the game nr =Number of remaining votes that is required to revoke Revocation is left to the end, doesn’t work in practice
Game with variable costs 1 A S V 2 2 A S V 3 S Number of stages Attack damage
Game with variable costs: Equilibrium Theorem 2:For any given values of ni,nr,v, and δ, the strategy of player i that results in a subgame-perfect equilibrium is: Revocation has to be quick
Optimal number of voters • Minimize: Abuse by attackers Duration of attack
Optimal number of voters • Minimize: Abuse by attackers Duration of attack Fraction of active players
RevoGame Estimation of parameters Choice of strategy
Evaluation • TraNS, ns2, Google Earth, Manhattan • 303 vehicles, average speed = 50 km/h • Fraction of detectors • Damage/stage • Cost of voting • False positives • 50 runs, 95 % confidence intervals
Global effect of local revocations How many benign nodes ignore an attacker?
False positives and abuse How many benign nodes ignore a benign node?
Conclusion • Local revocation is a viable mechanism for handling misbehavior in ephemeral networks • The choice of revocation strategies should depend on their costs • RevoGame achieves the elusive tradeoff between different strategies