Fenye Bao , Ing -Ray Chen, Moonjeong Chang Presented by: Scott Hackman 03 November 2011

1. Hierarchical Trust Management for Wireless Sensor Networks and Its Application to Trust-Based Routing FenyeBao, Ing-Ray Chen, Moonjeong Chang Presented by: Scott Hackman 03 November 2011 Scott Hackman – CS5214 – Modeling and Analysis

2. Introduction Cluster-based approach to creating a system for wireless routing better than shortest-distance and flood-based routing. Utilizes Social Networking and Quality of Service (QoS) techniques to model the behaviors of nodes to determine their reliability. Highly scalable due to being a cluster-based model. Scott Hackman – CS5214 – Modeling and Analysis

3. Wireless Sensor Network A Wireless Sensor Network (WSN) refers to a distributed network of autonomous sensors, each operating independently for the greater good of the network. A WSN is inherently unstable due to the independence of the Sensor Nodes (SN) and their different operating characteristics, including malicious and selfish activity. The WSN must take input from its SNs, evaluate their input, and determine the overall picture for what is happening across its network. Scott Hackman – CS5214 – Modeling and Analysis

4. Sensor Node • A SN monitors physical or environmental conditions, such as temperature, sound, vibration, pressure, motion, or pollutants. • A SN is can transmit, or forward information through multi-hop routing. • SNs have very limited resources: • Energy • Memory • Computational Power • May be susceptible to malicious attacks when their energy is low. Scott Hackman – CS5214 – Modeling and Analysis

5. Cluster Head A Cluster Head (CH) is a node that has been elected to take charge of a group of SNs. A CH receives direct input from each of its SNs. A CH is responsible for reporting to all of the other CHs in the system. CHs use more energy than SNs. Scott Hackman – CS5214 – Modeling and Analysis

6. Abnormal Node Behavior • Malicious Node • A node may be captured by the enemy at any point and start passing erroneous information or drop packets. • A node is more likely to become malicious if it has low energy or if it is surrounded by malicious nodes. • Selfish Node • A node may become selfish if its energy becomes low relative to its neighbors’. • “Selfish” can be thought of as “efficient”. If a node recognizes that its battery level is low and its neighbors have sufficient energy, it may start dropping packets so its neighbors pick up more of the burden. • The challenge becomes: How do we create a model such that malicious and selfish nodes can be identified and the WSN can adjust to these conditions to achieve a near-optimal performance? Scott Hackman – CS5214 – Modeling and Analysis

7. System Model • First, how do we determine which nodes are SNs and which nodes are CHs? • HEED (Hybrid energy-efficient, distributed) – The CH’s must have higher energy and have relative proximity. This will allow for higher energy consumption as well as optimal communications. • SNs will collect data and evaluate their peers. That information will be passed to their respective CHs. • The CHs will collect the SNs data and collect their own peer-to-peer (P2P) data from other CHs. • CHs will pass their data to a “CH Commander” for evaluation. Scott Hackman – CS5214 – Modeling and Analysis

8. How Does Trust Factor In? • Once the hierarchy is established, the evaluations completed by each node follow a trust scheme that allows for direct and indirect trust-based reporting. • Trust is established by evaluating directly, and indirectly, four different factors: • Energy • Measures competence • Less susceptible to malicious attacks • Unselfishness • Measures cooperativeness • Honesty • Whether or not the node is compromised based on intrusion detection capabilities in the system based on software-based code attestation • Intimacy • Relative degree of interaction experiences between two nodes Scott Hackman – CS5214 – Modeling and Analysis

9. Evaluation Process A weighted evaluation is performed and all four categories are factored into one, overall trust score: Tij(t) denotes the trust that node i has toward node j at time t. Scott Hackman – CS5214 – Modeling and Analysis

10. Peer-to-Peer Trust Evaluation P2P Trust Evaluation is performed between SNs and between CHs. When node i evaluates its trust toward node j, it snoops, or overhears enough data to provide direct observation. (It is assumed, notationally, that i and j are direct neighbors.) When i evaluates a node that is beyond its communication range, we refer to the node as node k. Nodeicannot directly evaluate k, so it must rely on the information passed to it by some node jand multiply that evaluation by a weight that correlates to i’s trust toward j. Scott Hackman – CS5214 – Modeling and Analysis

11. Peer-to-Peer Trust Evaluation This relationship is represented as follows: γ and α represent weights associated with trust decay. X represents one of the trust components. Scott Hackman – CS5214 – Modeling and Analysis

12. Peer-to-Peer Trust Factors - This measures the level of interaction experiences. It is computed by the number of interactions between node i and j over the maximum number of interactions between node i and any neighbor node over the time period [0, t]. - This refers to the belief of node i that node j is not compromised base on node i’s direct observations toward node j. It can be a binary quantity, 0 or 1, based on the result of Intrusion Detection System (IDS) deployed on node i about whether or not node j is compromised at time t. Scott Hackman – CS5214 – Modeling and Analysis

13. Peer-to-Peer Trust Factors - This indicates the percentage of node j’s remaining energy that node i directly observes at time t. Node i can overhear or even monitor node j’s packet transmission activities over the time period [0, t] to estimate this value. - This provides the degree of unselfishness of node j as evaluated by node i based on direct observations over [0, t]. Node i can apply overhearing and snooping techniques to detect selfish behaviors from node j. Scott Hackman – CS5214 – Modeling and Analysis

14. Other Parameters Defined α - Weight that represents a more instantaneous evaluation, since the higher α, the more weight is given to time t. β – Represents the impact of “indirect recommendations”. γ These parameters are used to adjust the trust decay over time. Lower factors cause a dampening effect that puts more weight on past events. This reduced high rates of change and may stabilize a system that receives sporadic, erroneous readings. Scott Hackman – CS5214 – Modeling and Analysis

15. CH-to-SN Trust Evaluation Once all calculations are complete for a given time period t, the CH applies statistical analysis principles to all Tij(t) values received to perform CH-to-SN trust evaluation toward node j. CH can also detect any outliers in the cluster to see if any good-mouthing or bad-mouthing is occurring. The CH can exclude a sensor or reroute with the information it obtains. Scott Hackman – CS5214 – Modeling and Analysis

16. Performance Model To create an objective model for comparison, a stochastic Petri net model is used. The Petri new model essentially computes the same values, but takes away the trust aspect. All values are known by the model at all times and routing data is computed accordingly. The underlying data of this model is used by the trust-based simulation, but each component can only see the data as defined by the initial conditions. Hence, best-case scenario, the trust-based approach can only perform as well as the objective Petri-net model. Scott Hackman – CS5214 – Modeling and Analysis

17. Petri Net Model Scott Hackman – CS5214 – Modeling and Analysis

18. Petri Net Model - Energy Energy represents the remaining energy in a node. A token will be expended from Energy when T_ENERGY triggers. Energy consumption rates: Scott Hackman – CS5214 – Modeling and Analysis

19. Petri Net Model - Selfishness • A node may become selfish to save energy. • An unselfish node may decide whether it will be selfish or not upon every time interval Ts according to its remaining energy and the number of unselfish neighbors. • A selfish node may become redeemed based on trust evaluation. Scott Hackman – CS5214 – Modeling and Analysis

20. Petri Net Model - Honesty A node becomes compromised when T_COMPRO fires and places a token in CN. Scott Hackman – CS5214 – Modeling and Analysis

21. Subjective Trust Evaluation If j is a selfish node (a/c), compromised node (b/c) or normal node (c/c) Scott Hackman – CS5214 – Modeling and Analysis

22. Objective Trust Evaluation Scott Hackman – CS5214 – Modeling and Analysis

23. Trust Evaluation Scott Hackman – CS5214 – Modeling and Analysis

24. Trust Evaluation Scott Hackman – CS5214 – Modeling and Analysis

25. Geographic Routing Scott Hackman – CS5214 – Modeling and Analysis

26. Geographic Routing Scott Hackman – CS5214 – Modeling and Analysis

27. Geographic Routing Scott Hackman – CS5214 – Modeling and Analysis

28. Geographic Routing Scott Hackman – CS5214 – Modeling and Analysis

29. Conclusion This model presents a very practical framework that allows for highly reliable transmissions with reduced overhead. Social networking and QoS methods allow peers to quantitatively rate their peers, drastically reducing the work needed to be done by the cluster head. This model remains highly scalable because of its hierarchical nature. Possible Future Work: Apply a genetic algorithm to this model and train it off of real-world data to achieve optimal weighting factors. Scott Hackman – CS5214 – Modeling and Analysis