VANETs. Agenda System Model → What is VANETs? → Why VANETs? Threats Proposed Protocol → AOSA → SPCP → PARROTS Evaluation → Entropy → Anonymity Set → Tracking.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Wenmao Liu Harbin Institute of Technology China. Outline ITS & VANETs Security Issues and Solutions An autonomous architecture Conclusion.
Advertisements

Efficient Secure Aggregation in VANETs Maxim Raya, Adel Aziz, and Jean-Pierre Hubaux Laboratory for computer Communications and Applications (LCA) EPFL.
Chapter 14 – Authentication Applications
Authentication Applications. will consider authentication functions will consider authentication functions developed to support application-level authentication.
Akshat Sharma Samarth Shah
Self-Organized Anonymous Authentication in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks Julien Freudiger, Maxim Raya and Jean-Pierre Hubaux SECURECOMM, 2009.
Grid Computing, B. Wilkinson, 20045a.1 Security Continued.
 Introduction  Benefits of VANET  Different types of attacks and threats  Requirements and challenges  Security Architecture  Vehicular PKI.
Survey of Vehicular Network Security Jonathan Van Eenwyk.
Grid Security Infrastructure Tutorial Von Welch Distributed Systems Laboratory U. Of Chicago and Argonne National Laboratory.
Lecture 2: Security Rachana Ananthakrishnan Argonne National Lab.
Grid Security. Typical Grid Scenario Users Resources.
A Mobile Infrastructure Based VANET Routing Protocol in the Urban Environment School of Electronics Engineering and Computer Science, PKU, Beijing, China.
Mar 19, 2002Mårten Trolin1 This lecture On the assignment Certificates and key management SSL/TLS –Introduction –Phases –Commands.
Encryption and Firewalls Chapter 7. Learning Objectives Understand the role encryption plays in firewall architecture Know how digital certificates work.
Apr 2, 2002Mårten Trolin1 Previous lecture On the assignment Certificates and key management –Obtaining a certificate –Verifying a certificate –Certificate.
Public-key based. Public-key Techniques based Protocols –may use either weak or strong passwords –high computation complexity (Slow) –high deployment.
Mini-Project 2007 On Location Privacy in Vehicular Mix-Networks Julien Freudiger IC-29 Self-Organised Wireless and Sensor Networks Tutors: Maxim Raya Márk.
Securing Vehicular Commuinications – Assumptions, Requirements, and Principles P. Papadimitratos, EPFL, Lausanne, Switzerland V. Gligor, University of.
Apr 22, 2003Mårten Trolin1 Agenda Course high-lights – Symmetric and asymmetric cryptography – Digital signatures and MACs – Certificates – Protocols Interactive.
An Efficient and Spontaneous Privacy-Preserving Protocol for Secure Vehicular Communications Hu Xiong, Konstantin Beznosov, Zhiguang Qin, Matei Ripeanu.
An Authentication Service Against Dishonest Users in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks Edith Ngai, Michael R. Lyu, and Roland T. Chin IEEE Aerospace Conference, Big.
APPLAUS: A Privacy-Preserving Location Proof Updating System for Location-based Services Zhichao Zhu and Guohong Cao Department of Computer Science and.
TEMPLATE DESIGN © Privacy Issues of Vehicular Ad-hoc Networks (VANETs) Hang Dok and Ruben Echevarria Advisor: Dr. Huirong.
03 December 2003 Public Key Infrastructure and Authentication Mark Norman DCOCE Oxford University Computing Services.
Privacy of Location Information in Vehicular Ad Hoc Networks Walaa El-Din M. Moustafa.
Security Management.
1 CS 194: Distributed Systems Security Scott Shenker and Ion Stoica Computer Science Division Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences.
Overview of Digital Signatures Introduction To Networks and Communications (CS 555) Presented by Bharath Kongara.
Secure pseudonym generation for efficient broadcast authentication in VANETs Deepak N Ananth and Manjusha Gadiraju CSC / ECE 774.
Masud Hasan Secure Project 1. Secure It uses Digital Certificate combined with S/MIME capable clients to digitally sign and.
PARROTS Position Altered Random Repetition of Transportation Signature
Chapter 10: Authentication Guide to Computer Network Security.
Wireless and Security CSCI 5857: Encoding and Encryption.
Masud Hasan Secue VS Hushmail Project 2.
Privacy Issues in Vehicular Ad Hoc Networks.
Secure Socket Layer (SSL)
Guomin Yang et al. IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communication Vol. 6 No. 9 September
SSL / TLS in ITDS Arun Vishwanathan 23 rd Dec 2003.
An efficient secure distributed anonymous routing protocol for mobile and wireless ad hoc networks Authors: A. Boukerche, K. El-Khatib, L. Xu, L. Korba.
Lecture 23 Internet Authentication Applications modified from slides of Lawrie Brown.
1 Section 10.9 Internet Security Association and Key Management Protocol ISAKMP.
Practices in Security Bruhadeshwar Bezawada. Key Management Set of techniques and procedures supporting the establishment and maintenance of keying relationships.
E-commerce What are the relationships among: – Client (i.e. you) – Server – Bank – Certification authority Other things to consider: – How to set up your.
Chapter 23 Internet Authentication Applications Kerberos Overview Initially developed at MIT Software utility available in both the public domain and.
Shambhu Upadhyaya Security –Upper Layer Authentication Shambhu Upadhyaya Wireless Network Security CSE 566 (Lecture 10)
Digital Envelopes, Secure Socket Layer and Digital Certificates By: Anthony and James.
Secure Authentication Scheme with Anonymity for Wireless Communications Speaker : Hong-Ji Wei Date :
DIGITAL SIGNATURE. GOOD OLD DAYS VS. NOW GOOD OLD DAYS FILE WHATEVER YOU WANT – PUT ‘NA’ OR ‘-’ OR SCRATCH OUT FILE BACK DATED, FILE BLANK FORMS, FILE.
Authentication of Signaling in VoIP Applications Authors: Srinivasan et al. (MIT Campus of Anna University, India) Source: IJNS review paper Reporter:
Secure Communication between Set-top Box and Smart Card in DTV Broadcasting Authors: T. Jiang, Y. Hou and S. Zheng Source: IEEE Transactions on Consumer.
多媒體網路安全實驗室 Anonymous ID Signature Scheme with Provable Identity Date: Reporter :Chien-Wen Huang 出處: 2008 Second International Conference on Future.
Security Patterns for Web Services 02/03/05 Nelly A. Delessy.
Network Security Continued. Digital Signature You want to sign a document. Three conditions. – 1. The receiver can verify the identity of the sender.
P2 DAP-Sybil Attacks Detection in Vehicular Ad hoc Networks..
A Novel Privacy Preserving Authentication and Access Control Scheme for Pervasive Computing Environments Authors: Kui Ren, Wenjing Lou, Kwangjo Kim, and.
Lecture 9 Overview. Digital Signature Properties CS 450/650 Lecture 9: Digital Signatures 2 Unforgeable: Only the signer can produce his/her signature.
多媒體網路安全實驗室 A Secure Privacy-Preserving Roaming Protocol Based on Hierarchical Identity-Based Encryption for mobile Networks 作者 :Zhiguo Wan,Kui Ren,Bart.
VEHICULAR AD HOC NETWORKS GAURAV KORDE KAPIL SHARMA.
IP Security (IPSec) Matt Hermanson. What is IPSec? It is an extension to the Internet Protocol (IP) suite that creates an encrypted and secure conversation.
 Attacks and threats  Security challenge & Solution  Communication Infrastructure  The CA hierarchy  Vehicular Public Key  Certificates.
29/Jul/2009 Young Hoon Park.  M.Bellare, D.Micciancio, B.Warinschi, Foundations of Group Signatures: Formal Definitions, Simplified Requirements, and.
Port Based Network Access Control
Indian Institute Of Technology, Delhi Page 1 Enhancements in Security, Performance Modeling and Optimization in Vehicular Networks Ashwin Rao 2006SIY7513.
An Efficient and Practical Authenticated Communication Scheme for Vehicular Ad Hoc Networks Source: IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, Reviewing.
VANET.
VANET.
Connected and Autonomous Vehicle Cybersecurity Controller Area Network
Multi-party Authentication in Web Services
Developing Vehicular Data Cloud Services in the IoT Environment
Presentation transcript:

VANETs

Agenda System Model → What is VANETs? → Why VANETs? Threats Proposed Protocol → AOSA → SPCP → PARROTS Evaluation → Entropy → Anonymity Set → Tracking Probability Conclusion

System Model VANETs are wireless networks where vehicles are both network hosts and routers They are involved in traffic and safety management. By using V2I and V2Vcomuunicatiobs A typical VANETs consists of a. Road Side Units b. Administration and application servers c. Location based Service d. Proxy e. Vehicles f. Group leader (depending on the model) g. Registration authority Communication through road side units in VANETs can be used to track the location of the vehicles

System Model This is an example showing the vehicles communicating with the traffic lights

As the VANETs uses the identifiers to communicate to the RSU through which it communicates to the LBS, this may affect the privacy of the vehicle. As people with access to these identifiers may be : 1) Administrators of network infrastructure 2) Administrators of LBS 3) Big Brother (quoted by George) 4) Hackers The anonymity of the message sender is also under risk Threats

AOSA : Anonymous Online Service Access SPCP : Synchronized Pseudonym Changing Protocol PARROTS: Position Altered Random Repetition Of Transportation Signature Proposed Models

In this protocol the concept of frequently changing anonymous keys is proposed to protect anonymity and location privacy. It is based on the concept of forming groups among neighbors. This model is based on two phases First Phase : All the vehicles and service providers register with the RA Here the vehicles dynamically form groups and short group signatures are used to handle all the group keys and signatures All the group members listen to the group leaders notifications Group members join the group based on the verification of the credentials of the group leader AOSA

Second Phase: In this when a vehicle needs to access the service. The steps followed in this procedure are : Step 1 : V i sends to GL the signed service request, m, represented by V − i (m) and his digital certificate, C(V i ) encrypted by the service provider’s public key, S + and by a previously established secret key, GL i S. This is represented as GL i S [S + (V − i (m), C(V i ))] = Gl i S [Mv]. Step 2: GL decrypts Mv and adds the GL’s location, Loc GL, and GL's digital certificate C(GL), then signs the message with the GL’s private key, GL −, resulting in M GL = GL − (Mv), C(GL), Loc GL. GL then forwards to the roadside unit, RSU. i AOSA

Step 3 : RSU relays message to Proxy. Step 4 : Proxy verifies GL’s certificate and forwards request to App. Server, AS. Step 5: AS (a) decrypts the message with its private key, (b) verifies the vehicle's identity and (c) verifies the vehicle's authority for the service requested. If all is satisfactory, service provider sends a reply, R, which includes session key, AS i S for communication between the vehicle and service provider. This results in a reply message encrypted with the vehicle’s public key, then with GL’s public key, or GL + (V + gi (R)). AOSA

Step 6 : Proxy verifies AS’s certificate and forwards reply to RSU. Step 7: RSU forwards reply to GL. Step 8: Finally, the GL forwards reply to vehicle using group secret key. The final reply may be represented as Gl i S [V + gi (R)]. AOSA

Initialization Phase :In addition to pseudonyms public/private keys and public key certificates, Certification Authority (CA) generates and uploads each vehicle a set of parameters that is required. Group management is divided between the CA and the temporary group leaders. Group Formation Phase : If there is no group, then it forms its own group before it changes the current pseudonym. Group joining phase : Group leader verifies the members CA certificate. Member vehicles receive member secret key. SPCP

Signature of any group member can be verified using group public key. Group Operations Phase : Each member uses its temporary identification, group private key, group public key and public key certificate issued by CA. Leader and member listen to each other continuously. If not heard it is understood that the member left. Pseudonym Changing Phase : group leader decides the time to change the pseudonyms. SPCP

Step 1: V gi sends to GL the signed service request, m, represented by V − i (m) and V + gi (m), C(V i ) encrypted by the service provider’s public key, S + and by a previously established secret key, GL i S. This is represented as GL i S [S + (V − i (m), V + gi (m), C(V i ))] = Gl i S [Mv]. Step 2 :GL decrypts Mv and adds the GL’s location, Loc GL, C(GL), then signs the message with the GL’s private key, GL −, resulting in M GL = GL − (Mv), C(GL), Loc GL. GL then forwards to the roadside unit, RSU. Step 3: RSU relays message to Proxy. SPCP

Step 4 :Proxy verifies GL’s certificate and forwards request to App. Server, AS Step 5: AS (a) decrypts the message with its private key, (b) verifies the vehicle's identity and (c) verifies the vehicle's authority for the service requested. If all is satisfactory, service provider sends a reply, R, which includes session key, AS i S for communication between the vehicle and service provider. This results in a replymessage encrypted with the vehicle’s public key, then with GL’s public key, or GL + (V + gi (R)). Step 6 : Proxy verifies AS’s certificate and forwards reply to RSU. Step 7: RSU forwards reply to GL. SPCP

Step 8: Finally, the GL forwards reply to vehicle using group secret key. The final reply may be represented as Gl i S [V + gi (R)]. SPCP

The parrots model alters the perceived posotion, hence the term “position altered” has been given. Here the message is repeated hence, the term “random repetition” has been given. The term “transportation signature is formualted as pseudo-identity is used to track the vehicle. In this model term “parrotee” is given to a vehicle that is willing to obfuscate its location. The term “parroter” is given to a vehicle that is willing to obfuscate another vehicle's location. PARROTS

PARROTS

AOSA/SPCP PARROTS

Anonymity Set Size : sum of all anonymity set values. Tracking Probability :no of vehicles with anonymity set size = 1/ total no of vehicles. Entropy : entropy + math.log(anonymity[vi],2)/total number of vehicles EVALUATION

In AOSA and SPCP the group leaders location is not secured, but using the PARROTS the group leaders location can also be secured. AOSA is a good model and has its own advantages such as securing the other group members and also enhancing the unlink ability by using the group identifiers. In any of the above models it is quite evident that higher density gives higher privacy In PARROTS concept multiple parrotee's per parroter can be implemented. In PARROTS the anonymity set i.e. how many are using the same location id is difficult to find. Including user choice could be the future direction for PARROTS. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK

References 1.Weerasinghe H, Fu H, Leng S (2010) Anonymous service access for Vehicular Ad hoc Networks, 2010 Sixth International Conference on Information Assurance and Security (IAS), pp , Weerasinghe H, Fu H, Leng S, Zhu Y (2011) Enhancing unlink ability in Vehicular Ad Hoc Networks, 2011 IEEE International Conference on Intelligence and Security Informatics (ISI), pp Sampigethaya K, Huang L, Li M, Poovendran R, Matsuura K, and Sezaki K (2005) CARAVAN: Providing location privacy for VANET, Proceedings of the Workshop on Embedded Security in Cars (ESCAR) 4.Sampigethaya K, Li M, Huang L, Poovendran R (2007) AMOEBA: Robust Location Privacy Scheme for VANET, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol.25, no.8, pp George Corser,Fu H, Pondicherry N, Alnahash N PARROTS(Position Altered Random Repetition of Transportation signature).

Thanks for your help and support throughout the semester Dr.Huirong Fu And George Corser ACKNOOWLEDGMENTS