Wireless Netw
DOI 10.1007/s11276-015-1191-x
Pair-wise key agreement and hop-by-hop authentication protocol
for MANET
K. Shanthi1 • D. Murugan2
 Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016
Abstract In MANET, the most important issues are
authentication of data packet in the network. Due to the hostile
environment, security is major concern while data transmis-
sion. In order to overcome this issue, in this paper, we propose
hop by hop group key agreement protocol where each node
generates pairwise key for encryption of data. The session key is
generated only between the nodes which is carrying the data
packet for transmission. The key exchange can be performed
between two nodes before data transmission. Ni constructs
Lagrange interpolating polynomial with degree n - 1. Each Ni
broadcasts the generated polynomial. After that, group key
agreement protocol is used to provide complete authentication
for those nodes. Simulation result show that the proposed
algorithm is efficient as it minimizes bandwidth usage, delay,
packet drop, and overhead, as well as fulfills all primary secu-
rity concern, with improved delivery ratio and throughput.
Keywords MANET  Encryption  Pairwise key 
Authentication
1 Introduction
1.1 Mobile Ad hoc network (MANET)
A Mobile Ad hoc Network (MANET) is a combination of
self-organized mobile nodes which are associated with
& K. Shanthi
shanthik0804@gmail.com
1
Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Cape
Institute of Technology, Thirunelveli, Tamilnadu, India
2
Department of Computer Science and Engineering,
Manonmaniam Sundaranar University, Tirunelveli 627012,
India
relatively low bandwidth wireless links. Each node has its
own area of influence, which is called a cell. Cell in a node
is an area within which others can receive its transmissions.
Since the nodes in MANET are not fixed, so there are no
fixed infrastructures. The nodes are free to ramble, so
network topology may change rapidly and randomly over
time, and nodes automatically made their own accommo-
dating infrastructures [1–6]. There are various applications
of MANET like video conferencing, rescue operations,
military applications, Disaster Management and so forth [2,
7].
1.2 Attacks on MANET
There are some attacks on trust in MANET which are given
as follows:
• Bad Mouthing Attack A node might purposely provide
a bad recommendation of another node in this attack.
Recommendation attacks without aggregation are gen-
erally affected where erroneous recommendations are
not evaluated with numerous observations [8–11].
• Denial of Service (DoS) Attack In DoS attacks,
attackers take benefit of trust propagation by means
of consuming as much resources as possible by flooding
and previously resource conscious mobile network with
trust commendation.
• On Off Attack In on–off attack, malevolent entities
perform well and badly, on the other hand, on
tenterhooks that they can stay undetected while causing
damage. This attack develops the dynamic properties of
trust throughout time-domain inconsistence [8].
• Conflicting Behavior Attack In this type of attack,
malevolent entities can damage good nodes’ recom-
mendation trust by performing differently to different
123

peers [12]. This node displays incompatible scenery
where it presents contradictory commendation about a
node to different nodes. For the similar reasons as an
on–off attack, the presentation of the system should
stay same if similar aggregation methods are deployed
[13–16].
• Camouflage Attack In camouflage attack, an attacker
will supply recommendations based on the bulk verdict,
and then at times, present fake information to disgrace
the trust scheme. Providing a superior service to
truthful nodes and greatly imprisoning the untruthful
nodes offers shield against this type of attacks.
• Sybil and Newcomer Attacks In this type of attack, a
nasty node can generate bogus IDs that can take the
responsibility for malevolent actions. Otherwise, a node
is able to create leave and rejoin a network with a new
ID for malicious attacks as a newcomer to the network.
A trust scheme that has not any centralized adminis-
trative node is defenseless to these types of attacks [17–
21].
• Collusion Attack Collusion attacks have more than one
node collaborating to afford fake information concern-
ing a normal honest node in recommendation trust
schemes. These types of attacks are generally protected
by neighbor sensing and hybrid approaches [22].
Some of the attacks on routing protocol in MANET,
which are discussed below.
• Flooding Attack In this type of attacks, the attacker
wear out the network resources, that is, bandwidth, and
to use a node’s resources, that is, computational and
battery power or for disrupting the routing operation to
cause harsh degradation in network performance [23–
26].
• Black hole Attack A malevolent node sends bogus
routing information to all nodes showing that it has a
most advantageous route; hence, it causes other good
nodes to route data packets through the malicious route.
This information will be received by the node before
the reception of the any other node in the network.
When route is set up, then nasty node is able to drop all
the data or forward it to the unauthenticated nodes [23,
27].
• Link Spoofing Attack In this type of attack, a malevolent
node promotes false links with non-neighbors for
disrupting routing operations. An attacker can publicize
a false link with a target’s two-hop neighbors, which
seems to be the target node to choose the malevolent
node to be its MPR [23].
• Wormhole Attack In this type of attack, a couple of
colluding attackers traces packets at one position and
then replays them at another position by means of a
private high speed network. An attacker collects
123
Wireless Netw
packets at one end in the network and ‘‘tunnels’’ them
to another end in the network, thereby replaying them
into the network from that end [23, 28–31].
• Colluding Misrelay Attack A number of attackers work
in collusion to change or crash routing packets to
interrupt routing operation in a MANET in colluding
misrelay attack. This attack is hard to identify by using
the conventional methods [23].
1.3 Authentication
Authentication is a process by which it validate that the
client is claimed as an authorized client. Authentication of
mobile nodes in MANETs can declare authorized clients
participation. The simplest solution is to make use of an
authentication key shared by all nodes in the network.
Authentication is an important security requirement to
avoid attacks against secure communication in MANET
and to moderate DoS attacks exploiting the restricted
resources of sensor nodes [32]. There are some authenti-
cation techniques in MANET: Public Key Infrastructure
(PKI) [33], Timed-Efficient Stream Loss-Tolerant
Authentication (TESLA) [33], Elliptic Curve Digital Sig-
nature Algorithm (ECDSA) [33], Lightweight hop-by-hop
authentication protocol (LHAP) [34], and Digital Signa-
tures Methods [7, 33, 35, 36].
In MANET, there is wireless communications linking
mesh clients and mesh routers, as well as surrounded by
mesh routers and gateways that must be secured against
different attacks. So, secure routing in MANET is very
necessary. There are some works on secure routing in
MANET, which are: Partially observed Markov decision
process (POMDP) [7], Authenticated Routing for Ad hoc
Networks (ARAN) [37], Secure Efficient Ad hoc Distance
Vector (SEAD) [38], and A Secure On-Demand Routing
Protocol for Ad Hoc Networks [39, 40].
2 Literature review
Khaleel et al. [7] have discussed about the problem related
to routing security issues of MANETs. The authors pro-
posed an algorithm for detecting malicious nodes which is
based on intelligent water drops algorithm and inspecting
routing modification attack problem. In this algorithm, a
digital signature is added to the control traffic for pre-
venting the injection of incorrect information in the net-
work. For authenticating the routing control message, this
signature is used by receiving node. The performance
metrics like end-to-end delay and network load are
Wireless Netw
discussed. This algorithm is using digital signature, but it is
not discussed how digital signature is generated and how it
is added to the traffic.
Liu et al. [41] have discussed about the problem related
to security in MANETs. The authors have proposed a
combined intrusion detection and continuous authentica-
tion novel framework in high security MANET. This sys-
tem is formulated as a 2-state partially observed Markov
decision process (POMDP). Intrusion detection and con-
tinuous authentication are able to share history information
with each other for achieving more resourceful and cost
efficient mechanisms for both processes. The performance
metrics like error cost has been discussed. It needs to dis-
cuss the main performance metrics like energy, delay, and
throughput.
Li et al. [42] have discussed about the problem related to
key management in cluster-based MANETs. The authors
have proposed a fully distributed ID-based multiple secrets
key management scheme (IMKM). This scheme is a
combination of ID-based multiple secrets and threshold
cryptography. In this scheme, all cluster heads produce a
master secret key and distribute. The author also proposed
an efficient one-round ID-based authenticated group key
agreement (ID-AGKA) protocol. This algorithm minimizes
the number of rounds and bandwidth usage along with
satisfying all primary security concerns. The performance
metrics like computational overhead, bandwidth overhead,
latency, and computation time have been discussed. In this
scheme, a pair-wise key agreement is used which is
applicable only for communication between two parties or
point to point communication; hence, it is not suitable for
wide range broadcasting.
Bu et al. [43] have discussed about the problem related
to user-to-device authentication in high security MANETs.
The authors proposed distributed scheme combining
authentication and intrusion detection. In this scheme, the
most appropriate biosensors for authentication or IDSs are
energetically chosen on the basis of recent security posture
and energy states. For IDS and sensor fusion, Dempster–
Shafer theory is used since more than one device is used at
each time slot. For moderating computational complexity,
scheduling process can be divided into offline and online
parts. Network lifetime and energy has been discussed as
performance metrics. It needs to improve the scheduling
decisions for enhancing the performance and reducing the
computational complexity of this system.
Shakshuki et al. [44] have conversed about the problem
of packet-dropping attack in MANETs. The authors pro-
posed a novel intrusion-detection system named Enhanced
Adaptive Acknowledgment (EAACK), which is specially
designed for MANETs. The authors also include digital
signature to avoid the attackers from initiating fake
acknowledgment attacks. EAACK having three most
important elements which are ACK, secure ACK (S-ACK),
and misbehavior report authentication (MRA). The per-
formance metrics like packet delivery ratio and Routing
overhead have been discussed. DSA and RSA has been
implemented in this system for signature verification and
DSA scheme requires more computational power. So, it
needs to use another scheme whose computational power is
low or modify this scheme.
3 Proposed solution
3.1 Overview
In our first paper, we propose a combined approach named
as fuzzy-based intrusion detection and swarm-based
authenticated routing in MANET. This technique involves
the detection of attacker level of the nodes in the network
layers such as MAC layer, physical layer and routing layer
using fuzzy logic technique. Based on the detected attacker
level, the trust value of each node is updated. When source
node wants to transmit a data packet to the destination, the
route with trustworthy nodes is selected using swarm-based
ant colony optimization (ACO) technique.
Since the trust messages and routing messages can be
attacked, security should be provided for these control
packets also. Hence, as an extension to the previous work,
we propose to develop an authentication technique for
protecting these control packets.
In lightweight hop-by-hop authentication protocol
(LHAP), the authentication is done at each hop. Every node
authenticates the data packet before forwarding it to next
node. So, we authenticate the data packet at each node and
for authentication between the nodes. We use one-round
ID-based authenticated group key agreement protocol (ID
AGKA) [42] for each nodes in route. It will be used for
authentication of packet data along with it. We will use a
pair-wise key agreement protocol [42] in this protocol.
After that, session key is generated, and this key will be
used to encrypt the communications between them two
nodes. By using (AGKA), pairwise key agreement and
hop-by-hop authentication is performed. The authentica-
tion becomes safer than one time authentication and also
provides security for various attacks.
3.2 Swarm-based authenticated routing
In the previous work, we proposed swarm intelligence-
based on ant colony optimization (ACO) technique in order
to find authenticated route. In this section, we will give
brief introduction about our previous authentication
method.
123

Our previous work includes ant colony optimization
(ACO) technique for providing authentication which
involves two ant agent namely forward ant (FA) and
backward ant (BA).
In order to transmit the data packet, the source launches
FA with a threshold trust value which helps to determine
the trustworthiness of the node by comparing the trust
value of node with the threshold trust value.
If the trust value of node i, Ti [ Tth
Then FA updates that node to the routing table until it
reaches destination
If Ti \Tth
Then corresponding node is eliminated from routing
table.
Once the FA reaches its destination, the BA is gener-
ated, and all the information collected by FA is transferred
to the BA. The information collected by BA is transmitted
in the same path but in opposite direction of FA.
BA then updates the trust information of each node in
the pheromone table which was created by FA. Once BA
reaches the source, it collects all the information from BA
and chose the most trusted node for data communication
(Fig. 1).
3.3 Network model
In this section, we will describe the different steps used in
our protocol to establish hop-by-hop authenticated routing.
It mainly consists two phases:
• Establishment of pair wise key
• Lightweight hop-by-hop group key agreement protocol
Fig. 1 Swarm-based authenticated routing
123
Wireless Netw
3.3.1 Introduction to generation of pairing parameter
We have considered ID-based system for authentication of
the data packet at each hop. Usually, ID-based system
allows any pair of users to communicate securely without
exchanging any public key certificates, without keeping
public key directory and even without using online services
of a third party taking part in communication.
This is possible with the help of trusted Private Key
Generator which issues a user private key to each user’s
when it first joins the network. As it is most efficient and
convenient method, we have considered the basic opera-
tions in condition where there is an offline PKG center.
These basic operations include system setup and private
key extraction.
In this section, we will define the model which we have
adapted for authentication of the data packets based on key
generation method.
The PKG turns a Bilinear Diffie-Hellman (BDH)
parameter generator to generate two groups G1 and G2
along with bilinear pairing e^ ¼ G1  G2.
R0 is taken as generator for G1, where H1 : f0; 1g !
Zq which is a cryptographic hash function.
The two other functions can be given as: H2: G1 ? Gq,
H3: G2 ? Gq
The function of PKG is to choose a random number
s 2 Zq as its private key.
Rpub = sR0 is considered as the PKG’s public key.
It predefines the number of key update phase index, U
and chooses a set of generators, Rm ð1  m  UÞ, of G1 for
regular updates about the keys.
The system parameters of PKG includes \p, q, g, G1,
G2, ê, R0, Rm, H1, H2, H3[The key extraction method is
explained as below:
• Each node submits his identity information IDito PKG
• PKG calculates Ii = H1 (IDi) (1 B i B n) and the
user’s public–private key pair: Q1 = (Ii ? s) R0,
Si = (Ii ? s)-1 P0.
• It then preloads the key pair and system parameters
onto corresponding Ni(1 B i B n) securely.
3.4 Establishment of pairwise keys
In this section, we proposed a pairwise agreement protocol
that allows two communicating node to establish their
session keys which is used to encrypt the communication
between them.
In order to provide security for data packets at each
instant of transmission, pair wise keys are generated for
each node which is selected as trusted node by ACO
technique and are eligible to carry the data packet.
Wireless Netw

The process of encryption of data using pairwise key is 3.5 Hop by hop group key agreement protocol
explained in the following steps:
In this section, we describe an efficient hop by hop group
Step 1 Each node Ni chooses its ephemeral key for
key agreement protocol for MANET which is described in
encryption of data, xi 2 Zq and calculates key according
the following steps:
to following equation:
Xi,j = xi (IjR0 ? Ppub) Step 1: Each node Ni(1 B i B n) chooses an ephemeral
Step 2 The ephemeral value is calculated by Ni, it sends key.
Xi,j to Nj.
Ei 2 Zq
Xi;j
Step 2: Each Ni then constructs a Lagrange interpolating
polynomial with degree n - 1 as follows:
Ni ! Nj
Xn ðx  ki;j ÞðmodqÞ
Step 3 Once the ephemeral values exchanged between Bi ðxÞ ¼ Ei Pnj¼1;j6¼u ð3Þ
u¼1 ðki;u  ki;j Þ
the nodes, then all nodes calculate their pairwise keys in
the following ways (Fig. 2):
n1
¼ axin1 þ    þ axi1 þ ai;0ðmodqÞ ð4Þ
xi xi
Ki; j ¼ e^ðR0 ; R0 Þ e^ðXj;i ; Si Þ þ e^ðXj;i ; Si Þ ð1Þ
where Ki,j is taken as the pairwise session key of Ni and
Nj
¼ e^ðR0 ; R0 Þxi þxj e^ðR0 ; R0 Þxi xj ð1  i; j  n; i 6¼ jÞ ð2Þ Step 3: Each Ni then broadcasts (ai0 þ ai1 þ    ain1 ).
Step 4: If ai0 þ ai1 þ    ain1 is received from Ni to Nj
Then Nj(1 B j B n) uses pair-wise session keys kj,i in
 
Ki; j ¼ H3 Ki; j order to recover keys.
Step 5: The key Ei(1 B j B n) is recovered using the
Step 4 If Ni wants to transmit data to Nj, it encodes in following equation:
form of pairwise key Ki, j and establishes session key for
communication.  
B Kj;i ¼ ain1 ðkj;i Þn1 þ    þ ai1 ðkj;i Þ þ ai0 ÞðmodqÞ
Step 5 Nj decodes the data based on the pairwise key and
¼ Ei
session key established between Ni and Nj.
ð5Þ
The above defined protocol provides security for each
node which is carrying the data packet for transmission. Step 6: After recovery process, each Nj computes group
The following are the security properties provided by session keys according to the following equation
above mentioned protocol. (Fig. 3).
• It provides implicit key authentication known as
session key security, and hence, there is no key SK ¼ SKj ¼ ðE1 þ E2 þ    þ Em ÞPm ð6Þ
compromise impersonation. Advantage
• It provides complete security while transmitting the
data packet, as it restricts unknown key share.
• The proposed technique provides efficient method
for bandwidth usage and also fulfills primary concern
of security (Fig. 4).

4 Simulation results

4.1 Simulation model and parameters

We use Network Simulator Version-2 (NS2) [45] to sim-

Fig. 2 Establishment of pairwise keys ulate our proposed algorithm. In our simulation, the

123
 Wireless Netw

Table 1 Simulation settings

No. of nodes 20, 40, 60, 80 and 100

Area size 1000 9 1000

Mac 802.11
Radio range 250 m
Simulation time 50 s
Traffic source CBR
Packet size 512
Speed 10 m/s
No. of attackers 2
Routing protocol FDSAR

Fig. 3 Representation of hop by hop group key agreement protocol

Nodes Vs Delay
20

Delay(Sec)
15
Establishment of pairwise key PKAHAP
10
LHAP
5
0
Key exchange between nodes for data 20 40 60 80 100
transmission
Nodes

Fig. 5 Nodes versus delay

Ni constructs Lagrange interpolating
polynomial with degree n-1

4.2 Performance metrics

Each Ni broadcasts the generated
polynomial
Key recovery using pairwise session keys
Generation of group session key
Fig. 4 Block diagram of proposed algorithm
channel capacity of mobile hosts is set to the same value: 2
Mbps. We use the distributed coordination function (DCF)
of IEEE 802.11 for wireless LANs as the MAC layer
protocol. It has the functionality to notify the network layer
about link breakage.
In our simulation, mobile nodes move in a
1000 m 9 1000 m region for 50 s simulation time. We
have varied the number of nodes as 20, 40, 60, 80 and 100.
We assume each node moves independently with the same
average speed. All nodes have the same transmission range
of 250 m. In our simulation, the node speed is 10 m/s. The
simulated traffic is Constant Bit Rate (CBR). Our simula-
tion settings and parameters are summarized in Table 1
We evaluate mainly the performance according to the
following metrics.
• Average packet delivery ratio It is the ratio of the
number of packets received successfully and the total
number of packets transmitted.
• Average packet drop It is the average number of
packets dropped by the misbehaving nodes.
• Throughput It is the number of packets received by the
receiver.
We compare our Pair-wise Key Agreement and Hop-by-
hop Authentication Protocol(PKAHAP) with the LHAP
[42].
4.3 Results
4.3.1 Based on nodes
In this experiment, we vary the number of nodes as
20,40,60,80, and 100.
Figure 5 shows the delay of PKAHAP and LHAP
techniques for different number of nodes scenario. We can
conclude that the delay of our proposed PKAHAP
approach is 73 % less than that of LHAP approach.

123
Wireless Netw

Nodes Vs Delivery Ratio conclude that the overhead of our proposed PKAHAP
Delivery Ratio
1.5
approach is 60 % less than that of LHAP approach.
1 PKAHAP Figure 9 shows the throughput of PKAHAP and LHAP
0.5 LHAP techniques for different number of nodes scenario. We can
0
conclude that the throughput of our proposed PKAHAP
20 40 60 80 100 approach is 48 % higher than that of LHAP approach.
Nodes

Fig. 6 Nodes versus delivery ratio

5 Conclusion

Nodes Vs Drop In this paper, we have proposed hop-by-hop group wise

15000
agreement protocol. Here, we have first generated a pair
10000 PKAHAP wise key between two nodes, which is carrying the data
Pkts

5000 LHAP packet for transmission. The main aim of generating pair-
wise key is to encrypt the data which is transmitted in the
0
20 40 60 80 100 network. Once the session key is established between two
Nodes nodes, all the keys are recovered and are used to determine
the most trusted node for transmission. The group wise
Fig. 7 Nodes versus drop agreement protocol is used to provide authentication for
each node in the network. Hence, we can say that proposed
algorithm fulfill the primary concern of the node partici-
Nodes Vs Overhead
20000 pating during data transmission. Simulation result show
Overhead

15000 that the proposed algorithm is efficient as it minimizes

PKAHAP
10000 delay, packet drop, and overhead with improved delivery
LHAP
5000 ratio and throughput.
0
20 40 60 80 100
Nodes

Fig. 8 Nodes versus overhead

References

1. Xing, Z., & Gruenwald, L. (2007). Issues in designing concur-

Nodes Vs Throughput rency control techniques for mobile ad-hoc network databases.
20000
Throughput

Technical Report, School of Computer Science, University of

15000
10000
5000
0 357–364, No 1, May 2012, ISSN (Online): 1694-0814.
20 40 60 80
Nodes
Fig. 9 Nodes versus throughput
Figure 6 shows the delivery ratio of PKAHAP and
LHAP techniques for different number of nodes scenario.
We can conclude that the delivery ratio of our proposed
PKAHAP approach is 22 % higher than that of LHAP
approach.
Figure 7 shows the drop of PKAHAP and LHAP tech-
niques for different number of nodes scenario. We can
conclude that the drop of our proposed PKAHAP approach
is 75 % less than that of LHAP approach.
Figure 8 shows the overhead of PKAHAP and LHAP
techniques for different number of nodes scenario. We can
Oklahoma, July 2007.
PKAHAP
2. Mukilan, P. & Wahi, A. (2012). EENMDRA: Efficient energy
LHAP and node mobility based data replication algorithm for MANET.
IJCSI International Journal of Computer Science Issues, 9(3),
100
3. Moon, A. & Cho, H. (2004). Energy efficient replication exten-
ded database state machine in mobile ad-hoc network. IADIS
International Conference on Applied Computing, 224–228.
4. Youssef, M., Ibrahim, M., Abdelatif, M., & Chen, L. (2014).
Routing metrics of cognitive radio networks: A survey. IEEE
Communications Surveys and Tutorials, 16(1), 92–109.
5. Attar, A., Tang, H., Vasilakos, A., Yu, F. R., & Leung, V. C. M.
(2012). A survey of security challenges in cognitive radio net-
works: Solutions and future research directions. Proceedings of
the IEEE, 100(12), 3172–3186.
6. Li, P., Guo, S., Yu, S., & Vasilakos, A. V. (2002). CodePipe: An
opportunistic feeding and routing protocol for reliable multicast
with pipelined network coding. In INFOCOM 2012, pp. 100–108.
7. Khaleel, T. A., & Ahmed, M. Y. (2012). The enhancement of
routing security in mobile ad-hoc networks. International Journal
of Computer Applications (0975–888), 48(16).
8. Sun, Y., Hany, Z., & Liu, K. J. R. (2008). Defense of trust
management vulnerabilities in distributed networks. IEEE Com-
munications Magazine, pp. 112–119, February 2008, 0163-6804/
08/$25.00  2008 IEEE.

123

9. Li, P., Guo, S., Yu, S., & Vasilakos, A. V. (2014). Reliable
multicast with pipelined network coding using opportunistic
feeding and routing. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Dis-
tributed Systems, 25(12), 3264–3273.
10. Zeng, Y., Xiang, K., Li, D., & Vasilakos, A. (2013). Directional
routing and scheduling for green vehicular delay tolerant net-
works. Wireless Networks, 19(2), 161–173.
11. Busch, C., Kannan, R., & Vasilakos, A. (2012). Approximating
congestion ? dilation in networks via ‘quality of routing’ games.
IEEE Transaction on Computers, 61(9), 1270–1283.
12. Sun, Y. L., Hany, Z., Yuy, W., & Liu, K. J. R. (2006). Attacks on
trust evaluation in distributed networks. In 40th annual confer-
ence on information science and systems, March 22–24, 2006,
pp. 1461–1466.
13. Yen, Y.-S., Chao, H.-C., Chang, R.-S., & Vasilakos, A. (2011).
Flooding-limited and multi-constrained QoS multicast routing
based on the genetic algorithm for MANETs. Mathematical and
Computer Modelling, 53(11–12), 2238–2250.
14. Chen, F., Deng, P., Wan, J., Zhang, D., Vasilakos, A. V., & Rong,
X. (2015). Data mining for the internet of things: Literature
review and challenges. International Journal of Distributed
Sensor Networks, 2015, 14. doi:10.1155/2015/431047.
15. Meng, T., Wu, F., Yang, Z., & Chen, G. (2015). Spatial
reusability-aware routing in multi-hop wireless networks. IEEE
TMC. doi:10.1109/TC.2015.2417543.
16. Dvir, A., & Vasilakos, A. V. (2011). Backpressure-based routing
protocol for DTNs. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication
Review, 41(4), 405–406.
17. Yu, Y., Kaminsky, M., Gibbons, P. B., & Flaxman, A. (2006).
SybilGuard: Defending against Sybil attacks via social networks.
In ACM SIGCOMM conference on computer communications
(SIGCOMM 2006), 2006 ACM 1595933085/06/0009, Pisa, Italy,
September 2006.
18. Zhang, X. M., Zhang, Y., Yan, F., & Vasilakos, A. V. (2015).
Interference-based topology control algorithm for delay-con-
strained mobile Ad hoc networks. IEEE Transactions on Mobile
Computing, 14(4), 742–754.
19. Vasilakos, A., & Zhang, Y. (2012). Thrasyvoulos spyropoulos,
delay tolerant networks: Protocols and applications. Boca Raton:
CRC Press.
20. Vasilakos, A. V., Li, Z., Simon, G., & You, W. (2015). Infor-
mation centric network: Research challenges and opportunities.
Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 52, 1–10.
21. Yao, G., Bi, J., & Vasilakos, A. V. (2015). Passive IP Traceback:
Disclosing the locations of IP spoofers from path backscatter.
IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security, 10(3),
471–484.
22. England, P., Shi, Q., Askwith, B., & Bouhafs, F. (2012). A survey
of trust management in mobile ad-hoc networks. Liverpool John
Moores University, June 2012, ISBN: 978-1-902560-26-7 
2012 PGNet.
23. Khokhar, R. H., Ngadi, M. A., & Mandala, S. (2008). A review of
current routing attacks in mobile ad hoc networks. International
Journal of Computer Science and Security, 2(3).
24. Yan, Z., Zhang, P., & Vasilakos, A. V. (2014). A survey on trust
management for internet of things. Journal of Network and
Computer Applications, 42, 120–134.
25. Yang, H., Zhang, Y., Zhou, Y., Fu, X., Liu, H., & Vasilakos, A.
V. (2014). Provably secure three-party authenticated key agree-
ment protocol using smart cards. Computer Networks, 58, 29–38.
26. Liu, B., Bi, J., & Vasilakos, A. V. (2014). Toward incentivizing
anti-spoofing deployment. IEEE Transactions on Information
Forensics and Security, 9(3), 436–450.
123
Wireless Netw
27. Gurjar, A. A., & Dande, A. A. (213). Black hole attack in
Manet’s: A review study. International Journal of IT, Engi-
neering and Applied Sciences Research (IJIEASR), 2(3). ISSN:
2319-4413, March 2013.
28. Hu, Y.-C., Perrig, A., & Johnson, D. B. (2006). Wormhole attacks
in wireless networks. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Com-
munications, 24, 370–380.
29. Jing, Q., Vasilakos, A. V., Wan, J., Lu, J., & Qiu, D. (2014).
Security of the internet of things: Perspectives and challenges.
Wireless Networks, 20(8), 2481–2501.
30. Zhou, J., Cao, Z., Dong, X., Xiong, N., & Vasilakos, A. (2015).
4S: A secure and privacy-preserving key management scheme for
cloud-assisted wireless body area network in m-healthcare social
networks. Information Science, 314, 255–276.
31. Fadlullah, Z. M., Taleb, T., Vasilakos, A. V., & Guizani, M.
(2010). DTRAB: Combating against attacks on encrypted pro-
tocols through traffic-feature analysis. IEEE/ACM Transaction on
Network, 18(4), 1234–1247.
32. Yasmin, R., Ritter, E., & Wang, G. (2010). An authentication
framework for wireless sensor networks using identity-based
signatures. In Computer and information technology (CIT), 2010
IEEE 10th international conference on June 29 2010–July 1
2010, pp. 882–889, Print ISBN: 978-1-4244-7547-6, INSPEC
Accession Number: 11529085. doi:10.1109/CIT.2010.165
33. Dahiya, A., & Sharma, V. (2009). A survey on securing user
authentication in vehicular ad hoc networks. In National con-
ference on recent drifts, break in applied sciences and its tech-
nology for innovation management (NCRDBAIM), KIET,
Ghaziabad, August 7–9, 2009.
34. Zhu, S., Xu, S., Setia, S., & Jajodia, S. (2003). LHAP: A light-
weight hop-by-hop authentication protocol for ad-hoc networks.
In Distributed computing systems workshops, 2003, 23rd inter-
national conference on 19–22 May 2003, pp. 749–755, Print
ISBN: 0-7695-1921-0, INSPEC Accession Number: 8071255.
doi:10.1109/ICDCSW.2003.1203642
35. Wang, T., Liu, Y., & Vasilakos, A. V. (2015). Survey on channel
reciprocity based key establishment techniques for wireless sys-
tems. Wireless Networks, 21(6), 1835–1846.
36. He, D., Chen, C., Chan, S., & Bu, J. (2012). ReTrust: Attack-
resistant and lightweight trust management for medical sensor
networks. IEEE Transactions on Information Technology in
Biomedicine, 16(4), 623–632.
37. Sanzgiri, K., Dahilly, B., Leviney, B. N., Shieldsz, C., &
Belding-Royer, E. M. (20002). A secure routing protocol for
ad hoc networks. In 10th IEEE international conference on
network protocols (ICNP’02) 1092-1648/02 $17.00  2002
IEEE.
38. Hu, Y.-C., Johnson, D. B., & Perrig, A. (2003). SEAD: Secure
efficient distance vector routing for mobile wireless ad hoc net-
works. In Ad hoc networks 1, 1570-8705/$—see front matter
2003 Published by Elsevier B.V. doi:10.1016/S1570-
8705(03)00019-2, pp. 175–192.
39. Hu, Y.-C., Perrig, A., & Johnson, D. B. (2005). Ariadne: A secure
on-demand routing protocol for ad hoc networks. Wireless Net-
works, 11, 21–38.
40. Zhou, J., Dong, X., Cao, Z., & Vasilakos, A. V. (2015). Secure
and privacy preserving protocol for cloud-based vehicular DTNs.
IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security, 10(6),
1299–1314.
41. Liu, J., Yu, F. R., Lung, C.-H., & Tang, H. (2009). Optimal
combined intrusion detection and biometric-based continuous
authentication in high security mobile ad hoc networks. IEEE
Transactions on Wireless Communications, 8(2), 806–815.
Wireless Netw
42. Li, L.-C., & Liu, R.-S. (2010). Securing cluster-based ad hoc
networks with distributed authorities. IEEE Transactions on
Wireless Communications, 9(10), 3072–3081.
43. Bu, S., Yu, F. R., Liu, X. P., Mason, P., & Tang, H. (2011).
Distributed combined authentication and intrusion detection with
data fusion in high-security mobile ad hoc networks. IEEE
Transactions on Vehicular Technology, 60(3), 1025–1036.
44. Shakshuki, E. M., Kang, N., & Sheltami, T. R. (2013). EAACK—
A secure intrusion-detection system for MANETs. IEEE Trans-
actions on Industrial Electronics, 60(3), 1089–1098.
45. Network Simulator. http://www.isi.edu/nsnam/ns
K. Shanthi received the B.Sc.
degree in computer science in
Manonmaniam Sundaranar
University, Tamilnadu, India, in
2000. The MCA degree in
Manonmaniam Sundaranar
University, Tamilnadu, India, in
2003. The M.Tech. Degree in
Dr. M.G.R. Educational and
Research Institute University,
Chennai, Tamilnadu, India, in
2005. She has worked as lec-
turer of Computer science and
Engineering Department in The
Indian Engineering College,
Tirunelveli District for 3 years. Now she is working as a Assistant
Professor in Computer Science and Engineering Department of Cape
Institute of Technology, Tamilnadu, India for more than 5 years. She
is currently a research scholar in the area of Adhoc Network. She is
member of CSI.
Dr. D. Murugan received the
B.E. degree in Electronic and
Communication in Madurai
Kamaraj University, Tamilnadu,
India. The M.E. degree in
Computer Science and Engi-
neering in Madurai Kamaraj
University, Tamilnadu, India.
The Ph.D. in Computer Science
and Engineering M.S. Univer-
sity, Tirunelveli, Tamilnadu,
India. Currently he has worked
as Associate Professor in
Department of Computer Sci-
ence and Engineering in
Manonmaniam Sundaranar University, Tirunelveli, Tamilnadu, India.
He has published 12 papers in journals and more than 20 papers in
Conferences both at National and International level and also he has
Published 3 Books in Springer publication. His areas of interest
include Software Engineering and Digital Image Processing. He is
head of Thamirabarani Educational Society, Nominee for Inspection
commission for Department of Mathematics S.T.Hindu College in
Nagercoil, Member of SC/ST Welfare police committee in Tir-
unelveli District jurisdiction area, Coordinator of ICTACT in
Government of Tamilnadu, Member of the Indian Society for Tech-
nical Education, Selection Committee member of lecturer history in
the college of Tiruvalluvar, Pabanasam, University syndicate mem-
ber(December 2008–December 2011).
123