Key Management Techniques in Wireless Sensor Networks.pptx

KEY MANAGEMENT
TECHNIQUES IN WIRELESS
SENSOR NETWORKS
By,
Ms.J.Paruvathavardhini & Ms.S.Menaga

Outline:
 Introduction
 Security and operational requirements for Key
Management
 Key Distribution Schemes
 Promising Key Management Protocols
 Summary
 Conclusion

Introduction
 WSN is a network
formed by large
number of sensor
nodes where each
node is equipped
with a sensor to
detect physical
phenomena such as
light, heat, pressure
etc…

Introduction
 WSN devices have severe resource
constraints in terms of energy, computation
and memory.
 Key Management include the processes of key
setup, the initial distribution of keys and key
revocation (removal of the compromised key).
 Many Security-critical application that depend
on key management processes demand a
high level of fault tolerance when a node is
compromised.

Security and operational requirements
for Key Management
 Confidentiality- Nodes should not reveal data to any unintended
recipients.
 Integrity- Data should not be changed between transmissions
due to environment or malicious activity.
 Data Freshness- Old data should not be used as new.
 Authentication- Data used in decision making process should
originate from correct source.
 Robustness- When some nodes are compromised the entire
network should not be compromised.
 Self-organization- Nodes should be flexible enough to be
self-organizing (autonomous) and self-healing (failure tolerant)
 Availability- Network should not fail frequently.

Continued……
 Time Synchronization- These protocols should not be
manipulated to produce incorrect data.
 Secure Localization- Nodes should be able to accurately
and securely acquire location information.
 Accessibility- Intermediate nodes should be able to perform
data aggregation by combining data from different nodes.
 Flexibility- Nodes should be replaceable when compromised.
 Scalability- WSN should concurrently support at least 3000
nodes even with key management in place.

Key Distribution Schemes
 Three keying models are used to compare the
different relationships between WSN Security
and operational requirements
 Network Keying
 Pairwise Keying
 Group Keying

Advantages & Disadvantages
 Network Keying :
Benefits Problems
Simple Lacks
Robustness.
Allows data
aggregation
and fusion
Scalable
Able to self-
organize
Flexible

 Pairwise Keying:
Benefits Problems
Provides best
robustness.
Non-scalable.
Unable to
self-organize.
Authentication
for each node.
Not flexible.

 Group Keying: Benefits Problems
Allows Multicast. Lacks efficient storage
for group keying in
IEEE 802.15.4
Allows group
collaboration.
Difficult to set up
securely.
Better robustness than
network keying.
Cluster formation
information is
application dependent.
Adjustable scalability
Flexible.
Able to self-organize
with in cluster.

Promising Key Management
Protocols
 Eschenauer and Gligor:
This protocol is simple, elegant and provides
effective trade off between robustness and
scalability.
 In this scheme a large pool of keys are
generated (eg:10,000 keys)
 Randomly take ‘K’ keys out of the pool to
establish a key ring (K << N)
 Path Key Discovery: When two nodes
communicate they search for a common key
with in the key ring by broadcasting their
identities (ID’s) of the keys they have.

Advantages&Disadvantages:
Advantages:
 Less than N-1 keys are stored
 Scalable
Disadvantages:
 It lacks authentication process and does not clearly define any
process for revoking or refreshing keys.
 The dynamic handshaking process prevents any form of data
aggregation (eg: one event detected by two neighboring nodes will
result in two separate signals.)
 No support for collaborative operations.
 No node is guaranteed to have common key with all of its
neighbors, there is a chance that some nodes are unreachable.
 Fails to satisfy security requirement authentication and operational
requirement accessibility.

Du, Deng, Han and Varshney:
 This protocol is based on pairwise keying model. This model
extends Eschenauer and Blom's work by using the same
paradigm but instead of individual keys it uses a array of
keys.
 Blom's model is based on the idea of a symmetric matrix
multiplication, where row i column j is equivalent to row j
column i, Thus, when node i calculates key ij and node j
calculates key ji. the keys are identical, leading to a
commonly shared secret.
 In Du's pairwise key management scheme, instead of using
only one private matrix, the sink node generates i private
matrices, and each node stores a subset of these matrices
in the same manner as Eschenauer's key ring.
 When two nodes must cornmunicate, they start by
broadcasting the node Ids, the indices of key matrices they
carry and the seed of the column of the public matrix. If they

Advantages:
 It offers strong robustness against node compromise at a
reasonable scalability cost. An adversary must compromise five
times as many nodes compared with Eschenauer's scheme to
compromise the entire network.
Disadvantages:
 The complexity of the protocol increases overhead costs.
 The cluster operations are not supported because it is a pairwise
keying scheme, and neither key revocation nor key refreshing are
considered.
 Overall Du's scheme fails to satisfy accessibility and is not
competitive with simpler schemes in terms of scalability due to its
high overhead costs.

LEAP
 LEAP uses four types of keys: Indivudival, group, cluster and
pairwise shared keys.
 The authentication mechanism known as µ-TESLA is used for
the broadcast authentication of the sink node,which ensures
that the packets sent with the group are from the sink node
only.
 It also employs one-way hash-key mechanism for source
packet authentication.
 LEAP uses a pre-distribution key to help establish the four
types of keys. The individual key is first established using a
function of a seed and the ID of the node.
 Then nodes broadcast their IDs. The receiving node uses a
function, seeded with an initial key, to calculate the shared key
between it and all of its neighbors.
 Thirdly, the cluster key is distributed by the cluster head using
pairwise communication secured with the pairwise shared key.
 Lastly for distributing the network-wide group key, the sink
node broadcasts it in a multihop cluster- by-cluster manner
starting with the closest cluster.

Advantages:
 It has µ-TESLA and one-way key chain authentication
as well as key revocation and key refreshing.
 Scalability
 Able to perform cluster communications.
Disadvantages:
 It assumes that sink node is never compromised.

SHELL
 Each cluster has its own distributed key management
entity residing in a non-clusterhead node.
 The operational responsibility and key management
responsibility are separated leading to better resiliency
against node capture.
Advantages:
 The main benefit of SHELL is that it has a high robustness
against node capture.
 It supports cluster (group) communications and does not
preclude data fusion or aggregation within the clusters.
Disadvantages:
 Its structure and operation arc highly complex,
involving heterogeneous node operations and
multiple (at least seven) types of keys.

PANJA, MADRIA, AND BHARGAVA
 This protocol is based on a hierarchical group
keying scheme using the Tree-based Group
Diffie-Hellman (TGDH) protocol.
 The TGDH keying scheme has one level of general
sensor nodes and multiple levels of cluster heads; that is
there can be a head of clusters responsible for multiple
cluster heads below it in a tree-like manner
 To establish the keys in this hierarchical tree based
WSN two separate schemes are used: intra-cluster and
inter-cluster keying.

Advantages:
 The advantage of this scheme is that compared to
SHELL, it is simple and elegant and hence, easy to
implement.
 Less storage and computational costs.
 Key revocation and key refreshing problems are
addressed.
Disadvantages:
 Node addition and Node replacement are not
considered explicitly.
 Compromises for robustness.
Overall, Panja’s scheme trades off robustness to better
satisfy the self-organization, accessibility, Scalability and
Flexibility requirements

Conclusion
 Future developments could incorporate the
flexibility of LEAP with the adjustable robustness
offered by Eschenauer or Du’s scheme.
 For security-critical application SHELL seems to
offer the highest robustness but it may be
further improved to reduce implementation
complexity.
 For extremely large WSNs, improving Panja's
scheme to take advantage of its highly scalable
hierarchical feature may prove attractive.

Key Management Techniques in Wireless Sensor Networks.pptx

More Related Content

Similar to Key Management Techniques in Wireless Sensor Networks.pptx (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Key Management Techniques in Wireless Sensor Networks.pptx