CS1520 Java Threads
CS2510 Fault Tolerance and Privacy in Wireless Sensor Networks
partially based on presentation by Sameh GobrielAgendaIntroduction to Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs)
Challenges and constraints in WSNs
In-network Aggregation
RideSharing fault tolerance protocol
Secure RideSharing, privacy-preserving and fault tolerance protocol
Conventional Wireless Networks Typical conventional wireless networks are Infrastructure-based (access point). Single hop communicationUses a contention-based MAC access protocol
Adhoc and Sensor Wireless NetworksNo Backbone infrastructure.
Multihop wireless communication.
Nodes are mobile and network topology is dynamic.
SPARC/Solaris Systems
Applications are countless
...Parking lot monitoringAdhoc and Sensor Wireless Networks
Professional Care giving for seniors
Habitat and environmental monitoringHealth Monitoring Body Embedded Network Participatory sensing Military ChallengesNodes are low power, low cost devices.
Very limited supply energy.
Required Lifetime of months or even years.
It may be hard (or undesirable) to retrieve the nodes to change or recharge the batteries.
Considerable challenge on the Energy Consumption.
Challenges contraint the protocols that can be deployed 6ConstraintsThese challenges induce constraints on the protocols developed to achieve:CommunicationData FusionFault ToleranceSecurity
Energy Consumption05101520Power (mW)SensingCPUTXRXIDLESLEEP
In-network Aggregation In-network aggregation Energy Efficient data fusion in WSNs
Each sensor monitors the area around itSensor is supposed to send its data to the end user.
In-network Aggregation End user is not interested in individual sensor readings
Global system information.
Tree-Construction and Data Reporting
Tree-Construction and Data ReportingSending raw data is expensive
Data aggregation (in-network processing) can save a lot of overhead
What are potential problems that you can think of with in-network aggregation?Frequent ErrorsWhen an error occurs A subtree of values is lostIncorrect result reported to the user
Wireless links are unreliable
Nodes energy depleted
Hazardous environment
Objective: Fault-tolerant aggregation and routing scheme for WSNFault Tolerant aggregation: Retransmission
When an error occurs, retransmit the lost valueDelayed Query response:Each level has to wait for possible retransmissions before its ownPacket Overhead:Packet overhead because some handshake is requiredFault Tolerant aggregation: Multipath RoutingA node attached itself to all parents it can hear from.When a link fails, the node value is not lost.
What could be the problem with this scheme ? Duplicate Sensitive Aggregation
Duplicate insensitive aggregation:Max(5, 7, 10, 4, 10) Duplicate sensitive aggregation:Sum, Avg, Count, RideSharing: Fault-tolerant duplicate sensitive aggregation and routing scheme for WSNRideSharing: General IdeaNode selects a primary parents and backup parents
If error free:Child broadcasts value to all parentsOnly primary aggregates it
RideSharing: General IdeaWhen a link error occurs between child and primaryBackup parent detects it (small bit vector 2 bit per child)
Backup parent aggregates the missed child value in its message (if it has not sent its own yet)
In case of error value of a node rideshares with the backup parents value
RS Detection: Bit Vector
RS Correctness
Parents have to be in communication rangePrimary has to send before backupBackup overhears primary error-freeRideSharing Overhead
Child broadcast to all parents (no overhead).Primary (or backup) aggregates the value and broadcast one message to parents (no overhead).No overhead for error correction but only for error detection:Parents listen to childrenDetection of primary link failure [small bit vector]
Cascaded RideSharing
Error free case, primary aggregates child value
In case of one link error, child value rideshares withfirst backup parent
In case of two link errors2nd backup handles itWhat about Privacy ?! Applications Collaborative sensing over shared infrastructure
text
Monitoring
SensorsAttack Model
stealthily infiltrate the network to eavesdropHonest-but-CuriousQuiet infiltrators correctly aggregate, but eavesdrop
New Privacy-Preserving Fault Tolerant Protocol for in-network aggregation in WSNAdditively homomorphic stream ciphersCascaded RidesharingPrivacy PreservationRobustnessSecure RideSharing ProtocolEach sensor ni encrypts its value vi as ci = vi + gi(ki) mod M, and sets its corresponding bit in the P-Vector.2. The resulting ci values are aggregated using the Cascaded RideSharing protocol, which results in the sink receiving the value C = i ci mod M.3. The sink computes the aggregate key value K = i gi(ki) mod M for each i P- Vector. The sink extracts the final aggregate value V = i vi = C K mod M.ProtocolniP2P3P1
ERROR
OK Got it
ci = vi + gi(ki) mod MP-Vector[i] = 1L-Vectorn1n2nn
nir-bit = 0
e-bit =1ReceiverSecure RideSharing Protocol P-Vectorn1n2nn
ni1 .. 1njniP2P3P1
ci ; P-Vector[i] = 1nj
cj ; P-Vector[j] = 1Now I can recover the plain aggregate value given the P-vectorReceiverEvaluation Comparison of four protocols using the CSIM simulatorSpanning-tree: no fault tolerance, but efficient for power!Cascaded RideSharingOur confidentiality-preserving fault-tolerant aggregation protocolOur protocol with state compression Comparison metrics:Average relative RMS error in aggregated resultsAverage energy consumed per node per epochAverage message size transmitted per node per epoch
Parameter Value RangesTotal number of nodes 300, 400, 500, . . . ,1000Link error rate 0.05, 0.10, . . . , 0.35Number of primary + backup parents max(3)Participation level (% of nodes reporting values) 1.5%, 2.5%, 5%, . . . , 25%SIMULATION PARAMETERS28More Simulation ParametersParameter Possible valuesSquare area320320 ft2 gridRadio range of each node30 ftSimulations10 simulation runs each 30 epochsSensor NodesMica2Data Transmission power consumption65 mWListening and reception power consumption21 mWNetwork Bandwidth38.4 KbpsCrypto usedRC4 stream cipherOptimization (Compression)RLE standard compressionSIMULATION PARAMETERS -- cont291- Effect of Link Error Rate
48.2% improvement in RMS
Constant overhead
Constant overhead302- Effect of Participation Level
Only 7.1% increase
Only 3.6% increase313- Effect of Network Density
90.2% improvement using optimization32Thank you
Transmit
Tx Data Pkts
Col. & Re-Tx
Tx Cntrl Pkts
Receive
Rx Data Pkts
Overhearing
Rx Cntrl Pkts
Idle
Idle Listening
Transmit
Receive
Idle
Off
S
T = 73Wind = 30
77
75
73
80
95
77
75
73
80
95
77
75
73
80
95
95
73
S1 = 73S2 = 77S3 = 95...
77
75
73
80
95
73 [1]
X
X
X
X
5
3
1
2
6
7
4
X
Max(2,5,4)
1
1
2
2
3
Max(0,0,1)
Max(1,2,4)
5
3
1
2
6
7
4
X
2+5+4
1
1
2
2
3
0+0+1
1+2+4
C1
C2
C3
P1
R1
R2
C1
C1+P1
C2+R1
C3+R2
C2
C3
C1
C2
C1
C1+P1
C1
C2
C3
P1
R1
R2
P1
C2+R1+C1
C3+R2
C2
C3
C1
C2
P1
X
C1+P1
C1
C2
C3
P1
R1
R2
1e
C2+R1
C3+R2
C2
C3
C1
C2
1r
2e
2r
C1+P1
This parent is Correcting
1e
1r
Error in C1 Primary Link
C1+P1
C1
C2
C3
P1
R1
R2
C2+R1
C3+R2
C2
C3
C1
C2
C1+P1
C1
C2
C3
P1
R1
R2
C1
C1+P1
C2+R1
C3+R2
C2
C3
C1
C2
C1
C1+P1
X