CORE: Counteracting overwhelming requests effectively—A method for ınterest flooding attack mitigation in NDNoT
Vol 2, Issue 2, 2024
VIEWS - 27 (Abstract)
Abstract
The Named Data Network (NDN) is a promising architecture for the near future. NDN communicates by naming data, unlike IP-based Internet architecture. Architectural understandability, ease of use, security, content presentation and simplicity of data exchange logic make this architecture preferable. The NDNoT approach, which recently combines IoT and NDN, enables Internet of Things applications using NDN naming conventions and basic data structure. However, increasing technological applications bring security vulnerabilities. In this study, we propose a new method called CORE that will secure the intended data transfer. The presented CORE mechanism was developed as a countermeasure against the Interest Flooding attack, one of the NDN security attacks. Tests were carried out in the Cooja simulation environment using three different topology scenarios. CORE’s performance metrics were evaluated based on success rate, average delay and Interest traffic. The results showed that when the CORE mechanism was active, there was an improvement in the success rate and average delay. In terms of Interest traffic, at least a 70% success rate was achieved compared to scenarios in which the CORE mechanism was not operated.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
1. Arjunwadkar DP. Introduction of NDN with Comparison to Current Internet Architecture based on TCP/IP. International Journal of Computer Applications. 2014; 105(5): 31-35. doi: 10.5120/18376-9536
2. Ahlgren B, Dannewitz C, Imbrenda C, et al. A survey of information-centric networking. IEEE Communications Magazine. 2012; 50(7): 26-36. doi: 10.1109/mcom.2012.6231276
3. Zhang L, Afanasyev A, Burke J, et al. Named data networking. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review. 2014; 44(3): 66-73. doi: 10.1145/2656877.2656887
4. Passarella A. A survey on content-centric technologies for the current Internet: CDN and P2P solutions. Computer Communications. 2012; 35(1): 1-32. doi: 10.1016/j.comcom.2011.10.005
5. Atzori L, Iera A, Morabito G. The Internet of Things: A survey. Computer Networks. 2010; 54(15): 2787-2805. doi: 10.1016/j.comnet.2010.05.010
6. Asghari P, Rahmani AM, Javadi HHS. Internet of Things applications: A systematic review. Computer Networks. 2019; 148: 241-261. doi: 10.1016/j.comnet.2018.12.008
7. Aggarwal CC, ed. Managing and Mining Sensor Data. Springer US; 2013. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4614-6309-2
8. Shang W, Bannis A, Liang T, et al. Named Data Networking of Things (Invited Paper). 2016 IEEE First International Conference on Internet-of-Things Design and Implementation (IoTDI). Published online April 2016. doi: 10.1109/iotdi.2015.44
9. Zhang Z, Lu E, Li Y, et al. NDNoT. Proceedings of the 5th ACM Conference on Information-Centric Networking. Published online September 21, 2018. doi: 10.1145/3267955.3269019
10. Aboodi A, Wan TC, Sodhy GC. Survey on the Incorporation of NDN/CCN in IoT. IEEE Access. 2019; 7: 71827-71858. doi: 10.1109/access.2019.2919534
11. Rai S, Dhakal D. A survey on detection and mitigation of interest flooding attack in named data networking. Springer, Singapore ; 2018.
12. Hidouri A, Hajlaoui N, Touati H, et al. A Survey on Security Attacks and Intrusion Detection Mechanisms in Named Data Networking. Computers. 2022; 11(12): 186. doi: 10.3390/computers11120186
13. Afanasyev A, Mahadevan P, Moiseenko I, et al. Interest flooding attack and countermeasures in named data networking. In: 2013 IFIP Networking Conference; 2013; Brooklyn, NY, USA. pp. 1-9.
14. Lee RT, Leau YB, Park YJ, et al. A Survey of Interest Flooding Attack in Named-Data Networking: Taxonomy, Performance and Future Research Challenges. IETE Technical Review. 2021; 39(5): 1027-1045. doi: 10.1080/02564602.2021.1957029
15. Saxena D, Raychoudhury V, Suri N, et al. Named Data Networking: A survey. Computer Science Review. 2016; 19: 15-55. doi: 10.1016/j.cosrev.2016.01.001
16. Feng B, Zhou H, Xu Q. Mobility support in Named Data Networking: a survey. EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking. 2016; 2016(1). doi: 10.1186/s13638-016-0715-0
17. Bilgili S, Demir AK. A Named Data Networking Stack for Contiki NG OS. 2022 2nd International Conference on Innovative Research in Applied Science, Engineering and Technology (IRASET). Published online March 3, 2022. doi: 10.1109/iraset52964.2022.9738034
18. Djama A, Djamaa B, Senouci MR. Information-Centric Networking solutions for the Internet of Things: A systematic mapping review. Computer Communications. 2020; 159: 37-59. doi: 10.1016/j.comcom.2020.05.003
19. Shannigrahi S, Fan C, Partridge C. What’s in a Name? Proceedings of the 7th ACM Conference on Information-Centric Networking. Published online September 22, 2020. doi: 10.1145/3405656.3418717
20. Nurhayati A, Mayasari R, Ahdan S, et al. Naming Scheme on Named Data Networking: A Survey. 2022 8th International Conference on Wireless and Telematics (ICWT). Published online July 21, 2022. doi: 10.1109/icwt55831.2022.9935350
21. Oikonomou G, Duquennoy S, Elsts A, et al. The Contiki-NG open source operating system for next generation IoT devices. SoftwareX. 2022; 18: 101089. doi: 10.1016/j.softx.2022.101089
22. Osterlind F, Dunkels A, Eriksson J, et al. Cross-Level Sensor Network Simulation with COOJA. Proceedings 2006 31st IEEE Conference on Local Computer Networks. Published online November 2006. doi: 10.1109/lcn.2006.322172
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2024 Sedat Bilgili, Gökçe Ertit, Alper Kamil Demir
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
ISSN
3029-2298 (Online)
