Mobile ad hoc network (MANET) is a collection of mobile nodes that communicate with each other without any fixed infrastructure or a central network authority. From a security design perspective, MANETs have no clear line of defense; i.e. no built-in security. Thus, the wireless channel is accessible to both legitimate network users and malicious attackers. Since MANET requires a unique, distinct, and persistent identity per node in order for their security protocols to be viable, Sybil attacks pose a serious threat to such networks. A Sybil attacker can either create more than one identity on a single physical device in order to launch a coordinated attack on the network or can switch identities in order to weaken the detection process, thereby promoting lack of accountability in the network. Here a lightweight scheme is used to detect the new identities of Sybil attackers without using centralized trusted third party or any extra hardware, such as directional antennae or a geographical positioning system. Through the help of extensive simulations, it is able to demonstrate that this scheme detects Sybil identities with good accuracy even in the presence of mobility.

Legitimate Network, Sybil Identity, Received Signal Strength

[1]. Douceur J R (2002), �The Sybil attack�, Revised Papers from the First International Workshop on Peer-to-Peer Systems, Vol.6, No.9, pp.251 -260.
[2]. Capkun S, Hubaux J P and Buttyan L (2006), �Mobility helps peer-to-peer security�, IEEE Trans. Mobile Comput., Vol. 5, No. 1, pp.43 -51.
[3]. Piro C, Shields C and Levine B N (2006), �Detecting the Sybil attack in mobile ad hoc Networks�,Proceeding. Securecomm Workshops, pp.1 -11.
[4]. Chen Y, Yang J, Trappe W and Martin R P (2010), �Detecting and localizing identity- based attacks in wireless and sensor networks�, IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., Vol. 59, pp.2418 -2434.
[5]. Abbas S, Merabti M, Llewellyn-Jones D, Kifayat K (2013), �Lightweight Sybil Attack Detection in MANETs�, IEEE Systems Journal, Vol.7 , No.2 pp.236-248.
[6]. M. Bianchini, M. Gori, and F. Scarselli. Inside pagerank. ACM Trans. Inter. Tech. 5(1):92�128, 2005.
[7]. A. Bhargava, K. Kothapalli, C. Riley, C. Scheideler, and M. Thober. Pagoda: a dynamic overlay network for routing, data management, and multicasting. In Proc.ACM Symp on Parallel Algorithms, pages 170�179, 2004.
[8]. R. Bhattacharjee and A. Goel. Avoiding Ballot Stuffing in eBay-like Reputation Systems. In ACM SIGCOMM Workshop on the Economics of Peer-to-Peer Systems , August 2005.
[9]. M. Bianchini, M. Gori, and F. Scarselli. Inside pagerank. ACM Trans. Inter. Tech.5(1):92�128, 2005.
[10]. R. B ̈ohme, G. Danezis, C. D ́ıaz, S. K ̈opsell, and A. Pfitzmann. Mix cascades vs. peer-to-peer: Is one concept superior? In Proc. Wkshp on Privacy Enhancing Technologies ,pages 243�255, 2004.
[11]. S. Buchegger and J.-Y. L. Boudec. A Robust Reputation System for P2P and Mobile Ad hoc Networks. In Proc. Wkshp on the Economics of Peer-to-Peer Systems , 2004.
[12]. J. Bulgatz. More Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds. Three Rivers Press, 1992.
[13]. S.Capkun and J.-P. Hubaux. BISS: building secure routing out of an incomplete set of secure associations. In Proc. ACM Wireless Security Conference , pages 21� 29, 2003
[14]. Sonam Gupta and Rekha Sharma,� A QoS Based Simulation Approach of Zone Routing Protocol in Wireless Ad-hoc Networks �, International Journal of Computer Sciences and Engineering, Volume 2, issue 7, P.No 24-30, 2014