International Journal of Advanced Engineering Technology and Innovative Science (IJAETIS)

Available online at: www.ijaetis.org

Volume 3, Issue 1, Page No: 01-07
January-February 2017
ISSN:2455-1651

Malicious data injection Detection in Wireless Sensor Network: A Survey

1 2
Vinay Shrivastava , Ravi H. Gedam
Student, Assistant Professor
Department of Computer Sc. & Engg
Shri Balaji Institute of Technology and Management,BETUL(M.P.)
E-mail: vinayshrivastava547@yahoo.in, ravihemraj@yahoo.com
ABSTRACT
WSNs have received noteworthy consideration in current years due to their potential applications in wildlife tracking, armed sensing,
traffic investigation, fitness care, atmosphere monitoring, building constructions monitoring, etc. Wireless sensor networks establish
a specific type of wireless data communication networks. Consistency of WSN is affected by errors that might take place due to a
number of causes such as soft-ware failures, dislocation, faulty hardware, or environmental threats. Linking letdown is unique
problem against the WSNs and can interrupt the whole sensor system communication. The variability of procedure against damaged
connection detection is overwhelming. Malicious data injection plays a noteworthy contribution in network disaster detection and
network management. In this paper we propose a survey of malicious data injection in wireless sensor network.

Keywords: Wireless Sensor Network, malicious data injection, Security, Security management, Link failure

INTRODUCTION:
A wireless sensor network comprises of several
small sized sensor nodes that have computation
capabilities. Wireless sensor networks (WSNs)[1]
have been widely used in many application areas
such as infrastructure protection, environment
monitoring and habitat tracing. Associated to the
wired networks, it seems considerable more
important to sense malicious data injection rather
than node responsibilities in WSNs. Every sensor
node can sense physical characteristics. WSNs have
been the favorite choice for the succeeding
generation monitoring and control systems. It can
sense temperature, light, vibration, electromagnetic
strength, humidity, and so on, and transmit the
sensed data to the sink node from end to end a
series of numerous intermediary nodes that
assistance forward the value. It has now become
possible to install enormous quantities of low cost
sensors to monitor big regions over ground
underwater, surface, or atmosphere. WSNs have
received noteworthy consideration in current years
due to their potential applications in wildlife
tracking, armed sensing, traffic investigation, fitness
care, atmosphere monitoring, building constructions
monitoring, etc. Nodes in WSNs are disposed to
letdown due to hardware letdown, energy
reduction, communication link faults, mischievous
attack, and so on. The greatest noteworthy
advantage of sensor networks is that they increased
the computation ability to physical atmosphere
where human beings cannot reach. They can work
for lengthy periods in locales that are antagonistic,
challenging or environmentally too sensitive for
human examination.
The location of each sensor is planned before
placement. Sensors are associated to the assigned
locations by human. Obviously, solution is inscalable
as much work is required for the installation.
Furthermore, it is occasionally infeasible to have
manual arrangement as the location information of
sensors is anonymous before actual placement.
Alternative solution for localization is equipping each
sensor with a GPS receiver. Sensors can find
themselves independently using the GPS signals.
However, connecting a GPS receiver for each sensor
node significantly rise the total cost of the sensor
network. In addition, the introduction of GPS
receiver increases the energy consumption[2] of a
node and hence restrains its life time. Finally, the
location gained from GPS-receiver may not be
precise enough for certain applications and the
accuracy of GPS is affected by numerous ecological
issues. Precision can be of tenths of meters for
general GPS. The mistake can be lowered to less
than ten meters for GPS growth systems like
Differential GPS (DGPS) but with an advanced cost.
1

Corresponding Author: Vinay Shrivastava www.ijaetis.org

Vinay Shrivastava et al. International Journal of Advanced Engineering Technology and Innovative Science (IJAETIS)
In wireless sensor networks, malicious data
injection[1] detection plays a serious role in network
analysis and organization. During flooding processes
link scanner passively collects hop counts of received
probe messages at sensor nodes. Based on the
surveillance that damaged links can result in
disparity between received hop counts and network
topology. The object of link scanner is to provide a
blacklist containing all possible faulty links. With
such a blacklist, further analysis and recovery
processes become possible, including (a) discovering
the root causes of observed indications in the
network, (b) altering routing policy for the related
nodes, (c) contribution the spare list of links for
every node. In this paper we propose a survey of
malicious data injection in wireless sensor network.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows.
Section 2 provides the background, relevant for the
context. Section 3 provides the literature survey
related to malicious data injection in wireless sensor
network. Section 4 concludes the paper with a
summary of the main findings concluding remarks,
and limitation discussion.
II. BACKGROUND
A wireless sensor network is which organized itself
rendering to the circumstances. It’s a collection of
nodes. The nodes are low cost and low battery
power sensor devices. WSN can be positioned on the
ground, in the air[3]. It can be positioned in vehicles,
on bodies of the human or animals. It can be
deployed under water, and inside the houses. The
main components of wireless sensor networks are
sensing unit, and a wireless transceiver. The function
of sensing unit is capture events of attention. The
main function of wireless transceiver is transmute
the apprehended actions back to the main base
station. The main base station is called sink node.
Sensor nodes cooperate with every other to achieve
tasks of data identifying, data communication, and
data processing. In WSNs serious incident data
collected by the sensor node-s used for specialist
care of an environment. The greatest noteworthy
advantage of sensor networks is that they increased
the computation ability to physical atmosphere
where human beings cannot reach. They could work
Volume 3, Issue 1; January-February 2017; Page No.01-07
© 2017 IJAETIS. All Rights Reserved
for overlong times in locales that are antagonistic,
challenging or environmentally too sensitive for
human examination. Moreover it has the probable
to send prosperity of data about the setting in which
they are organized and send their outcomes across
the network to the users. A sensor node is a tiny
component that is proficient of computation,
sensing and communication competences. Sensor
node is the main component of WSN. Sensor data
nodes can be helpful to sense moisture and
temperature. It is also used to sense temp. and light.
Since a single sensor transports only limited
information; a system of these maneuvers is cast-off
to achieve huge surroundings.
The communication component in sensor nodes is
used to transfer information. It has nowadays turn
out to be conceivable to install enormous quantities
of low cost sensors to monitor big regions over
ground underwater, surfce, or atmosphere. WSNs
have received noteworthy consideration in current
years due to their potential applications in wildlife
tracking, armed sensing, traffic investigation, fitness
care, atmosphere monitoring, building constructions
monitoring, etc. Nodes in WSNs are disposed to
letdown due to hardware letdown, energy
reduction, communication link faults, mischievous
attack, and so on.
WSN have the following individual features and
limitations: Self configurable[4]: Sensor nodes are
usually arbitrarily prearranged and particularly
assemble themselves into a communication range.
Battery-powred sensor nodes: Sensor nodes are
naturally power-drivn by battery and are
prearranged in a corrective situation where it is very
stimulating to change or boost the batteries.
Dense sensor node situation: Sensor nodes are
logically professionally situated and can be
numerous orders of magnitude higher than that in a
MANET.
Untrustworthy sensor nodes: Since sensor nodes are
probable to physical damages or letdowns due to its
placement in corrective or antagonistic atmosphere.
Severe energy, computation, and storage
2
restrictions: Sensors nodes are taking extremely
Page
Vinay Shrivastava et al. International Journal of Advanced Engineering Technology and Innovative Science (IJAETIS)
incomplete energy, computation, and storage
abilities.
Data duplication: In utmost sensor network use,
sensor nodes are powerfully positioned in an area of
attention and work together to accomplish a shared
recognizing work. Thus, the data identified by
numerous sensor nodes naturally have a certain
level of relationship or duplication.
Repeated topology modification: Network topology
modifications regularly because of the node
letdowns, destruction, addition, energy decrease, or
station disappearing.
Application precise: A sensor network is typically
intended and positioned for a precise application.
The design necessities of a sensor network alteration
with its application.
The battery is the main energy source in the wireless
sensor network. For better performance battery
power should be sufficient. Sensing unit consists of
sensor and ADC (Analog to Digital Converter). Sensor
senses the events and acts as an input for analog to
digital converter. The analog to digital converter
converts the analog signal into digital form. Then the
output of sensing unit is input to the processing unit
of wireless sensor network. Processing unit consists
of microprocessor and memory. Microprocessor is
the main component of processing unit. All the
processing of wireless sensor network performed in
microprocessor. Memory is used to store processing
data and can be used for other related events.
Communication unit is the unit used to
communicate to the outside world.
The main WSN objectives are low node cost, small
node size, low power consumption, scalability, self
configurability, better channel utilization, fault
tolerance, adaptability, Qos support and security.
Therefore, error free and reliable data transfer
between source and destination is the challenges in
WSN. Consistent transfer of data is the surety that
the packet carrying event's information reaches at
the endpoint. The design challenges of WSN are
limited energy capacity, sensor locations, limited
hardware resources, massive and random node
deployment, network characteristics and unreliable
Volume 3, Issue 1; January-February 2017; Page No.01-07
© 2017 IJAETIS. All Rights Reserved
environment, data aggregation, diverse sensing
application requirements, scalability.
Because of the challenges of designing of routing
protocols of wireless sensor network we have many
constraints. WSN have limitations due to resources.
WSN have low storage capacity[5], low bandwidth.
The other limitations are low central processing unit
and limited battery energy. The design challenges of
WSN are limited hardware resources, limited energy
capacity, sensor locations, random and massive node
positioning, scalability, network characteristics and
unreliable environment, data aggregation, diverse
sensing application requirements.
Nodes in WSNs are disposed to letdown due to
hardware letdown, energy reduction,
communication link faults, mischievous attack, and
so on. The main WSN objectives are low node cost,
small node size, low power consumption, scalability,
self configurability, better channel utilization, fault
tolerance, adaptability, Qos support and security.
Low node cost: The cost of node is necessary factor
to design a WSN. Reduced cost node also reduces
the entire network cost. The WSN can be
implemented in military, forest area which when
destroyed cannot be reclaimed so cost may be
effective parameter for wireless sensor network
design.
Scalability: The network should be scalable i.e. the
nodes can be without difficulty added to the wireless
sensor network as and when required. In most cases
wireless sensor network can be implemented in wild
region so small sized network may be easily
manageable.
Small node size: The size of node is also important
for WSN design. Small node size reduces the price
and power intake of network. In most cases wireless
sensor network can be implemented in wild region
so small sized network may be easily manageable.
The faulty link detection and security can be easily
implemented in WSN.
Self configurable: The wireless sensor network
should be self configurable i.e. network should be
automatically organize themselves as needed.
3
Page
Vinay Shrivastava et al. International Journal of Advanced Engineering Technology and Innovative Science (IJAETIS)
Low power consumption: Sensor node is always
powered by battery. For better network
performance low power consumption is an
important factor. All the nodes in wireless sensor
network are powered by battery. So node should
consume less power as compared to other adhoc
network.
Reliability: The network should be reliable. The data
transmission between destination and source should
be reliable and secure. In most cases wireless sensor
network can be implemented in wild region so the
network should be reliable.
Security: Security is also very important for better
network. The data transmission should be secure.
So the main network design parameters are small
power intake, reliability and security.
Localization in wireless sensor networks is to fix the
geographical locations of sensors in a WSN. The
minimum solution is manual outline. The location of
each sensor is planned before placement. Sensors
are associated to the assigned locations by human.
Obviously, solution is inscalable as much work is
required for the installation. Furthermore, it is
occasionally infeasible to have manual arrangement
as the location information of sensors is anonymous
before actual placement.
In WSNs, consistency can be categorized into diverse
levels event or Packet dependability Level, End-to-
End or Hop-by-Hop dependability Level
Nodes in WSNs are disposed to letdown due to
hardware letdown, energy reduction,
communication link faults, mischievous attack, and
so on. Consistency of WSN is affected by mistakes
that may happen due to numerous reasons such as
software malfunctions, malfunctioning hardware,
dislocation, or environmental hazards. Nodes in
sensor networks have very limited energy. In ad-hoc
network batteries can be replaced as and when
needed. The battery condition of WSN node is very
important factor for better communication. The
hardware in good condition is very necessary for
WSN communication. The communication of WSN is
not only effected by antenna angle but also weather
Volume 3, Issue 1; January-February 2017; Page No.01-07
© 2017 IJAETIS. All Rights Reserved
conditions, obstacles. It is also depends on
interference.
Routing in wireless network is different from simple
adhoc network. Wireless sensor network is
infrastructure less. Wireless links are not reliable. All
the routing protocols of wireless sensor network
require good energy. Wireless sensor node may fail
because of infrastructure. The wireless sensor
network protocols are location based protocols,
hierarchical protocols, data centric protocols,
multipath based protocols, QoS based protocols,
mobility based protocols, and heterogeneity based
protocol. Location based protocols are GAF, TBF,
SMECH, GeRaF, MECN, GEAR, Span, BVGF.
Hierarchical Protocols are APTEEN, LEACH[6], HEED,
PEGASIS, TEEN.
Data-centric Protocols are Rumor Routing, ACQUIRE,
Quorum-Based Information Dissemination, SPIN,
EAD, Information-Directed Routing, HABID, GBR,
EAR, IDR, COUGAR, DD.
Heterogeneity-based Protocols are CHR, CADR, IDSQ.
Multipath-based Protocols are Braided Multipath,
Sensor-Disjoint Multipath , N-to-1 Multipath
Discovery. Mobility-based Protocols are TTDD, Data
MULES, SEAD, Joint Mobility and Routing, and
Dynamic Proxy Tree-Base Data Dissemination.
QoS-based protocols are SPEED, Energy-aware
routing, SAR.
Low-energy adaptive clustering hierarchy (LEACH):
LEACH is the first and most popular energy-efficient
hierarchical clustering algorithm for WSNs that was
proposed for reducing power consumption. The
operation of LEACH is divided into rounds having
two phases each namely (i) a setup phase to
organize the network into clusters, CH
advertisement, and transmission schedule creation
and (ii) a steady-state phase for data aggregation,
compression, and transmission to the sink.
LEACH is completely distributed and requires no
global knowledge of network. It reduces energy
consumption by (a) minimizing the communication
cost between sensors and their cluster heads and (b)
turning off non-head nodes as much as possible.
4
LEACH uses single-hop routing where each node can
Page
Vinay Shrivastava et al. International Journal of Advanced Engineering Technology and Innovative Science (IJAETIS)
transmit directly to the cluster-head and the sink.
Therefore, it is not applicable to networks deployed
in large regions. Furthermore, the idea of dynamic
clustering brings extra overhead, e.g. head changes,
advertisements etc., which may diminish the gain in
energy consumption.
III. LITERATURE SURVEY
Network diagnosis has been extensively studied in
recent years. Existing approaches can be broadly
divided into two categories: debugging tools and
inference schemes. This work belongs to the later
category. [7] is a notable tool which focuses on
debugging sensor nodes at the source-level, and
enables developers to wirelessly connect to a
remote sensor and execute debugging commands.
Declarative Tracepoints allows the developers to
insert a group of action-associated checkpoints at
runtime, which are programmed in an SQL-like
declarative language. Existing inference-based
diagnosis schemes for WSNs like or trust deeply on
an add in procedure that occasionally reports a big
amount of network information from separate
sensor nodes to the sink, announcing enormous
overhead to the resource forced and traffic sensitive
sensor network. In order to minimize the overhead,
some researchers propose to establish inference
models by marking the data packets and then parse
the results at the sink to infer the network status, or
conduct the diagnosis process in local areas. [8]
apply Belief Network with the bipartite graph to
represent dependencies among links and end to end
connections, then the root causes can be deduced
by conducting inference on the Belief Network. [9]
explores the bottleneck nodes in a WSN, and
enhances the network visibility by analyzing the
events and status in history.
Besides, most approaches actively design their
probes to fetch desired information for faulty link
detection [10], especially in the managed enterprise
WLANs and wireless mesh networks, where the
monitors are easy to deploy. For each cycle, a node
is required to monitor the cycle’s performance. [11]
develops a non-adaptive fault diagnosis through a
set of probes where all the probes are employed in
advance. The authors in [12] propose a failure
Volume 3, Issue 1; January-February 2017; Page No.01-07
© 2017 IJAETIS. All Rights Reserved
detection scheme, in which monitors are assigned to
each optical multiplexing and transmission section.
These approaches usually compute the probe paths
according to different network symptoms, so as to
combine the network topology to infer the link
status. For a large scale sensor network, however,
deploying monitors in the wild not only increases the
cost, but also needs to guarantee sustainable
management. Sniffers can be used to collect the
information.
Malicious data injection becomes more problematic
in the multihop networks due to topology structures.
Malicious data injection plays an important part in
network failure detection and network
management. The backup node is used to secure
data transmission. The data should be transmitted
securely irrespective of malicious data injection
occurs on not. A wireless link itself nearly exists,
which means we can’t directly see and appraise
whether it achieves well or not. Malicious data
injection may cause failure of link in wireless sensor
network. It demonstrates problematic to localize the
broken-down links under a dynamic mal-condition in
the remote, for the link quality will be meaningfully
impacted by the natural environment like flow in the
ocean and trees in the forest. Malicious data
injection discovery becomes more difficult in the
multi-hop networks due to topology structures.
IV. CONCLUSION
WSNs have been the favorite choice for the
succeeding generation monitoring and control
systems. Nodes in WSNs are disposed to letdown
due to hardware letdown, energy reduction,
communication link faults, mischievous attack, and
so on. The data transmission is possible only if like
failure does not occur in wireless sensor network. In
any circumstances if link down the network cannot
continue to transfer the data to destination. .
Malevolent info and data injection shows a
remarkable part in net system let-down recognition
and network organisation. This paper presented a
survey of malicious data injection in wireless sensor
network.
References
5
Page
Vinay Shrivastava et al. International Journal of Advanced Engineering Technology and Innovative Science (IJAETIS)
[1] Vittorio P. Illiano and Emil C. Lupu, Detecting
Malicious Data Injections in Event Detection
Wireless Sensor Networks, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON
NETWORK AND SERVICE MANAGEMENT, VOL. 12,
NO. 3, SEPTEMBER 2015, pp-496-512
[2] T. S. Rappaport et al., Wireless Communications:
Principles and Practice, vol. 207, Englewood Cliffs,
NJ, USA: Prentice-Hall, 1996.
[3] W. Dong, Y. Liu, Y. He, T. Zhu, and C. Chen,
“Measurement and analysis on the packet delivery
performance in a large-scale sensor network,”
IEEE/ACM Trans. Netw., vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 1952–
1963, Dec. 2014.
[4] H. Chang et al., “Spinning beacons for precise
indoor localization,” in Proc. ACM SenSys, Raleigh,
NC, USA, 2008, pp. 127–140.
[5] Qiang Ma, Kebin Liu, Zhichao Cao, Tong Zhu,
Yunhao Liu, Link Scanner: Faulty Link Detection for
Wireless Sensor Networks, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON
WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS, VOL. 14, pp 4428-
4438, Aug 2015
[6] S. S. Ahuja, S. Ramasubramanian, and M. M.
Krunz, “Single-link failure detection in all-optical
networks using monitoring cycles and paths,”
IEEE/ACM Trans. Netw., vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 1080–
1093, Aug. 2009.
Volume 3, Issue 1; January-February 2017; Page No.01-07
© 2017 IJAETIS. All Rights Reserved
[7] Q. Cao, T. Abdelzaher, J. Stankovic, K.
Whitehouse, and L. Luo, “Declarative tracepoints: A
programmable and application independent
debugging system for wireless sensor networks,” in
Proc. ACM SenSys, Raleigh, NC, USA, 2008, pp. 85–
98.
[8] A. Cerpa, J. L. Wong, L. Kuang, M. Potkonjak, and
D. Estrin, “Statistical model of lossy links in wireless
sensor networks,” in Proc. IEEE IPSN, 2005, pp. 81–
88.
[9] L. Girod et al., “EmStar: A software environment
for developing and deploying wireless sensor
networks,” in Proc. USENIX Annu. Tech. Conf.,
Boston, MA, USA, 2004, p. 24.
[10] Y. Hamazumi, M. Koga, K. Kawai, H. Ichino, and
K. Sato, “Optical path fault management in layered
networks,” in Proc. IEEE GLOBECOM, Sydney, NSW,
Australia, 1998, pp. 2309–2314.
[11] C. Karlof and D. Wagner, “Secure routing in
wireless sensor networks: Attacks and
countermeasures,” AdHoc Netw., vol. 1, no. 2/3, pp.
293–315, 2003.
[12] A. Perrig, J. Stankovic, and D. Wagner, “Security
in wireless sensor networks,” Mag. Commun.,
vol. 47, no. 6, pp. 53–57, Jun. 2004
6
Page