See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/262979806

Analysis of Black Hole and Wormhole Attack using AODV Protocol

Article · January 2013

CITATIONS READS

0 1,038

1 author:

Dr Mukesh Kumar
The Technological Institute of Textile and Sciences
73 PUBLICATIONS   185 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Dr Mukesh Kumar on 01 July 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 International Journal of Research in Management, Science & Technology (E-ISSN: 2321-3264)
Analysis of Black Hole and Wormhole Attack using
AODV Protocol
Shefi Mehta1 , Dr. Mukesh Sharma2
1
M.Tech Scholor, TIT&S, Bhiwani, India
mehta.shefi@gmail.com
2
HOD CSE, TIT&S, Bhiwani, India
drmukeshji@gmail.com
Abstract: Ad hoc is used to describe solutions that are developed
on-the-fly for a specific purpose or Ad hoc is used to indicate
something that is done at the time without planning ahead of
time. In this paper, we have analyzed the performance of Mobile
Ad-hoc Networks (MANET) under Black hole and wormhole
attack. As for any network the delay, throughput are main
parameter so here we are analyzing the throughput of the
network. The NS2 network simulator has been used and graphs
have been produced using xgraph.
Keywords: MANET, Black hole, wormhole, NS-2.
I. INTRODUCTION:
Mobile Ad-hoc Network (MANET) is formed by some
wireless nodes communicating each other without having any
central coordinator to control their function. Such a network is
helpful in creating communication between nodes that may
not be in line-of-sight and outside wireless transmission range
of each other. Similar wireless networks have important
applications in a wide range of areas covering from health,
environmental control to military systems. In MANET, as the
nodes are utilizing open air medium to communicate, they
face acute security problems compared to the wired medium.
Two such critical problems are Black Hole attack and
Wormhole attack. A black hole attack is referred to as a node
dropping all packets and sending forged routing packets to
route packets over itself. A malicious node absorbs all data
packets in itself, similar to a hole which sucks in everything
in. In this way, all packets in the network are dropped [1].
Under Wormhole attack, two faraway malicious nodes can
collude together using either wired link or directional antenna,
to give an impression that they are only one hop away.
Wormhole attack can be launched in hidden or in participation
mode. Wormholes can either be used to analyze the traffic
through the network or to drop packets selectively or
completely to affect the flow of information [2].
II. ROUTING PROTOCOL:
There are many types of routing protocol like Flat routing,
Geographical routing and Hierarchical. For our purpose here
we are using the ad hoc on demand distance vector (AODV)
protocol which is a kind of Flat Routing protocol.
Ad hoc On Demand Distance Vector Routing (AODV)
44
2321-3264/Copyright©2013, IJRMST, June 2013
Vol. 1; No. 1, June 2013
Available at www.ijrmst.org
AODV is a source initiated on-demand routing protocol. It is
an on-demand and distance-vector routing protocol, meaning
that a route is established by AODV from a destination only
on demand [7]. Every mobile node maintains a routing table
that maintains the next hop node information for a route to the
destination node. When a source node wishes to route a packet
to a destination node, it uses the specified route if a fresh
enough route to the destination node is available in its routing
table. If not, it starts a route discovery process by broadcasting
the Route Request (RREQ) message to its neighbors, which is
further propagated until it reaches an intermediate node with a
fresh enough route to the destination node specified in the
RREQ, or the destination node itself.
Black Hole Attack
A black hole attack is referred to as a node dropping all
packets and sending forged routing packets to route packets
over itself. A malicious node absorbs all data packets in itself,
similar to a hole which sucks in everything in. In this way, all
packets in the network are dropped.
A malicious node dropping all the traffic in the network
makes use of the vulnerabilities of the route discovery packets
of the on demand protocols, such as AODV. In route
discovery process of AODV protocol, intermediate nodes are
responsible to find a fresh path to the destination, sending
discovery packets to the neighbor nodes. Malicious nodes do
not use this process and instead, they immediately respond to
the source node with false information as though it has fresh
enough path to the destination [1].
Wormhole Attack
In Wormhole attack if more than one node is compromised, it
is reasonable to assume that these nodes interact in order to
gain an additional advantage. This allows the adversary to
perform a more effective attack. In Wormhole attack two
adversaries collude by tunneling packets between each other
in order to create a shortcut (or Wormhole) in the network.
The adversaries can send a route request and discover a route
across the ad hoc network, then tunnel packets through the
non-adversarial nodes to execute the attack. The adversaries
 International Journal of Research in Management, Science & Technology (E-ISSN: 2321-3264)
Vol. 1; No. 1, June 2013
Available at www.ijrmst.org

can use the low cost appearance of the wormhole links in

order to increase the probability of being selected as part of
the route and then attempt to disrupt the network by dropping
all of the data packets. The Wormhole attack is strong attack
which can be performed even if only two nodes are
compromised [2].

III. RESULTS
Average Throughput
Average throughput or network throughput is the average rate
of successful message delivery over a communication
channel. This may be delivered over a physical or logical link
or pass through a certain network node. The throughput is
usually measured in bits per second (bps) and sometimes in
data packets per second or data packets per time slot.
We evaluate the throughput of simple AODV using different
values of mobility and we also evaluate the average
throughput with black hole and wormhole attack using AODV
and we note the variation in average throughput with the Figure 2: Average Throughput (Black Hole)
variation in the value of mobility.
Here figure 2 is showing the Average Throughput vs mobility
Below figure 1 is showing the Average Throughput vs
graph for the black hole attack. The figure shows that the
mobility graph for AODV protocol. The figure shows that the
Average Throughput is varying with the mobility. Here x-axis
average throughput is varying with the mobility. Here x-axis
represents the mobility and y-axis represents the Average
represents the mobility and y-axis represents the average
Throughput.
throughput.

Figure 3: Average Throughput (Wormhole)

Figure1: Average Throughput (AODV)
Here figure 3 is showing the Average Throughput vs mobility
graph for the Wormhole attack. The figure shows that the
Average Throughput is varying with the mobility.
Comparison

45

2321-3264/Copyright©2013, IJRMST, June 2013

 International Journal of Research in Management, Science & Technology (E-ISSN: 2321-3264)
Vol. 1; No. 1, June 2013
Available at www.ijrmst.org

seconds. Delay may differ slightly, depending on the location

of the specific pair of communicating nodes. Although users
only care about the total delay of a network engineers need to
perform precise measurements.

We evaluate the delay in MANET with simple AODV using

different mobility and then we also evaluate the delay using
AODV with black hole attack and wormhole attack and we
note the variation in delay with AODV, Black hole and warm
hole as we vary the value of mobility.

Figure 4: Comparison of AODV and Black Hole Attack for Average

Throughput

The results of comparison between AODV Protocol and Black

Hole attack for Average Throughput is noticed from the
simulation run and are shown as comparison graph above.
Here figure 4 is showing the Mobility vs Average Throughput
graph for AODV protocol and Black Hole attack. X-axis
represents Mobility and y-axis represents Average
Throughput.
The results of comparison between AODV Protocol and
Wormhole attack for Average Throughput is noticed from the
simulation run and are shown earlier in the tables. The Figure 6: Packet Delay (AODV)
comparison graph between these two is shown below.
The figure is showing the delay vs mobility graph. The figure
shows that the delay in packets transfer is varying with the
mobility. Here x-axis represents the mobility and y-axis
represents the delay.

Figure 5: Comparison of AODV and Wormhole Attack for Average

Throughput

Packet Delay:
The delay of a network specifies how long it takes for a bit of
data to travel across the network from one node or end point
Figure 7: Packet Delay (Black Hole)
to another. It is typically measured in multiplies or fractions of

46

2321-3264/Copyright©2013, IJRMST, June 2013

 International Journal of Research in Management, Science & Technology (E-ISSN: 2321-3264)
The figure is showing the delay vs mobility graph for the
black hole attack. The figure shows that the delay in packets
transfer is varying with the mobility. Here x-axis represents
the mobility and y-axis represents the delay.
Figure 8: Packet Delay (Wormhole)
The figure is showing the delay vs mobility graph for the
Wormhole attack. The figure shows that the delay in packets
transfer is varying with the mobility. Here x-axis represents
the mobility and y-axis represents the delay.
Comparison
The results of comparison between AODV Protocol and Black
Hole attack for Delay is noticed from the simulation run and
are shown earlier in the tables. The comparison graph between
these two is shown below.
47
2321-3264/Copyright©2013, IJRMST, June 2013
Vol. 1; No. 1, June 2013
Available at www.ijrmst.org
Figure 9: Comparison of AODV and Black Hole Attack for Delay
The results of comparison between AODV Protocol and
Wormhole attack for Delay is noticed from the simulation run
and are shown earlier in the tables. The comparison graph
between these two is shown below.
Figure 10: Comparison of AODV and Wormhole Attack for Delay
IV. CONCLUSION
The proposed work is about the analysis of Black hole attack
and Wormhole attack with AODV protocol. The proposed
work is about to improve the AODV protocol in terms of
security. As in case of multicast network because of lot of
communication the networks suffer from some attack that
results the packet loss over the network. The proposed work is
about to minimize this packet loss over the network. The work
will increase the throughput. The system is implemented in a
wireless network with AODV protocol. For this purpose, we
implemented an AODV protocol with Black Hole attack and
Wormhole attack in NS-2. Having simulated the Black Hole
attack and Wormhole attack, we saw that the packet loss is
increased. There is also decrease in the Throughput of the
network. Tables of simulation results show the difference
between the output with and without the Black Hole and
Wormhole attack. This also shows that Black Hole attack and
Wormhole attacks affects the overall network connectivity
and the data loss could show the existence of Black Hole and
Wormhole attack in the network. If the number of Black Hole
nodes is increased then the data loss would also be expected to
increase.
 International Journal of Research in Management, Science & Technology (E-ISSN: 2321-3264)
Vol. 1; No. 1, June 2013
Available at www.ijrmst.org

REFERENCES

[1] Dokurer, Semih, “SIMULATION OF BLACK HOLE ATTACK IN

WIRELESS AD-HOC NETWORKS” September 2006.
[2] V. Mahajan, M. Natu, A. Sethi. “Analysis of wormhole intrusion attacks
in MANETS”. In IEEE Military Communications Conference (MILCOM),
pp. 1-7, 2008.
[3] Dipali Koshti,” Comparative study of Techniques used for Detection of
Selfish Nodes in Mobile Ad hoc Networks”, International Journal of Soft
Computing and Engineering (IJSCE) ISSN: 2231-2307, 2011
[4] Mieso K. Denko,” Detection and Prevention of Denial of Service (DoS)
Attacks in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks using Reputation-Based Incentive
Scheme”.
[5] A.Mishra, Security and Quality of Service in Ad Hoc Wireless
Networks,2008.
[6] Li Zhao,” MAR S: Misbehavior Detection in Ad Hoc Networks”, Global
Telecommunications Conference, 2007. GLOBECOM '07. IEEE, 26-30 Nov.
2007, 941 - 945
[7] Elizabeth M. Royer, and Chai-Keong Toh, “A Review of Current Routing
Protocols for Ad Hoc Mobile Wireless Networks,” IEEE Personal
Communications, pp. 46-55, April 1999.
[8] Internet Resource: Wikipedia.org

48

2321-3264/Copyright©2013, IJRMST, June 2013

View publication stats