Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

TFMD-SDVN: a trust framework for misbehavior detection in the edge of software-defined vehicular network

  • Published:
The Journal of Supercomputing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper, a trust framework is proposed for misbehavior detection in software defined vehicular networks (TFMD-SDVN) to detect the correct events in the network reported by the trusted or untrusted nodes. The trust value of a node is calculated based on rating, recommendation, and similarity. If the trust value is greater than a threshold, then the event reported by the event reporting node (ERN) is assumed to be correct. The performance of the proposed work is evaluated using OMNeT++ network simulator and SUMO traffic simulator in Veins hybrid framework. The performance parameters taken are True Positive Rate (TPR), False Positive Rate (FPR), Detection Time (DT), and Packet Delivery Ratio (PDR). Simulation results show that the proposed approach performs better than ART scheme, RPRep scheme, and BYOR scheme.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19
Fig. 20

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of Data and Materials

Data and materials will be provided on request.

References

  1. Parno B, Perrig A (2005) Challenges in securing vehicular networks. In: Workshop on Hot Topics in Networks (HotNets-IV), pp. 1–6. Maryland, USA

  2. Olariu S, Weigle MC (2009) Vehicular networks: from theory to practice. Chapman and Hall/CRC, Virginia

    Book  Google Scholar 

  3. Raya M, Hubaux J-P (2005) The security of vehicular ad hoc networks. In: Proceedings of the 3rd ACM Workshop on Security of Ad Hoc and Sensor Networks, (pp 11–21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, United States. https://doi.org/10.1145/1102219.1102223

  4. Ros FJ, Martinez JA, Ruiz PM (2014) A survey on modeling and simulation of vehicular networks: communications, mobility, and tools. Comput Commun 43:1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comcom.2014.01.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Hartenstein H, Laberteaux L (2008) A tutorial survey on vehicular ad hoc networks. IEEE Commun Mag 46(6):164–171. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCOM.2008.4539481

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Gillani S, Shahzad F, Qayyum A, Mehmood R (2013) A survey on security in vehicular ad hoc networks. In: International Workshop on Communication Technologies for Vehicles, (pp 59–74) Springer

  7. Bhoi SK, Khilar PM (2013) Vehicular communication: a survey. IET Netw 3(3):204–217. https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-net.2013.0065

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Mishra P, Puthal D, Tiwary M, Mohanty SP (2019) Software defined iot systems: properties, state of the art, and future research. IEEE Wirel Commun 26(6):64–71. https://doi.org/10.1109/MWC.001.1900083

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Rout S, Sahoo KS, Patra SS, Sahoo B, Puthal D (2021) Energy efficiency in software defined networking: a survey. SN Comput Sci 2(4):1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42979-021-00659-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Puthal D, Swain S, Mohanty SP (2021) Towards next generation robust cryptosystems. IEEE Consum Electron Mag 10(5):58–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Nanda A, Puthal D, Rodrigues JJ, Kozlov SA (2019) Internet of autonomous vehicles communications security: overview, issues, and directions. IEEE Wirel Commun 26(4):60–65. https://doi.org/10.1109/MWC.2019.1800503

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Kirkpatrick K (2013) Software-defined networking. Commun ACM 56(9):16–19. https://doi.org/10.1145/2500468.2500473

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Xia W, Wen Y, Foh CH, Niyato D, Xie H (2015) A survey on software-defined networking. IEEE Commun Surv Tutor 17(1):27–51. https://doi.org/10.1109/COMST.2014.2330903

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Kreutz D, Ramos FM, Verissimo PE, Rothenberg CE, Azodolmolky S, Uhlig S (2014) Software-defined networking: a comprehensive survey. Proc IEEE 103(1):14–76. https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2014.2371999

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Liu J, Wan J, Zeng B, Wang Q, Song H, Qiu M (2017) A scalable and quick-response software defined vehicular network assisted by mobile edge computing. IEEE Commun Mag 55(7):94–100. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCOM.2017.1601150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Ku I, Lu Y, Gerla M, Gomes RL, Ongaro F, Cerqueira E (2014) Towards software-defined vanet: architecture and services. In: 2014 13th Annual Mediterranean Ad Hoc Networking Workshop (MED-HOC-NET), (pp 103–110). https://doi.org/10.1109/MedHocNet.2014.6849111

  17. Truong NB, Lee GM, Ghamri-Doudane Y (2015) Software defined networking-based vehicular adhoc network with fog computing. In: 2015 IFIP/IEEE International Symposium on Integrated Network Management (IM), (pp 1202–1207) https://doi.org/10.1109/INM.2015.7140467

  18. Jaballah WB, Conti M, Lal C (2019) A survey on software-defined vanets: benefits, challenges, and future directions. arXiv preprint arXiv:1904.04577

  19. Bhatia J, Modi Y, Tanwar S, Bhavsar M (2019) Software defined vehicular networks: a comprehensive review. Int J Commun Syst 32(12):4005. https://doi.org/10.1002/dac.4005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Bhoi SK, Obaidat MS, Puthal D, Singh M, Hsiao K-F (2018) Software defined network based fault detection in industrial wireless sensor networks. In: 2018 IEEE Global Communications Conference (GLOBECOM), (pp 1–6) https://doi.org/10.1109/GLOCOM.2018.8647321

  21. Puthal D, Mohanty SP, Bhavake SA, Morgan G, Ranjan R (2019) Fog computing security challenges and future directions [energy and security]. IEEE Consum Electron Mag 8(3):92–96. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCE.2019.2893674

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Mishra AK, Puthal D, Tripathy AK (2021) Graphcrypto: next generation data security approach towards sustainable smart city building. Sustain Cities Soc 72:103056. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2021.103056

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Mishra P, Biswal A, Garg S, Lu R, Tiwary M, Puthal D (2020) Software defined internet of things security: properties, state of the art, and future research. IEEE Wirel Commun 27(3):10–16. https://doi.org/10.1109/MWC.001.1900318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Zhao L, Bi Z, Lin M, Hawbani A, Shi J, Guan Y (2021) An intelligent fuzzy-based routing scheme for software-defined vehicular networks. Comput Netw 187:107837. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comnet.2021.107837

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Li W, Wang Y, Jin Z, Yu K, Li J, Xiang Y (2021) Challenge-based collaborative intrusion detection in software-defined networking: an evaluation. Digit Commun Netw 7(2):257–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcan.2020.09.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Adnan M, Iqbal J, Waheed A, Amin NU, Zareei M, Umer A, Mohamed EM (2021) Towards the design of efficient and secure architecture for software-defined vehicular networks. Sensors 21(11):3902. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21113902

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. El-Sayed H, Zeadally S, Khan M, Alexander H (2021) Edge-centric trust management in vehicular networks. Microprocess Microsyst 84:104271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micpro.2021.104271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Ahmad F (2021) A trust evaluation framework in vehicular Ad-Hoc networks. University of Derby, United Kingdom

    Google Scholar 

  29. Li W, Song H (2016) Art: An attack-resistant trust management scheme for securing vehicular ad hoc networks. IEEE Trans Intel Transp Syst 17(4):960–969. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2015.2494017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Wang J, Zhang Y, Wang Y, Gu X (2016) Rprep: a robust and privacy-preserving reputation management scheme for pseudonym-enabled vanets. Int J Distrib Sens Netw 12(3):6138251. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/6138251

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Mühlbauer R, Kleinschmidt JH (2018) Bring your own reputation: a feasible trust system for vehicular ad hoc networks. J Sens Actuat Netw 7(3):37. https://doi.org/10.3390/jsan7030037

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Sun M, Li M, Gerdes R (2017) A data trust framework for vanets enabling false data detection and secure vehicle tracking. In: 2017 IEEE Conference on Communications and Network Security (CNS), (pp 1–9) https://doi.org/10.1109/CNS.2017.8228654

  33. Subba B, Biswas S, Karmakar S (2018) A game theory based multi layered intrusion detection framework for vanet. Future Gener Comput Syst 82:12–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2017.12.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Grover J, Gaur MS, Laxmi V (2013) Trust establishment techniques in VANET. In Wireless Networks and Security, pp 273–301. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-36169-2_8

  35. Wang S, Yao N (2019) A rsu-aided distributed trust framework for pseudonym-enabled privacy preservation in vanets. Wirel Netw 25(3):1099–1115. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11276-018-1681-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Zhang J (2011) A survey on trust management for vanets. In: 2011 IEEE International Conference on Advanced Information Networking and Applications, (pp 105–112) https://doi.org/10.1109/AINA.2011.86

  37. Yang N (2013) A similarity based trust and reputation management framework for vanets. Int J Future Gener Commun Netw 6(2):25–34

    Google Scholar 

  38. Hussain R, Lee J, Zeadally S (2021) Trust in vanet: a survey of current solutions and future research opportunities. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst 22(5):2553–2571. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2020.2973715

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Kerrache CA, Lagraa N, Calafate CT, Lakas A (2017) Tfdd: a trust-based framework for reliable data delivery and dos defense in vanets. Veh Commun 9:254–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vehcom.2016.11.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Hasrouny H, Samhat AE, Bassil C, Laouiti A (2019) Trust model for secure group leader-based communications in vanet. Wirel Netw 25(8):4639–4661. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11276-018-1756-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Kamat P, Baliga A, Trappe W (2006) An identity-based security framework for vanets. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Vehicular Ad Hoc Networks, (pp 94–95) Association for Computing Machinery, New York, United States. https://doi.org/10.1145/1161064.1161083

  42. Hasrouny H, Samhat AE, Bassil C, Laouiti A (2017) Vanet security challenges and solutions: a survey. Veh Commun 7:7–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vehcom.2017.01.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Hu H, Lu R, Zhang Z (2015) Vtrust: a robust trust framework for relay selection in hybrid vehicular communications. In: 2015 IEEE Global Communications Conference (GLOBECOM), (pp 1–6) https://doi.org/10.1109/GLOCOM.2015.7417027

  44. Tajeddine A, Kayssi A, Chehab A (2010) A privacy-preserving trust model for vanets. In: 2010 10th IEEE International Conference on Computer and Information Technology, (pp 832–837) https://doi.org/10.1109/CIT.2010.157

  45. Diep PTN, Yeo CK (2016) A trust-privacy framework in vehicular ad hoc networks (vanet). In: 2016 Wireless Telecommunications Symposium (WTS), (pp 1–7) https://doi.org/10.1109/WTS.2016.7482038

  46. Li X, Liu J, Li X, Sun W (2013) Rgte: A reputation-based global trust establishment in vanets. In: 2013 5th International Conference on Intelligent Networking and Collaborative Systems, (pp 210–214) https://doi.org/10.1109/INCoS.2013.91

  47. Xiao Y, Liu Y (2019) Bayestrust and vehiclerank: constructing an implicit web of trust in vanet. IEEE Trans Veh Technol 68(3):2850–2864. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2019.2894056

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Sumra IA, Hasbullah H, Lail J, Rehman M (2011) Trust and trusted computing in VANET. Comput Sci J 1(2):1–24

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  49. Hu H, Lu R, Zhang Z, Shao J (2016) Replace: a reliable trust-based platoon service recommendation scheme in vanet. IEEE Trans Veh Techno 66(2):1786–1797. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2016.2565001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Chen T, Mehani O, Boreli R (2009) Trusted routing for vanet. In: 2009 9th International Conference on Intelligent Transport Systems Telecommunications,(ITST), (pp 647–652) https://doi.org/10.1109/ITST.2009.5399276

  51. Poongodi M, Hamdi M, Sharma A, Ma M, Singh PK (2019) Ddos detection mechanism using trust-based evaluation system in vanet. IEEE Access 7:183532–183544. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2960367

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Huang Z, Ruj S, Cavenaghi MA, Stojmenovic M, Nayak A (2014) A social network approach to trust management in vanets. Peer-to-peer Netw Appl 7(3):229–242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12083-012-0136-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Gazdar T, Belghith A, Abutair H (2017) An enhanced distributed trust computing protocol for vanets. IEEE Access 6:380–392. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2017.2765303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Ahmed S, Al-Rubeaai S, Tepe K (2017) Novel trust framework for vehicular networks. IEEE Trans Veh Technol 66(10):9498–9511. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2017.2710124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Zhang D, Yu FR, Yang R, Tang H (2018) A deep reinforcement learning-based trust management scheme for software-defined vehicular networks. In: Proceedings of the 8th ACM Symposium on Design and Analysis of Intelligent Vehicular Networks and Applications, (pp 1–7) Association for Computing Machinery, New York, United States. https://doi.org/10.1145/3272036.3272037

  56. Malik N, Puthal D, Nanda P (2017) An overview of security challenges in vehicular ad-hoc networks. In: 2017 International Conference on Information Technology (ICIT), (pp 208–213) https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIT.2017.14

  57. Al-Khafajiy M, Baker T, Asim M, Guo Z, Ranjan R, Longo A, Puthal D, Taylor M (2020) Comitment: a fog computing trust management approach. J Parallel Distrib Comput 137:1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpdc.2019.10.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. El Sayed H, Zeadally S, Puthal D (2020) Design and evaluation of a novel hierarchical trust assessment approach for vehicular networks. Veh Commun 24:100227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vehcom.2019.100227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Gower JC, Legendre P (1986) Metric and euclidean properties of dissimilarity coefficients. J Classif 3(1):5–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01896809

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We want to thank our institutes for providing the infrastructure to conduct the research work. All authors successfully performed their work for the successful preparation of the manuscript. All authors contributed to the study conception and design. The problem statement, literature survey, system model, proposed framework, analysis, and simulation were done by Rajendra Prasad Nayak, Srinivas Sethi and Sourav Kumar Bhoi. Debasis Mohapatra and Rashmi Ranjan Sahoo majorly contributed to the analysis of the proposed framework for developing and proving the theorems. Pradip Kumar Sharma and Deepak Puthal majorly contributed to SDVN system modeling and evaluation of the simulation results. Deepak Puthal also acts as the corresponding author to this manuscript for managing all communications and revision. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Funding

There is no funding information.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Rajendra Prasad Nayak, Srinivas Sethi and Sourav Kumar Bhoi have contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Government College of Engineering, Kalahandi, BPUT, Rourkela, Odisha, 769015, India

    Rajendra Prasad Nayak

  2. Department of Computer Science Engineering and Applications, Indira Gandhi Institute of Technology, Sarang, BPUT, Rourkela, Odisha, 769015, India

    Srinivas Sethi

  3. Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Parala Maharaja Engineering College, Berhampur, BPUT, Rourkela, Odisha, 769015, India

    Sourav Kumar Bhoi, Debasis Mohapatra & Rashmi Ranjan Sahoo

  4. Department of Computing Science, University of Aberdeen, King’s College, Aberdeen, AB24 3FX, UK

    Pradip Kumar Sharma

  5. Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Khalifa University, Abu Dhabi, UAE

    Deepak Puthal

Authors
  1. Rajendra Prasad Nayak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Srinivas Sethi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sourav Kumar Bhoi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Debasis Mohapatra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Rashmi Ranjan Sahoo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Pradip Kumar Sharma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Deepak Puthal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Deepak Puthal.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

There is no conflict of interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nayak, R.P., Sethi, S., Bhoi, S.K. et al. TFMD-SDVN: a trust framework for misbehavior detection in the edge of software-defined vehicular network. J Supercomput 78, 7948–7981 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-021-04227-z

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-021-04227-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation