SPINS: Security Protocols for Sensor Networks

By Adrian Perrig, Robert Szewczyk, J. Doug Tygar, Victor Wen, David E. Culler. ACM/IEEE International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking, 2001

1,423 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Computer Networks and Communications

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/025294b10910ac8f13e7f687b9891197a627d7d3

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Computer Networks and Communications

1. Peng Ning
2. Donggang Liu
3. Sencun Zhu
4. Byrav Ramamurthy
5. Garhan Attebury
6. Yinhai Wang
7. Daniela Rus
8. Mani B. Srivastava

Citations in the corpus

• Security in wireless sensor networks: issues and challenges (2006, background): “to be applied directly for the wireless networks and in particular for wireless sensor networks. WSNs consist of tiny sensors which really suffer from the lack of processing, memory and battery power [6], [7], [8], [9]. Applying any encryption scheme requires transmission of extra bits, hence extra ”
• Establishing pairwise keys in distributed sensor networks (2005, methodology): “includes SNEP, a security primitive building block, and μTESLA [12], an adaption of TESLA [10, 11].”
• TinyECC: A Configurable Library for Elliptic Curve Cryptography in Wireless Sensor Networks (2008, background): “For example, there has been a substantial amount of research on random key pre-distribution for pairwise key establishment (e.g., [12, 16, 17, 27, 29]) and broadcast authentication (e.g., [28, 30, 38 ]).”
• Using Directional Antennas to Prevent Wormhole Attacks (2004, methodology): “Several efficient mechanisms have been proposed for establishing secure link keys in ad hoc networks [6, 3, 22].”
• Security in embedded systems: Design challenges (2004, background): “Various studies [Carman et al. 2000; Perrig et al. 2002; Potlapally et al. 2003] show that the widening battery gap would require designers to make energy-aware design choices (such as optimized security protocols, custom security hardware, and so on) for security.”
• Biosec: a biometric based approach for securing communication in wireless networks of biosensors implanted in the human body (2003, background): “[3] have presented a set of protocols for achieving requirements of security like confidentiality and authenticity.”
• Localization for mobile sensor networks (2004, methodology): “Another approach would be to use the μTesla protocol [ 38 ], by preloading each node with the initial hash chain value and each seed with the initial secret.”
• Security in Wireless Sensor Networks (2008, neutral): “By using secure communication protocols such as SPINS (Perrig et al., 2002), eavesdropping and active attacks can be prevented.”
• Multilevel μTESLA: Broadcast authentication for distributed sensor networks (2004, methodology): “The solution can be considered a variation of the immediate authentication extension to TESLA [Perrig et al. 2001a].”
• Securing ad hoc routing protocols (2002, methodology): “In [8], [4] and [ 24 ] they use them in order to provide delayed key disclosure.”
• Wireless sensor network key management survey and taxonomy (2010, background): “Perrig et al. (2001) presented a base station participation scheme called SPINS.”
• Global clock synchronization in sensor networks (2006, methodology): “2. Beacon broadcast: Broadcast operation uses � Tesla [ 25 ].”
• Reputation-based framework for high integrity sensor networks (2004, methodology): “The testimonies to this are some recent works in literature that study the impact of malicious attacks on these networks [1, 2, 3]. There have been several proposals, all based on cryptography, to ensure secure communication on these resource constrained nodes such as SPINS[ 4 ], TinySec[5], INSENS[”