ASSESSMENT ITEM 3 11

ASSESSMENT ITEM 3 11

Running head: ASSESSMENT ITEM 3 1

Assessment Item 3

Student Name

Course Name

Professor Name

University Name

September 15, 2017

Assessment Item 3

Question 1: Comparison and contrast between three WiMAX network data encryption standards

We choose three standards that WiMAX uses for data encryption. These three techniques are AES, DES, and 3DES respectively. AES (Advanced Encryption Standard) and 3DES (Triple Data Encryption Standard). We define different similarities and dissimilarities between these three standards to compare and contrast.

DES Data Encryption

The DES stands for “Data Encryption Standard.” It is a cipher used as data encryption principle developed by IBM and approved as a national standard. The DES standard is a simple network block cipher. It utilizes a “64-bit block size” and “56-bit key length”. DES cipher sustained as a standard for encryption in WiMax networks till it becomes probable to crack within 24 hours using brute force assaults. Hence, Des is nowadays considered less protected and outdated. Basically, DES deliver cryptographic safety for every administration communications. It is not the satisfactory standard used for encryption and must not utilize in the system anymore (Kucharzewski & Kotulski, 2010).

AES Data Encryption

The foremost technique or data encoding standard utilized by WiMax networks is AES. AES stands for “Advanced Encryption Standard.” WiMax network utilizes AES to encode information transmitted on the network. AES method of encryption offers provision and facility for 192-bit, 128-bit, and 256-bit encoding keys. Due to this reason, it is exponentially robust than DES standard. The standard was constructed from CCMP. It is known as “Counter Mode with Cipher Block Chaining Message Authentication Code Protocol (CCMP).” WiMax utilizes “Counter Mode with Cipher Block Chaining Message Authentication Code Protocol (CCMP)” to encode all stream of traffic on its web. It likewise practices “Advanced Encryption Standard (AES)” to communicate information securely. The AES encryption standard for WiMax has turned out to be a famous procedure and algorithm. AES is quicker than 3DES technique. It is easy to use, implement and usages very less memory. However, it needs devoted CPUs on board the BS. It might not be utilized by every single end-user computers. Data encryption using AES is a more efficient and sophisticated cryptographic procedure however its real strength lies in the key-length choices. Hence, 3DES remains an important encryption standard for the WiMax network (Ahson & Ilyas, 2008).

3DES Data Encryption

WiMax networks likewise utilize 3DES standard for encoding the data for security. It stands for “Triple Data Encryption Standard.” The “Triple Data Encryption Standard” generally utilizes three dissimilar keys having a 56-bit length for each key. The utilization of these keys makes the performance decrement in some of the software systems. The slow limit and performance on the key lengths sorting 3DES approach quite outdated. It is considered as 3 times to DES as it substitutes 64-bit three keys to the 192-bit key for encryption of data in WiMax network. The extended length of key offers an active security contrary to a brute force assault in these networks. Similarly, Triple DES (or 3DES), a method of utilizing DES encryption standard three times, shown an ineffective counter to brute-force attacks. 3DES is slowing up the encryption procedure significantly) (Alzaabi, Ranjeeth, Alukaidey, & Salman, 2013 ).

The table given below displays a simple comparison between these standards for encryption.

Table 1: Comparison and contrast between AES, DES, and 3DES

Question 2: Security Challenges of WPAN Technologies

There are various WPAN technologies accessible in the world of networks. However, we are going to discuss the security challenges for two of them. These two technologies implementing WPAN (wireless personal area network) are Bluetooth and ZigBee.

Security issues or challenges of Bluetooth

Bluetooth is a prominent technology. However, the security challenges need to be taken into consideration. Threats are integral to any of the wireless innovation including Bluetooth. Irrespective of endless probabilities and marketplace share, the Bluetooth device specification does possess an error in its standard security execution. Such susceptibility can expose a user using Bluetooth to several risks. These risks include the theft, eavesdropping, default configuration, impersonation, loss, man-in-the-middle assault, service/piconet mapping and many other risk vectors.

Denial of service attack is one of the most important security concern with Bluetooth networks. Malicious invaders can hamper the devices, choke them from getting phone calls and reduce the phone battery. Bluetooth is specially designed to act as a “Personal Area Network.” It is a fact that devices which are more than some feet away must not be available through Bluetooth. But, a person is not secure in case he/she normally confirm there is a gap between him and a possible hacker. Hackers have been recognized to utilize high gain and a directional antenna to effectively converse above much higher distances. For instance, security expert Joshua Wright showed the utilization of similar antenna to invade a Bluetooth gadget in a café.

Bluesnarfing is also a method to bypass the Bluetooth network security. Such vulnerability exists as a fault because of the approach Bluetooth is executed on specific mobile gadgets. “Backdoor hacking” is an additional threat to Bluetooth network. It is where a gadget that is no longer trusted can yet acquire access to phone and data like using Bluesnarfing. It can result in access to use facilities like WAP etc. (Niem, 2002)

Security issues of ZigBee Technology

The ZigBee wireless security and attacks have fascinated much attention by industry security experts, government and hacker communities. They are concerned about the implementation portion of ZigBee that is a reason behind maximum security challenges of the technology. There are several forms of attacks that have positively practiced against ZigBee systems. They are categorized in few categories like replay, injection, physical and key assaults (Bowers, 2012).

Physical risks/attacks: In case a well-educated attacker can possess physical entrée to a gadget comprising a ZigBee Radio, likelihoods are decent that they can negotiate it. What creates physical risks so successful is being capable of communicating tangibly with the gadget to get an “encryption key” utilized by the objective ZigBee network (Donovan, 2012).

Key attacks: Additional types of key assaults are probable by using remote methods to get encryption keys. Bigger, more complex ZigBee setups will typically use OTA for easiness of updating and security. Unluckily, such approach can be invaded by partaking a gadget that imitates a node on the network and gathers wireless network broadcasts. These gathered parcels can be additionally assessed or possibly decrypted utilizing an open-source and free device (Donovan, 2012).

Another form of challenges with ZigBee network is related to the injection and replay attacks. These attacks are mixed with parcel replay or/and injection risks to hack the ZigBee gadget into accomplishing unauthorized activities. ZigBee networks are exposed to such forms of assaults. It is for the lightweight structure of the WPAN protocol that has negligible replay security (Bowers, 2012).

Question 3: Critical Reflection on Research Papers having topic “Energy Harvesting.” These are critical reflection on two distinct research papers.

1. “Energy harvesting in wireless sensor networks: A Comprehensive Review.”

Reference:

Shaikh, Karim, F., & Zeadally, S. (2016, March). Energy harvesting in wireless sensor networks: A Comprehensive Review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 55, 1041-1054. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.11.010

Critical Reflection:

The article is about energy harvesting in WSN (“Wireless Sensor Networks”). The article offers a comprehensive view on energy harvesting in such networks. It stated that in recent times, wireless area networks have developed dramatically and marked a significant advancement in different applications. However possessing restricted lifespan, batteries, as the power foundations of wireless sensor nodes have constrained the applications and advancement of WSNs. These networks often need a much-extended lifecycle for great performance. The main objective of the paper is to present a wide assessment of the research on energy harvesting approaches for WSNs.

Recently, WSNs have captivated much consideration due to their universal nature and extensive arrangement in Internet of Things (IoT). The restricted energy linked with WSNs is the main blockage of WSN innovations. Therefore, to overcome such major restriction, the deployment and design of high performance and efficient energy harvesting systems is important. The author expressed to explore different energy harvesting methods for Wireless sensor network environment. The paper presents a complete taxonomy of the different energy harvesting foundations that can be utilized by WSNs. The paper likewise discusses several recently projected energy forecast models that have the prospective to increase the energy gathered in WSNs.

The author describes various energy harvesters in the paper in detail. It includes the name of the piezoelectric harvester, photovoltaic harvester, thermal harvester, wind harvester, vibration harvester and flow harvester. The article provides an entire introduction of the different likely energy harvesters for the environment. It introduces energy gathering approaches, and an assortment of that must be appropriate for the real applications operational WSNs environment. As denoted in the paper there is various kind of energy form in the environment.

It stated that it is important to integrate the key circuits and structure design with the planning and contract found on power-alert of wireless sensor nodules to extend the sensor terminal life. It is well said that there is a requirement to combine the energy gathering approach, power administration plan, innovative communication principles, and battery recharging. The dimension of energy gathering scheme must be decreased as much as probable for the severe needs of sensor terminals in numerous applications. There are several things that I like about the paper, e.g., facts and explanation of different energy harvesters. There is also discussion about vibration harvester.

It stated that vibration is one of the most widespread energy foundation accessible in different settings like roads, vehicles, bridges, roads and additional forms of living amenities and production. The investigators of Takenaka Company established a novel WSN scheme that comprises vibration-based energy harvesters along with wireless sensors. The present article information with tables and figures that displays the schematic illustration of these energy harvesters. The article describes flow harvester approach that hydropower can be advanced in any dimension and any scope, it is pertinent in WSNs. Electromagnetic energy harvester developed based on the “principle of electromagnetic induction” using “inductive electromagnetic force.” Finally, the article recognized some of the issues that still require being reported. These issues addressed to advance efficient, cost-effective and consistent energy gathering schemes for the WSN environment (Shaikh, Karim, & Zeadally, 2016).

2. “Energy harvesting wireless communications: A Review of recent advances.”

Reference:

Ulukus, S., Yener, A., Erkip, E., Simeone, O., Zorzi, M., Grover, P., & Huang, K. (2015, March). Energy Harvesting Wireless Communications: A Review of Recent Advances. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 33(3), 360-381. doi:10.1109/JSAC.2015.2391531

Critical Reflection:

The article outlines current contributions in the wide domain of energy harvesting in wireless communications. In specific, the article offers the present state of the art solution for wireless networks comprised of nodes. It comprises of energy gathering nodes, initiating from the data theoretic performance limitations to broadcast planning schemes and medium access, resource allocation and other networking problems. The evolving linked domain of energy broadcast for self-supporting energy gathering wireless systems is contemplated in details. It covers energy collaboration features and instant information and energy transmission equally. The paper reviewed different possible models using energy gathering nodes at diverse network instruments.

It stated that there are numerous diverse natural foundations and linked innovations for energy collection. These involve indoor lightning, solar, thermal, vibrational, chemical biological and electromagnetic source, etc. It likewise discusses that energy might be harvested using human-made foundations using wireless system energy transmission. In this, energy is broadcasted from one terminal to another in a measured way. The technologies discussed in the research paper possess different amounts of harvesting efficiencies and capacities. The paper discusses some topics like data-theoretic physical layer performance restrictions to medium access and scheduling procedures as well as control protocols. It is worth noticing energy gathering wireless systems instantaneously present fresh speculative challenges.

The article researches on various energy consumption models at the sensor nodes in WSN networks. The zone offers a rich group of prospects for attaining design visions from scientific designs that take real-world thoughts into the description. The potential enhancement there is carefully secured to the effectiveness of energy transmission. To end our review of the article, we want to conclude by describing that forthcoming issues. These are for energy collection wireless systems. These do not just lie in developments in different network layer’s design commencing from signal dissemination and conversations physical layer to network layer, however likewise in containing the real corrective nature of the emerging gathering wireless systems. These wireless networks are incorporating with the developments from devices and circuits that gather and broadcast energy (Ulukus, et al., 2015).

References

Ahson, S., & Ilyas, M. (2008). WiMAX standards and security. Aurebach Publications, Taylor & Francis Group.

Alzaabi, M., Ranjeeth, K. D., Alukaidey, T., & Salman, K. (2013 , May). SECURITY ALGORITHMS FOR WIMAX. International Journal of Network Security & Its Applications (IJNSA), 05(03), 31-44. doi:10.5121/ijnsa.2013.5304

Bowers, B. (2012, Janurary 09). ZigBee Wireless Security: A New Age Penetration Tester’s Toolkit. Retrieved from ciscopress: http://www.ciscopress.com/articles/article.asp?p=1823368&seqNum=4

Donovan, J. (2012, May 24). Security Issues with Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, and ZigBee. Retrieved from digikey: https://www.digikey.com/en/articles/techzone/2012/may/security-issues-with-wifi-bluetooth-and-zigbee

Kucharzewski, Ł., & Kotulski, Z. (2010). WiMAX Networks – architecture and data security. Annales UMCS Informatica AI X, 02, 177-185. doi:10.2478/v10065-011-0022-7

Niem, T. C. (2002, April 11). Bluetooth And Its Inherent Security Issues. Retrieved from sans: https://www.sans.org/reading-room/whitepapers/wireless/bluetooth-inherent-security-issues-945

Shaikh, Karim, F., & Zeadally, S. (2016, March). Energy harvesting in wireless sensor networks: A Comprehensive Review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 55, 1041-1054. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.11.010

Ulukus, S., Yener, A., Erkip, E., Simeone, O., Zorzi, M., Grover, P., & Huang, K. (2015, March). Energy Harvesting Wireless Communications: A Review of Recent Advances. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 33(3), 360-381. doi:10.1109/JSAC.2015.2391531