SECURING MOBILE AD-HOC NETWORKS AGAINST ROGUE NODES

By

RAJI Rafat Omolabake

220603CMP009

BEING A RESEARCH PROPOSAL SUBMITTED

TO

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

FACULTY OF NATURAL AND APPLIED SCIENCE
AL-HIKMAH UNIVERSITY, ILORIN, NIGERIA.

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE

AWARD OF
MASTER DEGREE IN COMPUTER SCIENCE

Supervisor: DR. Aro T. O

MAY, 2024

1
CHAPTER ONE 2
1.0 INTRODUCTION 2
1.1 Background to the Study 2
1.1.1 Intrusion Detection Systems 4
1.2 Statement of the problem 5
1.3 Aim and Objectives 6
1.4 Significance of the study 6
1.5 Scope of the study 7
1.6 Definition of Terms 8
LITERATURE REVIEW 11
2.0 Mobile Ad-hoc Network (MANET) 11
2.1 Applications of Mobile Ad-hoc Networks (MANETs) 11
2.2 Challenges in MANETs 11
2.3 Routing Protocols in Mobile Ad-hoc Networks 12
2.4 Types of Routing Protocols 13
2.5 Reviewed Works on MANET Routing Protocols 15
2.6 Reviewed Works on Security Challenges and Detection of Attacks in MANETs 19
CHAPTER THREE 28
Methodology 28
3.0 Introduction 28
3.1 Support Vector Machine 29
3.1.1 The key steps involved in using a Support Vector Machine (SVM) algorithm are: 29
3.2 Lightweight Cryptography 32
3.2.1 Types of Lightweight Cryptography commonly used in MANETS: 32
3.3 Process Of Asymmetric Encryption Like RSA 33
3.3.1 Steps For Lightweight Symmetric Algorithms 34
3.4 Network Simulator 3 35
3.4.1 Features Of Network Simulator 3 36
REFERENCES 38

2
CHAPTER ONE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the Study
Computer Networks have become a very important aspect in the technology development

because it promotes communication between people and businesses (Raheem, 2011).A computer

network is a group of interconnected nodes or computing devices connected together to share

resources, such as files, printers, and internet connections and communicate with one another,

either through physical cables or wireless connections (Chauhan, 2023). A good example of

computer network is Mobile Ad-hoc Network. A MANET is a self-configuring, infrastructure-

less networks that consist of mobile nodes without a centralized administration, (Praveen et al.,

2022; Khudayer, Alzabin,Anbar,Tawafak, Wan, Alsideiri,Almeidy,2023). MANETs have

emerged as a promising technology for various applications. These networks are particularly

useful in situations where there is no pre-existing infrastructure or in rapidly deployable

scenarios, such as disaster response or military operations to smart cities and vehicular networks.

They also provide a flexible and dynamic communication environment, enabling nodes to

communicate directly with each other, forming a temporary network on-the-fly, (Conti &

Giordano, 2014).

MANET is autonomous system of nodes connected by wireless links that usually has a routable

networking environment on top of a Link Layer ad hoc network (Oyelakin, Agboola, Abdullahi

and Yusuf, 2020). Generally, this kind of network consists of a set of mobile nodes connected

wirelessly in a self-configured, self-healing network without having a fixed infrastructure.

MANET nodes are free to move randomly as the network topology changes frequently. Each

node behaves as a router as they forward traffic to other specified nodes in the network.

However, the decentralized and dynamic nature of MANETs presents numerous challenges,
3
especially in terms of routing and security (Bhatnagar, Gobi, Aqeel & Solanki, 2023). The

inherently dynamic and fluid nature of MANETs, along with their limited resources and lack of

permanent infrastructure, makes them vulnerable to numerous security challenges. These include

disruptions by malicious nodes (rogue nodes), Denial of Service (DoS) attacks, and advanced

attacks targeting routing protocols. Given these vulnerabilities, there is a pressing need for

creative solutions that can protect the integrity, confidentiality, and availability of data within

MANETs. (Hassan, Ali & Nigel, 2023; Raji &Oyelakin, 2023).

Routing is a fundamental aspect of MANETs, as it determines the path for data transmission

between nodes. Since there is no fixed infrastructure in MANETs, routing protocols play a

critical role in establishing efficient and reliable communication paths. Traditional routing

protocols designed for wired networks, such as the popular Internet Protocol (IP) routing

protocols, are not suitable for MANETs due to the unique characteristics of these networks,

including node mobility, limited resources, and frequent topology changes. Consequently,

several routing protocols have been proposed specifically for MANETs, aiming to optimize

routing performance, minimize overhead, and adapt to dynamic network conditions (Nithya,

Amudha, Musthafa, Ramirez-Asis, Velayutham&Sengan, 2022).

Korir and Cheruiyot (2022), mentioned that in a MANET, nodes do not know the topology of

their network. Rather, they have to discover it by their own as the topology in the ad-hoc

network is dynamic topology. The basic rules is that a new node whenever enters into an ad-

hoc network, must announce its arrival and presence and should also listen to similar

announcement broadcasts made by other mobile nodes. MANETs exhibit a dual nature based on

the role of the node, which varies depending on whether it is a sender, receiver, or an

intermediate node that helps complete the network topology. Nodes acting as senders or

4
receivers are termed hosts, while those serving as intermediate nodes function as routers (Revath,

Karpagavall and Jullet., 2020).Generally, a mobile ad-hoc network (MANET) is characterized by

the following criteria: dynamic topology (Karthik et al.2010), limited Bandwidth- (Kumar &

Kumar, 2012), limited physical security (Kumar et al., 2012) and decentralized network control,

(Kumar et al., 2012).

1.1.1 Intrusion Detection Systems

Intrusion detection systems distinguish themselves from traditional signature- and anomaly-

based systems by examining the behavioral patterns of network entities and identifying

irregularities, where compromising of a network entity exposes all confidential information to an

intruder, causing most preventive security mechanisms to fail. The ability of IDS to adapt to the

network's dynamic characteristics and detect intrusions that conventional methods miss makes

these IDSs particularly promising for use in Mobile Ad-hoc Networks (MANETs), but they have

limitations such as high computational overhead and difficulty in detecting new types of attacks

(Alsoufi, Razak, Siraj, Nafea, Ghaleb, Saeed & Nasser 2021).

Tartakovsky, Rozovskii, Blazek, and Kim (2006) define intrusion detection as the activity of

identifying and examining network intrusions by monitoring traffic for signs of security

breaches, which may be initiated by intruders. Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS) are described

as either software or hardware solutions designed to facilitate this process. Liao, Lin, and Tung

(2013) outline various types of IDS, including host-based, network-based, wireless-based,

network behavior analysis, and mixed forms. According to Anthi, Slowinska, Theodorakopoulos,

and Burnap (2019), a basic IDS architecture includes sensors, an analysis engine, and a reporting

system. This setup allows for the collection and analysis of data, detection of network anomalies,

and the issuance of alerts to notify about any detected intrusions.

5
1.2 Statement of the problem
Mobile Ad-hoc Networks (MANETs) are increasingly critical in applications ranging from

emergency response to military operations, where traditional communication infrastructures may

be unavailable or impractical (Bhatnagar et al. 2023). However, the security of MANETs is

continuously threatened by rogue nodes—unauthorized or compromised nodes within the

network that introduce severe vulnerabilities. These rogue nodes can execute a variety of

disruptive actions such as launching denial-of-service attacks, compromising data integrity

through spoofing, and manipulating routing tables, which can cripple the network.

Current security measures for MANETs are often inadequate due to several intrinsic challenges.

First, the dynamic nature of MANETs, characterized by frequent changes in network topology

and node mobility, complicates the application of conventional security solutions that assume a

static network environment. Second, many existing security protocols either impose significant

overhead that degrades network performance or rely on centralized mechanisms that contradict

the decentralized architecture of MANETs. Furthermore, these solutions frequently fail to

prevent identity spoofing attacks, leaving the network vulnerable to intrusions that exploit

fabricated or stolen credentials.

This proposal aims to address these critical vulnerabilities by developing a novel approach to

securing MANETs against rogue nodes, focusing specifically on identity-based intrusion

detection and enhancing routing integrity. This approach will integrate robust identity

verification mechanisms to ensure that all participating nodes are authenticated and authorized,

thereby mitigating the risk of spoofing and other identity-related attacks. Additionally, the

proposed system will incorporate adaptive intrusion detection techniques that can dynamically

6
respond to new and evolving threats without imposing excessive computational or

communication overhead.

1.3 Aim and Objectives

The aim of this study is to secure mobile ad-hoc networks against rogue nodes: an approach for

identity-based intrusion detection and routing integrity

The objectives of the study are as follows:

1. To design and implement an intrusion detection system that leverages identity

verification to detect and mitigate the impact of rogue nodes within MANETs.

2. To use lightweight cryptography algorithm to ensure that the security measures

introduced do not excessively burden the network, particularly in terms of computational

resources and communication overhead.

3. To extensively test and validate the effectiveness of the proposed intrusion detection and

routing integrity mechanisms under various scenarios using network simulators like NS3

or OPNET.

4. To Apply Support Vector Machine to IDS in order to protect MANETs from emerging

threats and vulnerabilities

5. To compare the performance of the proposed security mechanism with existing

approaches in terms of detection accuracy, false positive and false negative rates,

computational overhead, and energy consumption.

1.4 Significance of the study

The proposed security mechanism outlined in this study is designed to overcome the

shortcomings of existing security solutions for Mobile Ad-hoc Networks (MANETs) by

providing a more lightweight and energy-efficient approach. This initiative is part of broader

7
efforts to fortify MANETs against a variety of security threats, including rogue nodes, Denial of

Service (DoS) attacks, and routing attacks. The findings from this research are expected to offer

critical insights into the design and evaluation of identity-based security mechanisms,

particularly in environments where resources are limited. Furthermore, the outcomes of this

study could potentially inform the development of new security standards and best practices for

MANETs, which might be adopted by industry and governmental organizations. Additionally,

the results may attract interest from researchers in related fields such as wireless

communications, network security, and machine learning, potentially sparking further

investigations in these disciplines..

1.5 Scope of the study

This study will encompass several integral components aimed at securing Mobile Ad-hoc

Networks (MANETs) against rogue nodes through innovative identity-based intrusion detection

and routing integrity strategies. Firstly, a comprehensive literature review will be conducted to

examine existing intrusion detection systems and secure routing protocols. This review will

provide a foundational understanding of current methodologies and their limitations, setting the

stage for the proposed security enhancements.

Secondly, the study will involve the development and implementation of an advanced identity-

based intrusion detection system integrated with secure routing protocols. These security

measures will be designed to dynamically adapt to the changing topology and threat landscape of

MANETs. The implementation will be conducted within a simulated environment using network

simulation tools such as NS3 or OPNET.

Thirdly, extensive simulation experiments will be performed to evaluate the efficacy of the

proposed security framework. The performance of the intrusion detection system and secure

8
routing protocols will be assessed based on various metrics such as detection accuracy, routing

integrity, network overhead, and response times to security breaches.

Furthermore, the results from these experiments will be meticulously analyzed to determine the

effectiveness of the proposed models in improving network security against rogue nodes. A

comparative analysis will also be conducted between the proposed security solutions and

traditional security protocols to highlight improvements and advantages in securing MANETs.

Finally, the study will conclude with a comprehensive assessment of the proposed security

enhancements’ overall impact on MANET security. This will include discussions on potential

areas for future research and further development of the security protocols to accommodate

emerging threats and technological advancements in Mobile Ad-hoc Networks.

1.6 Definition of Terms

i. Mobile Ad-Hoc Network (MANET): A Mobile Ad-Hoc Network (MANET) is a type

of wireless network that does not rely on a pre-existing infrastructure. Instead, nodes

within the network communicate directly with each other and dynamically establish

routes. MANETs are self-configuring and capable of rapidly adapting to changes in

the network topology caused by node mobility (Praveen et al., 2022; Khudayer et

al.,2023).

ii. Rogue Node: In the context of network security, a rogue node refers to a network

device that is not authorized to be part of the network or has been compromised by

malicious actors. Such nodes can perform a variety of disruptive actions, including

intercepting data or executing attacks against the network (Avinash, 2024).

iii. Intrusion Detection System (IDS): An Intrusion Detection System (IDS) is a software

application or hardware appliance that monitors network or system activities for

9
 malicious activities or policy violations. Any detected activity is typically reported to

an administrator or collected centrally using a security information and event

management (SIEM) system ((Alsoufiet al., 2021).

iv. Routing Integrity: Routing integrity refers to the assurance that the path taken by data

packets between two endpoints in a network remains unaltered by unauthorized

entities. This concept is crucial in preventing routing attacks where malicious nodes

manipulate the path of the data traffic (Murugesan, Chelladurai, Kuluchamy&

Rajendran, 2024).

v. Identity-Based Security Mechanism: This type of security mechanism utilizes unique

identifiers of the entities within a network, such as digital certificates, to manage

access and control interactions. Identity-based security mechanisms are crucial for

ensuring that only authenticated and authorized devices participate in network

activities (Lee, 2022).

vi. Denial of Service (DoS) Attack: A Denial of Service attack is a malicious attempt to

disrupt normal traffic of a targeted server, service, or network by overwhelming the

target or its surrounding infrastructure with a flood of Internet traffic. DoS attacks

exploit the specific capacity limits that apply to any network resources (Chen &

Kumar, 2021).

vii. Identity-based security: A security mechanism that uses digital certificates to verify

the identity of nodes in a network and to prevent unauthorized access (Wang, Song,

bian& Huang 2024).

viii. Lightweight cryptography: Cryptographic algorithms and protocols that are designed

to minimize the computational overhead of security mechanisms, especially in

resource-constrained environments (Wang et al., 2024).

10
ix. Machine learning: A branch of computer science that uses algorithms and statistical

models to enable systems to learn from data and to improve their performance over

time.

x. Intrusion detection: The process of detecting and responding to unauthorized or

malicious activity in a computer network.

xi. Simulation: The process of modeling the behavior of a system using computer

software, usually for the purpose of analysis and evaluation.

11
CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW
2.0 Mobile Ad-hoc Network (MANET)
MANET (Mobile Ad-hoc Network) is a combination of wireless mobile devices which interacts

with each other through radio communication (Nishi & Pooja, 2022). Wireless communication

employs radio technology to facilitate data transmission without any fixed infrastructures. A

mobile ad hoc network is an example of this data transmission technique, which comprises of

devices such as smart phones, laptops and printers. Some of the key features of mobile ad hoc

networks include self-creation, self-organization and also self-administration (Korir &

Cheruiyot., 2022).

2.1 Applications of Mobile Ad-hoc Networks (MANETs)

Several studies have established the fact that a MANET is a wireless network that enables

mobile devices to connect without relying on any pre-established infrastructure or access point

(Karthik et al., 2010; Oyelakin et al., 2020). There are several scenarios in which MANET

technology can be deployed to solve a problem. For examples, some of the applications of

MANET include: Sensor Networks for environmental monitoring; rescue operations in remote

areas; remote construction sites; emergency operations; military battlefield; civilian

environments; law enforcement operations; and commercial projects as well as in nomadic

education as argued by Oyelakin and Jimoh (2017).

2.2 Challenges in MANETs

Challenges in MANETs are of different categories. They include routing, power consumption,

internetworking, Quality of Service and Security. Brief explanations are as outlined below:

(i) Routing: since the topology of the network is constantly changing, the issue of

routing packets between any pair of nodes becomes a challenging task. Furthermore,

12
 multicast routing even imposes a bigger challenge because the multicast tree is no

longer static. This is due to the random movement of nodes within the network.

Routes between nodes may potentially contain multiple hops. Therefore, the design of

the protocol becomes even more complicated (Umesh, Mewada, Iaddhani & Bunkar,

2011).

(ii) Power Consumption: the routing protocol should take into consideration the limited

power resource of the mobile wireless nodes. In other words, the routing protocol

should be efficient and energy-aware (Kumar et al., 2012).

(iii) Internetworking: a MANET may be interconnected with a fixed network. Therefore,

the routing protocol should take into consideration the coexistence of other routing

protocols designed for fixed networks (Karthik et al., 2010).

(iv) Quality of Service (QoS): Providing different quality of service levels in a constantly

changing environment imposes a further challenge (Karthik et al., 2010).

(v) Security is another critical concern in MANETs, as these networks are vulnerable to

various attacks due to their open nature, lack of centralized control, and limited

resources. The absence of a fixed infrastructure and the presence of malicious nodes

pose significant challenges in maintaining the confidentiality, integrity, and

availability of data transmitted over MANETs (Gupta, & Mittal, 2017).

2.3 Routing Protocols in Mobile Ad-hoc Networks

Mamood and Zengin (2021) established that routing is the method of selecting a traffic path in a

network or over multiple networks, which to send and receive data. It directs the passing of

logically addressed packets from their source toward their ultimate destination through

intermediary nodes. Routing protocol is the routing of packets based on the defined rules and

regulations. Every routing protocol has its own algorithm on the basis of which it discovers and
13
maintains the route. Each routing protocol has a data structure which stores the information of

route and modifies the table as route maintenance is requires.

2.4 Types of Routing Protocols

Figure 1 show the prominent way of classifying MANETs routing protocols. The protocols may

be categorized into two types, Proactive and Reactive. Other category of MANET routing

protocols which is a combination of both proactive and reactive is referred as Hybrid.

MANETs Routing Protocols

Reactive Proactive

Hybrid
Examples: Examples:
AODV, DSR, TORA DSDV, OLSR, WRP etc.

Examples:
ZRP

Figure 1: Classification of MANET routing protocols,(Pandey & Swaroop, 2011).

Thiagarajan,Ganesan, Anbarasu, Baskar, Arthi and Ramkumar (2021) carried out a study that

involved achieving optimised secure approach for the detection and isolation of malicious nodes

in MANET. The authors argued that the technique is efficient for the purpose it was designed

for. Oyelakin et al. (2020) investigated the performances of selected MANET routing algorithms

using a nomadic scenario.. Also, Alslaim, Alaqel and Zaghloul (2014) reported that a Mobile

Ad-hoc Network (MANET) consists of wireless mobile hosts forming a temporary network

14
without the need for standalone infrastructure or centralized administration. The study also

emphasized that the nodes in the network, due to their mobility, possess the ability to self-

organize and self-configure. Notably, these nodes serve not only as hosts but also perform the

functions of routers.

Dynamic Source Routing (DSR) is a pure reactive routing protocol which is based on the

concept of source routing. DSR protocol is composed of two important phases: route discovery

and route maintenance. DSR does not employ any periodic routing advertisement packets, link

status sensing or neighbor detection packets (Sultana et al., 2017). Therefore, the routing packet

overhead is less because of its on-demand nature. Due to dynamic nature of the MANET

operating environment, any route can fail anytime. Therefore, the route maintenance process will

constantly monitors the network and notify the other nodes with the help of route error packets as

well as route cache would be updated (Minhas, Mahmood & Malik, 2012). Raza, Umar, Qasim,

Ashraf and Irfan (2016) defined Mobile Ad-Hoc Network (MANET) as a wireless network

without any fixed infrastructure, comprising autonomous mobile nodes such as smartphones,

laptops, iPads, PDAs, and more. The network has a self-configuring ability to dynamically

reconstruct its topology and routing table information, allowing the exchange of data packets

when nodes join or leave on an ad-hoc basis.

Ad-hoc On-demand Distance Vector (AODV) algorithm is pure reactive in nature and it contains

the properties of both DSR and DSDV protocols. AODV algorithm is an improvement on DSDV

in the sense that it minimizes the number of broadcasts. AODV borrows the concept of hop by

hop routing, sequence numbers, periodic beacon messages from DSDV protocol (Sultana et al.,

2017). When a node wants to send a message to destination node, first it will check whether it

has a valid route to the destination or not. If not, then it broadcast a route request packet (RREQ)

15
to its neighbors which then forwards the request to their neighbors and so-on, until either it

reaches to the intermediate node which has a valid route for the destination or the destination

node. In AODV, once the route request has reached the destination or an intermediate node with

a valid route, the destination/intermediate node responds by unicasting a route reply (RREP)

message back to the neighbor node from which it first received the RREQ (Minhas et al., 2012).

Sunil and Ashwani (2010) provided an overview of various on demand/reactive routing protocols

Dynamic Source Routing, Ad-hoc On-demand Distance Vector and Temporary Ordered Routing

Protocol (DSR, AODV and TORA) by presenting their characteristics, functionality, benefits and

limitations and then makes their comparative analysis so to analyze their performance. It was

observed that the performance of all protocols studied was almost stable in sparse medium with

low traffic. The claim was that TORA performs much better in packet delivery owing to

selection of better routes using acyclic graph.

2.5 Reviewed Works on MANET Routing Protocols

Praveen et al. (2022) proposed a secure and energy-efficient routing protocol using group key

management. Asymmetric key cryptography is used, which involves two specialized nodes,

labeled the Calculator Key (CK) and the Distribution Key (DK). The authors argued that these

two nodes are responsible for the generation, verification, and distribution of secret keys.Kumar

and Singla (2022) carried out a performance analysis of Optimized ACO-AOMDV Routing

Protocol with AODV and AOMDV in MANET scenarios. The work focused on measuring the

performances of the optimized ACO-AOMDV routing algorithms and the existing AODV and

AOMDV ones. It reported that the optimized one out-performed the other two.

Revath, Karpagavall, and Jullet (2020) proposed a Hybrid Approach for Cost-Effective Routing

and Security in MANETs, utilizing BSSO-DSR and AES-ECC Algorithms. The study

16
emphasized the utilization of the DSR-BSSO-MANETs algorithm, which efficiently identifies

malicious attacks in MANETs by optimizing energy consumption and maintaining load

balancing through the BSSO clustering algorithm. The research successfully identified blackhole

attacks using the MND-TX/RX Mechanism. Results from the study concluded that the DSR-

BSSO-MANETs method outperforms other existing systems in terms of routing efficiency,

including improvements in Routing Overhead, Packet Delivery Ratio (PDR), Throughput,

energy consumption, and packet delay.

David, Cordova, Alexandre, Nguyen, Mai, and Guy (2020) introduced a system called Block

graph, designed to advocate for the integration of blockchain technology into mobile ad hoc

networks. This platform facilitates the deployment of ad hoc networks to facilitate transactions

within the blockchain ecosystem.

Oyelakin et al. (2020) conducted a study comparing MANET routing protocols within a

Nomadic Community Scenario, underscoring the significance of these protocols in enhancing

network performance within such contexts. The researchers utilized simulations to explore the

potential of Mobile Ad-hoc Networks (MANETs) in providing network connectivity in extensive

nomadic settings. The study concentrated on scenarios where nomadic communities require

wireless connectivity independent of central network infrastructure due to their operational

conditions. Comparative analysis focused on the DSDV and AODV algorithms in this particular

scenario, employing Network Throughput and End-to-End Delay as performance metrics to

evaluate protocol efficacy under experimental conditions.

Kwan-Wu, John, Aidan, and Rogar (2019) the study shared experiences implementing and

deploying MAD-HOC's AODV and DSDV protocols for MANETs. The study identified key

17
challenges including managing unreliable links, reducing reliance on topology-specific

parameters, optimizing handoff mechanisms, and minimizing packet loss, as well as integrating

neighbor discovery and filtering. The authors emphasized the critical role of neighbor selection

in MANET routing protocols and advocated for adaptive parameter adjustments and proactive

route construction based on signal strength. The study proposed the development of a neighbor

selection sub-layer with diverse metrics, filters, and heuristics to enhance MANET routing.

Thiagarajan and Moorthi (2017) discussed different routing approaches. The study introduced

Optimized Link State Routing (OLSE), a dynamic and secure routing method aimed at

enhancing routing efficiency. OLSE functions as a proactive routing protocol utilizing periodic

metrics, providing effective outcomes in handling network congestion and boosting throughput.

The proposed mechanism underwent evaluation via simulation software, confirming its

effectiveness in attaining optimal routing results.

Table 1: Review of related Work on MANETs Routing protocols in a tabular form

Authors/date Proposed system Solution Advantages Limitations

Praveen et al. secure and energy- The research It was reported System
(2022) efficient routing employs that the optimized complexity, more
protocol is asymmetric key one performed storage,
proposed by using cryptography with better than the performance
group key two nodes, the other two. Overhead.
management. Calculator Key
(CK) and the
Distribution Key
(DK), which
manage the
generation,
verification, and
distribution of
secret keys.
Kumar and Singla Performance Network Results indicate Testing in real
(2022) analysis of performance was that as node size environments and
Optimized ACO- assessed using increases, the additional
AOMDV Routing metrics including ACO-AOMDV comparative
Protocol with end-to-end delay, routing protocol analyses are
18
 AODV and energy surpasses others in needed for a
AOMDV in consumption, throughput, delay, comprehensive
MANET scenarios packet delivery energy efficiency, evaluation.
ratio, and and packet
throughput. delivery ratio.
Revath, A Hybrid The study The study Complexity,
Karpagavall and Approach for successfully concluded that the Resource
Jullet (2020) Cost-Effective demonstrated the DSR-BSSO- intensive, Latency
Routing and detection of MANETs method and scalability
Security in blackhole attacks surpasses other issues
MANETs using using the MND- systems in routing
BSSO-DSR and TX/RX efficiency,
AES-ECC Mechanism showing
Algorithms. improvements in
packet delivery
ratio, throughput,
energy usage, and
packet dela
David, Cordova, A system named It is a platform The technology Increased latency,
Alexandre, Block graph. that promotes enhances security higher resource
Nguyen, Mai and blockchain and data integrity consumption, and
Guy (2020) technology for in MANETs. reduced
mobile ad hoc scalability.
networks.
Oyelakin et al. A Study on The The study AODV algorithm Network
(2020) Comparative conducted has better overhead, battery
Analysis Of simulation on performance over consumption and
MANET Routing Mobile Ad-hoc DSDV in terms of use of
Protocols In Network throughput and computational
Nomadic (MANET) to end-to-end delay resources.
Community explore its
Scenario potential for
network
connectivity in a
vast nomadic
environment
Kwan-Wu, John, Implementation The study noted The study The study
Aidan, and Rogar and deployment that selecting highlighted key recommended
(2019) experiences with neighbors is issues including adjusting
MAD-HOC's crucial in the managing parameters
AODV and DSDV routing protocols unstable links, adaptively and
protocols for of MANETs. reducing reliance investigating the
MANETs on topology- proactive building
specific of routes based on
parameters, signal strength.
improving
handoff
mechanisms and
packet loss
reduction, and
enhancing

19
 neighbor
discovery and
filtering
Thiagarajan and Efficient routing The study Effective Periodic flooding,
Moorthi (2017) protocols for conducted routing outcomes in increased
mobile ad hoc in ad hoc handling network overhead and
network networks, congestion and reduced scalability
employing a enhancing data
dynamic source transmission rates
routing scheme to
transmit data from
source to receiver
nodes

Protocol Type Strengths Weaknesses

TORA Reactive Better for determining No support on multicast
optimal routes networks
AODV Reactive Scalable, loop free Delays
DSR Reactive Fast in route reconnection. Delays
DSDV Proactive Track the best route High energy consumption
OLSR Proactive Less delay, user friendly Maximum energy required.
CGSR Proactive Saves on storage Maximum energy required.
NEPSSS Routing issues managed. More energy consumed
Formal Modelling Handles issues related to Dropping of the packets, more
challenging information. energy use.
AOMDV Minimal energy consumed Affected by bad reports,
packet dropping
Trust Based Approach Untrusted nodes are Dropping of the packets, low
recorded. security
Trust Based Technique Low energy consumption Higher packet drops and
network collision.
NTPA Issues on packet routing are Maximum energy consumed Packet dropping
handled.
Multidimensional Trust Evaluation Challenges of bad nodes are More energy, drops packets.
Security Solution solved.
Direct and Indirect Trust Calculation Better throughput. Network collision Drops
packets and low speed.
Table2:Conventional MANETs Routing Protocols ,types, Strengths and weaknesses (Korir & Cheruiyot., 2022).

2.6 Reviewed Works on Security Challenges and Detection of Attacks in

MANETs
Murugeshwari, Amirthavalli, Sri, and Pari (2023) conducted research on a hybrid key

authentication scheme aimed at ensuring privacy in Ad-hoc communication. Study introduces a

team-centered rekey control framework incorporating a grouping component that partitions the

network into smaller groups via group clusters. This method effectively addresses privacy

20
concerns by utilizing rekeying to update shareable keys, facilitating both forward and reverse

privacy. The periodic beacon signals transmitted by team members aid in detecting and

preventing node replication attacks within the sensor field. Experimental findings illustrate that

the proposed system surpasses the current model in terms of power efficiency, privacy level, key

precision, memory usage, and time efficiency.

Ghodichor et al. (2023) investigated methods for enhancing the security of MANETs against

attacks by employing a blockchain-based Secure Routing Algorithm (SRA). MANETs,

characterized by their lack of infrastructure and dynamic topology, are susceptible to various

attacks. The proposed SRA, incorporating blockchain technology, verifies nodes and safeguards

both data and control flow. The research demonstrates that this approach enhances MANET

security, reduces delay, and improves parameters such as packet delivery ratio, throughput, and

end-to-end delay. The research indicated that future research will explore additional applications

of blockchain in MANETs. Meanwhile, Korir et al. (2022) conducted a survey on the security

challenges inherent in current MANET routing protocols, providing valuable insights into

security-related issues within these protocols.

Nishi and Pooja (2022) argued that MANETs commonly encounter numerous security

vulnerabilities due to their inherent decentralized nature. This characteristic renders mobile

nodes/devices vulnerable to various attacks. Network layer attacks in MANETs encompass

Black hole, Gray Hole, Wormhole, flooding, and sinkhole attacks, which disrupt packet routing

and diminish network performance. MANETs utilize several routing protocols such as AODV,

DSR, DSDV, and ZRP. Additionally, it has been noted that MANETs face limitations including

energy constraints, security attacks, scalability issues, and security vulnerabilities.

21
Srilakshmi, Alghamdi, Vuyyuru, Veeraiah, and Alotaibi (2022) introduced a Secure

Optimization Routing Algorithm tailored for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks (MANETs). This

algorithm leverages optimization techniques to enhance routing efficiency and ensure secure,

trust-based, and energy-efficient navigation within MANETs. The approach employs fuzzy

clustering to designate Cluster Heads (CHs) based on indirect, direct, and recent trust

evaluations, while value nodes are identified according to their trust ratings. Subsequently, CHs

facilitate multi-hop routing through the designated protocol, selecting optimal routes considering

factors such as latency, performance, and network connectivity.

Sivapriya and Mohandas (2022) presented a comprehensive overview of topics that have been

discussed on MANET security, identifying elements contributing to threat scenarios,

summarizing network security requirements, and categorizing attacks based on the

communication protocol stack. The article also outlines potential research directions for

developing future security systems for MANETs and related application paradigms.Thiagarajan,

Ganesanb, Baskar, and Ramkumar (2021) proposed a system for detecting and isolating

malicious nodes in MANETs. Upon detection, the malicious node is isolated and discarded, and

an alternative path is established using various techniques. The system employs an algorithm for

enabling multipath reliable routing, discovering paths for a group of nodes, and reorganizing

these paths based on reliability index.

Khan, Chawhan, Mushrif, and Neole (2021) devised a mechanism to evaluate the performance of

the Ad hoc On-demand Distance Vector Protocol (AODV) under the influence of Black hole,

Gray hole, and Worm hole attacks in MANETs. The research proposed a security mechanism

based on two techniques: cryptography-based and trust-based. While cryptography offers greater

accuracy, it consumes more energy and time for attack detection and prevention compared to

22
trust-based techniques. Trust-based methods, although more energy and time efficient, may not

always provide accurate detection, especially for multiple attacks. The researchers suggested that

this technique is not efficient for multiple attacks and may be suitable for specific types of

attacks.

Khalifa, Nuri, and Ali (2021) proposed an Intrusion Detection System (IDS) utilizing three

Machine Learning (ML) techniques: Random Forest (RF), Support Vector Machines (SVM), and

Naive Bayes (NB). These algorithms were employed to classify nodes in MANETs utilizing the

Dynamic Source Routing (DSR) protocol. The Random Forest algorithm exhibited the highest

accuracy in experimental research. SVM, a supervised learning technique, identifies patterns for

classification and regression, reducing data and enhancing predictive performance. NB is a

probability classifier model capable of handling multiple classes simultaneously, requiring

minimal data for training compared to other models.

Regassa and Yeom (2021) implemented an IDS mechanism alongside the OLSR protocol to

effectively detect misbehaving nodes in MANETs. The mechanism validates the path and

identifies attackers, isolating them through an alternative path for End-to-End communication.

While this approach introduces some network overhead, it significantly enhances network

security. Future research directions include evaluating the routing protocol and developing

mechanisms to minimize the introduced overhead in network traffic.Additionally, Ibrahim,

Ahmed, Sundaram, and Karthika (2021) introduced the rushing attack in the AOMDV multicast

routing protocol, highlighting its detrimental impact on MANET performance. Subsequently, the

research implemented a prevention mechanism based on time threshold and random route

selection techniques. The research asserted that the rushing attack involves nodes transmitting

excessive route requests with higher transmission power, disrupting data transmission. The

23
prevention mechanism effectively safeguarded the network, enhancing throughput, packet

delivery ratio, and reducing end-to-end delay compared to the attacked AOMDV routing

protocol. The research noted that this method does not necessitate additional external resources,

rendering it suitable for resource-constrained Mobile Ad hoc Networks.

Pooja, Kavita, and Gia (2020) proposed a protective mechanism against dual attacks in

MANETs, focusing on Black Hole and Gray Hole attacks. The approach involved leveraging the

concept of Artificial Neural Network (ANN) as a deep learning algorithm alongside the swarm-

based Artificial Bee Colony (ABC) optimization technique. The ABC optimization technique

simulates the intelligent behavior of honeybees and categorizes network nodes into two lists:

healthy nodes and affected nodes. Affected nodes are further categorized into BHA nodes and

GHA nodes. ANN is then utilized to train the network using these categorized properties. The

network's performance was evaluated based on parameters such as Packet Delivery Ratio (PDR),

throughput, and delay. Results demonstrated significant improvements in PDR, throughput, and

delay when employing the swarm-based Artificial Bee Colony (ABC) optimization technique for

protection against BHA and GHA attacks.

Deepak, Nisha, Sunil, and Sudesh (2020) conducted an analysis and comparison of the ant

colony optimization algorithm with DSDV, AODV, and AOMDV, focusing on finding the

shortest path in MANETs. In a similar vein, Swarm Intelligence (SI) techniques, including Ant-

Colony Optimization (ACO) and Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO), are employed to discover

optimal communication paths among nodes. The protocol is optimized to select the most

efficient path, thereby extending communication availability. These SI-based methods address

various routing challenges and offer enhancements in packet delivery speed, throughput, power

efficiency, and packet delay (Goyal and Rani, 2022).

24
Prasath and Sreemathy (2019) investigated the performance of the optimized Dynamic Source

Routing protocol (DSR) for MANETs. The research utilized the Firefly algorithm to adapt the

conventional DSR algorithm and determine the best routes between communication nodes. The

proposed technique enhanced DSR routing performance by employing the Firefly algorithm to

facilitate well-coordinated packet transfers from source to destination nodes. The optimal path

selection was based on factors such as link quality, node mobility, and end-to-end

delay.Bhagyalakshmi (2018) proposed Q-AODV, a Flood Control Ad-Hoc on Demand Distance

Vector Routing Protocol, designed to minimize control packet volume by reducing intermediary

nodes in the route discovery process. It utilizes queue length to manage route request (RREQ)

broadcasts, resulting in improved Quality of Service (QoS) metrics and network longevity

compared to AODV.Ravilla and Reddy (2016) explored the use of the Secured Hash Algorithm

(SHA3-256) for secured routing in MANETs employing the Hybrid Routing Technique. The

Hashed Message Authentication Code (HMAC) was implemented to ensure data integrity and

authenticity. The Zone Routing Protocol (ZRP) was utilized as the hybrid routing method

(Puttini et al., 2006).

Authors/date Proposed system Methodology Result Limitations

Murugeshwari, A hybrid key The study The proposed Network overhead
Amirthavalli, Sri authentication efficiently tackles system surpasses in terms of
and Pari (2023) scheme to ensure privacy concerns by the existing model computational
privacy in Ad-hoc employing rekeying in terms of power
communication. to refresh shareable efficiency, privacy resources and
keys, facilitating level, key precision, network
both forward and memory usage, and bandwidth.
reverse privacy. time efficiency.
Ghodichor et al. Enhancing the The proposed SRA, Reduces delay and Additional
(2023) security of integrates improves applications of
MANETs against blockchain parameters such as blockchain in
attacks by technology, packet delivery MANETs need to
employing a authenticates nodes ratio, throughput be explore.
blockchain-based and ensures the and end-to-end
Secure Routing security of both data delay.
Algorithm (SRA). and control
processes.
Nishi and Pooja Argued that Network layer Different security Energy constraints,

25
(2022) MANETs commonly attacks like Black mechanisms are security attacks,
encounter hole, Gray Hole, been proposed to scalability issues,
numerous security Wormhole, reduce or minimize and security
vulnerabilities due the attacks. vulnerabilities.
flooding, and
to their inherent
sinkhole attacks
decentralized
disrupt packet
nature.
routing and
reduce network
performance.
Srilakshmi, A Secure The approach Routing efficiency Network overhead
Alghamdi, Optimization employs fuzzy and trust-based
Vuyyuru, Veeraiah, Routing Algorithm clustering to security
and Alotaibi (2022) tailored for Mobile designate Cluster
Ad Hoc Networks Heads (CHs) based
(MANETs). on indirect, direct,
and recent trust
evaluations, while
value nodes are
identified according
to their trust ratings
Sivapriya and A comprehensive The effort led to Potential research
Mohandas (2022) overview of topics the identification directions for
discussed on of elements developing future
MANETs Security security systems for
contributing to MANETs and
threat scenarios, a application
summary of paradigms.
network security
requirements, and
the categorization
of attacks based
on the
communication
protocol stack
Khan, Chawhan, a mechanism to Cryptography-based Offer greater Consumes energy
Mushrif, and Neole evaluate the and trust-based Accuracy and time, not
(2021) performance of the efficient for
Ad hoc On-demand multiple attacks.
Distance Vector
Protocol (AODV)
under the influence
of Black hole, Gray
hole, and Worm
hole attacks in
MANETs.
Khalifa, Nuri, and An Intrusion RF to classify Accuracy, better Network overhead
Ali (2021) Detection System nodes, SVM to predictive
(IDS) utilizing three identify patterns and performance,
Machine Learning NB to minimize handle multiple
(ML) techniques: data set. classes.
Random Forest
(RF), Support
Vector Machines
(SVM), and Naive
26
 Bayes (NB).
Regassa and Yeom An IDS mechanism The mechanism It enhanced network It introduced
(2021) alongside the OLSR validates the path security overhead in network
protocol to and identifies traffic
effectively detect attackers, isolating
misbehaving nodes them through an
in MANETs alternative path for
End-to-End
communication.
Ibrahim, Ahmed, Rushing attack in prevention Effective safeguard Network overhead
Sundaram, and the AOMDV mechanism based the network,
Karthika (2021) multicast routing on time threshold throughput, packet
protocol, and random route delivery ratio
highlighting its selection
detrimental impact techniques.
on MANET
performance.
Pooja, Kavita, and A protective Artificial Neural Improvements in
Gia (2020) mechanism against Network (ANN) and PDR, throughput,
dual attacks in Swarm-based and delay
MANETs, focusing Artificial Bee
on Black Hole and Colony (ABC)
Gray Hole attacks.
Deepak, Nisha, An analysis and Swarm Intelligence packet delivery various routing
Sunil, and Sudesh comparison of the (SI) techniques; speed, throughput, challenges
(2020) ant colony Ant-Colony power efficiency,
optimization Optimization (ACO) and packet delay
algorithm with and Particle Swarm
DSDV, AODV, and Optimization (PSO)
AOMDV
Prasath and The performance of Firefly algorithm Reduced packet
Sreemathy (2019) the optimized volumes
Dynamic Source
Routing protocol
(DSR) for
MANETs.
Table3: Review of related work on security in MANETs in tabular form

Authors/date Problem Solution Advantages Limitations

Luong, Vo, Hoang, IDS of Flooding Machine Higher misbehavior Not resistant
2019 attacks learning(RDFVwith detection ratio.Higher todynamicAttack
DATA and packet deliveryratio
AODV) Reduced
routingoverheadLower
end-to-enddelay
Sbai and Boukhari IDS of datafloodingor Deep learning High performances Only resistant
(2020) UDPfloodingattack (Accuracy, Precision, toflooding attacks
Recall and F1-score)
Chatterjee and Saha Clustering Artificial Creating model to Large requirement of
(2019) NeuralNetworks(ANNs predict the scale of storage and time
). the weights necessary processing
to select cluster heads
for various networks
IDS of Blackhole Artificial Reduction of packet Only resistant
attacks NeuralNetwork, loss rate, delay and toBlack hole attack
27
 Kaushik (2021) FireflyAlgorithm energy consumption
withAODV
Ghasemnezhad and Routing Fuzzy Logic-Based Minimizing cost and Done only for a
Ghaffari (2018) ReliableRouting network resources single
Protocol(FRRP) consumption unicast routing
Protocol
Hiremath, Anuradha IDS of Blackhole Fuzzy inferencesystem Detection and Detect only
and Pattan (2016) attacks (FIS) prevention Blackhole attack
of the cooperative
black hole attack
Table4 : some existing AI-based security methods in MANETs(Khalfaoui, Farchane& Safi., 2022)

Detection and Type of attack Simulation Tool used Year

prevention Technique
used
Cryptography and trust Black hole, Gray hole, NetSim 2021
based Worm Hole
ANN with Swarm based Black hole, Gray hole MATLAB 2020
Artificial Bee Colony
ML Techniques- Random DDoS NS-2 2022
Forest, SVM Support
Vector Machines, Naive
Bayes

OLSR protocol with IDS IDS NS-2 2022

Random route selection Rushing attack NS-2 2021
technique
ANN - Cuckoo search IDS MATLAB 2021
algorithm
Chimp CoCoWa-AODV Selfish nodes NS-2 2021
Dynamic Trust based Gray hole NS-2 2021
security protocol
VANET Grouping Blockchain linked routing NS-2 2020
Algorithm using method
clustering Gray hole*
Technique
Secure Energy Routing Active and passive attacks NS-2 2021
Protocol
Mobile based clustering- Sybil attack Java Simulation 2022
MOBIC algorithm
AODV-BS routing Black hole attack NS-2 2021
protocol
Trust change detection Malicious nodes Java Simulation 2022
mechanism by clustering
Detection and prevention Black hole NS-2 2021
system (DPS)
Spray and wait, Epidemic, Black hole ONE Simulator 2021
Prophet Protocols
AODV and SAODV Black hole NS-2 and Python 2022
protocol using SVM
On demand distance Black hole NS-2 2021
vector routing protocol
Table5: Tabular representation of some of review work carried out earlier (Goyal & Rani., 2022)
28
29
CHAPTER THREE

Methodology
3.0 Introduction
This chapter described all the research process require to achieve all objectives listed in chapter

one. Each step of the methodology is logically detailed corresponding with the activities to

accomplish each objective of the study.

Figure2 shows the architectural representation of Research Methodology

Methodology Plan

Design an intrusion detection

Objective 1 system using Support Vector
Machine

Use lightweight cryptography

Objective 2 algorithm to reduce computation
overhead

Evaluate the performance of the

Objective 3 proposed system using NS-3

Compare the performance of the

proposed system with existing
Objective 4
approaches in terms of detection
accuracy, network overhead e.t.c

30
Lightweight Support Vector Machine (SVM) in Mobile Ad hoc Networks (MANETs) involves

adapting SVM algorithms to the specific constraints and characteristics of MANET

environments, such as limited computational resources, dynamic topology, and energy

constraints. Here are the steps involved:

3.1 Support Vector Machine

A Support Vector Machine (SVM) is a supervised machine learning algorithm used for

classification and regression tasks. It works by finding an optimal hyperplane in an N-

dimensional space that maximizes the margin between different classes of data points. SVMs

were developed in the 1990s by Vladimir N. Vapnik and his colleagues. They are widely used in

machine learning for their ability to handle both linear and nonlinear classification problems.

SVMs distinguish between classes by finding the best decision boundary, known as the

hyperplane, which maximizes the margin between the closest data points of different classes.

Support vectors are the data points that determine this maximal margin. When data is not linearly

separable, SVMs use kernel functions to transform the data into a higher-dimensional space for

linear separation, a technique known as the "kernel trick." Popular kernel functions include

linear, polynomial, radial basis function (RBF), and sigmoid kernels. SVMs are powerful tools

with applications in various fields like healthcare, natural language processing, signal processing,

and image recognition.

3.1.1 The key steps involved in using a Support Vector Machine (SVM) algorithm are:
I. Prepare the data

Data acquisition: training data will be gathered from Kaggle repository, which will

consists of input features (x) and corresponding labels (y) indicating the class or category.

Data Preprocess: this will process and scale the input features as needed. It helps the

SVM algorithm converge faster and perform better.

31
 II. Kernel function: The kernel function maps the input data into a higher-dimensional

feature space, allowing the SVM to find a linear separator (hyperplane) in that space.

Common kernel functions include linear, polynomial, radial basis function (RBF), and

sigmoid. The choice of kernel function depends on the complexity of the data and the

problem at hand.

III. SVM model: The SVM algorithm will train the model by finding the optimal hyperplane

that maximizes the margin between the data points of different classes. This is done by

solving a quadratic optimization problem using techniques like Lagrange multipliers. The

data points that lie closest to the hyperplane and influence its position are called support

vectors.

IV. Evaluate the model: Assess the performance of the trained SVM model on a separate test

dataset Metrics like accuracy, precision, recall, and F1-score can be used to evaluate the

model's performance.

V. Tune the hyperparameters: SVM has hyperparameters that can be tuned to improve its

performance, such as the regularization parameter (C) and the kernel parameters.

Techniques like grid search or cross-validation can be used to find the optimal

hyperparameter values.

VI. Use the trained model for prediction: Once the SVM model is trained and tuned, it can be

used to classify new, unseen data points into the appropriate classes.

32
figure 3 show the architectural representation of SVM for the proposed system
Start

Data Acquisition: the data will be gotten from

Kaggle repository

Data preprocess: this will process and scale the input

features as needed (Training Dataset)

The kernel function will map the input data into a higher
-dimensional feature space (Feature Extraction)

Train SVM Model

Evaluate SVM Model

N Are all the SVM

parameters
obtained

YES

SVM Model

Implement Model

Stop

33
3.2 Lightweight Cryptography
lightweight cryptography for Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks (MANETs) is essential due to the

computing constraints of low-capacity mobile devices. Researchers have focused on developing

lightweight cryptographic primitives to address these constraints efficiently

3.2.1 Types of Lightweight Cryptography commonly used in MANETS:

I. Symmetric Key Cryptography:

i. Stream Ciphers: Stream ciphers like RC4, HC-128, or Grain are often preferred in

MANETs due to their simplicity and efficiency in hardware and software

implementations.

ii. Block Ciphers: Lightweight block ciphers such as PRESENT, KATAN, or SIMON

are suitable for resource-constrained environments like MANETs.

II. Hash Functions:

i. Cryptographic hash functions like MD5, SHA-1, or SHA-256 are used for integrity

verification and message authentication in MANETs. However, the choice of hash

function should consider both security and efficiency.

III. Elliptic Curve Cryptography (ECC):

i. ECC offers strong security with shorter key lengths compared to traditional

cryptosystems, making it suitable for resource-constrained environments like

MANETs. ECC variants like ECDSA (Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm)

can be used for digital signatures.

IV. Identity-Based Cryptography (IBC):**

i. IBC eliminates the need for certificates by using user identities directly as public keys,

which reduces the overhead of key management in MANETs. Pairing-based

cryptography is often used in IBC schemes.

34
V. Group Key Management:**

i. Lightweight group key management schemes such as those based on key trees or

polynomial-based techniques are used for secure group communication in MANETs.

These schemes aim to minimize overhead while providing efficient key distribution and

management.

3.3 Process Of Asymmetric Encryption Like RSA

 Key Generation: Generate a key pair consisting of a public key and a private key. The

public key is shared with others, while the private key is kept secret. In RSA, this

involves selecting two large prime numbers, computing their product (the modulus), and

finding the public and private exponents.

 Key Distribution: Share the public key with parties that need to encrypt data to send to

you securely. The private key should be securely stored and not shared with anyone.

 Data Encryption: To send a message securely, the sender obtains the recipient's public

key and uses it to encrypt the message. This is typically done using padding schemes to

enhance security.

 Message Transmission: Transmit the encrypted message over the communication

channel. Asymmetric encryption is often used for key exchange in secure communication

protocols like SSL/TLS.

 Data Decryption: Upon receiving the encrypted message, the recipient uses their private

key to decrypt the message and recover the original plaintext. This process ensures that

only the intended recipient, who possesses the corresponding private key, can decrypt the

message.

 Authentication and Integrity: Asymmetric encryption can also be used for digital

signatures. The sender can use their private key to create a digital signature for a

35
 message, which can be verified by anyone with access to the sender's public key. This

ensures message authenticity and integrity.

 Key Management: Proper management of public and private keys is essential. This

includes securely storing private keys, rotating keys periodically, and revoking

compromised keys.

 Performance Considerations: Asymmetric encryption, especially with algorithms like

RSA, can be computationally intensive compared to symmetric encryption. Consider

performance implications, especially in resource-constrained environments like

MANETs.

3.3.1 Steps For Lightweight Symmetric Algorithms

Feature Selection and Dimensionality Reduction:

 Identify the most relevant features for classification or regression tasks in MANETs,

considering factors such as node mobility, link quality, energy levels, and network

topology.

 Employ dimensionality reduction techniques like Principal Component Analysis (PCA)

or feature selection algorithms to reduce the dimensionality of the feature space and

eliminate irrelevant or redundant features.

Selection of Lightweight SVM Algorithm:

 Choose a lightweight variant of SVM suitable for MANETs, such as LinearSVC for

linear SVMs or NuSVC for nu-SVM.

 Consider the computational efficiency, memory footprint, and scalability of the chosen

algorithm, as well as its ability to handle dynamic data and limited resources.

Data Collection and Preprocessing:

36
  Collect and preprocess data relevant to the MANET application, including network traffic

logs, node characteristics, or sensor data.

 Preprocess the collected data to handle missing values, outliers, and noise, and normalize

features to a common scale.

Model Training:

 Split the preprocessed data into training and testing sets.

 Train the lightweight SVM model using the training data, optimizing hyperparameters as

necessary through techniques like cross-validation.

 Consider distributed or incremental learning approaches to train SVM models in

MANETs, leveraging data parallelism or online learning to handle large datasets or

dynamic environments.

Model Evaluation:

 Evaluate the trained lightweight SVM model's performance on the testing data using

appropriate evaluation metrics such as accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score, or area under

the ROC curve (AUC).

 Validate the model's performance under realistic MANET conditions, considering factors

like node mobility, network partitioning, and varying environmental conditions.

Integration into MANET Environment:

 Integrate the trained lightweight SVM model into the MANET environment, ensuring

compatibility with existing network protocols and systems.

 Implement mechanisms for real-time data collection, feature extraction, and model

inference within the MANET nodes or network infrastructure.

37
3.4 Network Simulator 3
Network Simulator version 3, NS-3, is a new simulator that is intended to eventually replace the

aging NS-2 simulator. NS-3 officially started around mid 2006, and the first stable version was

released in June 2008, containing models for TCP/IP, WiFi, OLSR, CSMA (Ethernet), and point-

to-point links, “GOD routing”, among others. Additional stable versions have been subsequently

released, including Python bindings, learning bridge, and real-time scheduler for version 3.2

(Sep. 2008), emulation, ICMP, and IPv6 addresses in NS3.3 (Dec. 2008), WiFi improvements,

object naming system, and “tap bridge” in NS-3.4 (Apr. 2009). Even though NS-2 still has a

greater number of models included in the distribution, NS-3 has a good development momentum

and is believed to have a better core architecture, better suited to receive community

contributions. Core architecture features such as a COM-like interface aggregation and query

model, automatic memory management, callback objects, and realistic packets, make for a

healthier environment in which to develop new complex simulation models. In addition, it is

reportedlyArtner, Lehn and Wehrle (2009)one of the better performing simulation tools available

till today.

3.4.1 Features Of Network Simulator 3

 NS-3 OBJECT CLASS: NS-3 enhances the basic C++ object model by incorporating the

ns-3 Object class, which introduces additional features like the attribute system and

object aggregation

 NODE REPRESENTATION: in an ns-3 network topology, the fundamental unit is the

Node object. Various components of a node are also represented as objects and are

associated with the node. For instance, in a simulation where a laptop is depicted as a

node, the WiFi radio component would be represented as an object installed on it.

38
 OBJECT AGGREGATION: NS-3 facilitates the attachment of objects to nodes through

object aggregation, which allows the addition of diverse objects to a node at runtime

without altering the node class itself. However, a node can only have one instance of an

object from any given class. In the energy management framework described, object

aggregation is utilized to attach EnergySource objects to a node.

 ATTRIBUTE SYSTEM: Another crucial aspect of ns-3 is its attribute system. This

system enables users to alter specific simulation parameters by setting the attributes of

objects, thus avoiding direct modifications to class source code. This is accomplished

through high-level simulation scripts. In the context of our energy framework, attributes

such as the initial energy and supply voltage of an Energy Source are set this way.

 Simulator Class: the management and timing of simulation events in ns-3 are handled by

the Simulator class (Nabar and Poovendran, 2012).

39
REFERENCES
Alslaim, M. N., Alaqel, H. A., & Zaghloul, S. S. (2014). A comparative study of MANET
routing protocols. In The Third International Conference on e-Technologies and
Networks for Development (ICeND2014) (pp. 178-182) , IEEE.
Avinash, J. (2024). Routing and Security Based Ad-hoc Networks Configuration for
Identification of Attack Using Reinforcement Learning Approach.

Bhatnagar, G., Gobi, N., Aqeel, H., & Solanki, B. S. (2023). Sparrow-based Differential
Evolutionary Search Algorithm for Mobility Aware Energy Efficient Clustering in
MANET Network. International Journal of Intelligent Systems and Applications in
Engineering, 11(8s), 135-142.
Bisen, D., Mishra, S., Saurabh, P.: K-Means Based Cluster Formation and Head Selection
Through Artificial Neural Network in MANET (2021). https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-
667651/v1
Chatterjee, B., Saha, H.N.: Parameter Training in MANET using Artificial Neural Network. Inte.
J. Compu. Net. Inf. Secur, 11(9), pp. 1–8 (2019).
https://doi.org/10.5815/ijcnis.2019.09.0112 H. Khalfaoui et al.
Conti Marco & Giordano Silvia (2007).Multihop Ad Hoc Networking: The Reality,IEEE
Communications Magazine 45(4):88 – 95, Follow journal, DOI:
10.1109/MCOM.2007.343617,IEEE Xplore
David Alexis, Cordova Morales, Alexandre Laube, Nguyen Thi, Mai Trang, Guy Pujolle (2020).
Blockgraph: A blockchain for mobile ad hoc networks. In 2020 4th cyber security in
networking conference (CSNet) (pp. 1-8). IEEE.
Deepak Sinwar, Nisha Sharma, Sunil Maakar& Sudesh Kumar (2020). Analysis and comparison
of ant colony optimization algorithm with DSDV, AODV, and AOMDV based on
shortest path in MANET, Journal of Information and Optimization Sciences 41(2):621-
632, DOI: 10.1080/02522667.2020.1733193
Dilli, R., & Reddy, P. C. S. (2016, October). Implementation of security features in MANETs
using SHA-3 standard algorithm. In 2016 International Conference on Computation
System and Information Technology for Sustainable Solutions (CSITSS) (pp. 455-458).
IEEE.
E. Anthi, L. Williams, M. Słowińska, G. Theodorakopoulos and P. Burnap, “A supervised
intrusion detection
Ghasemnezhad, S., Ghaffari, A.: Fuzzy logic based reliable and real-time routing protocol for
mobile ad hoc networks. Wireless Personal Communications, 98(1), pp. 593–611 (2018).
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11277-017-4885-9

Ghodichor, N., Sahu, D., Borkar, G., & Sawarkar, A. (2023). Secure Routing Protocol To
Mitigate Attacks By Using Blockchain Technology In Manet. arXiv preprint
arXiv:2304.04254.

40
Goswami M. M., (2017) “AODV based adaptive distributed hybrid multipath routing for mobile
AdHoc network,” in Proc. International Conference on Inventive Communication and
Computational Technologies, pp. 410-414.
Hiremath, P.S., Anuradha, T., Pattan, P.: Adaptive fuzzy inference system for detection and
prevention of cooperative black hole attack in MANETs. In 2016 International
Conference on Information Science (ICIS). IEEE, pp. 245–251 (2016).
https://doi.org/10.1109/INFOSCI.2016.7845335
Ibrahim H. A., Ahmed A. S., Sundaram B. B., Karthika P., (2021), Prevention of Rushing Attack
in AOMDV using Random Route Selection Technique in Mobile Adhoc Network,
Proceedings of Fifth Int. Conf. on Electronics, Communication and Aerospace Tech.
(ICECA2021) IEEE.
Kalimuthu, V.K., Samydurai, G.: Fuzzy Logic Based DSR Trust Estimation Routing Protocol for
MANET Using Evolutionary Algorithms. Tehnickivjesnik/Technical Gazette, 28(6),
2006–2014 (2021). https://doi.org/10.17559/TV-20200612102818
Karthik S, Kannan S., Arunachalam V. P., Ravichandran T., and Valarmathi M. L..(2010).An
investigation about performance comparison of multihop wireless ad-hoc network routing
protocols in MANET, International Journal of Computer Science Issues(IJCSI), 7(3), pp.
35— 41.
Kaushik, P.: An Improved Black Hole Detection and Prevention Mechanism in MANET using
Firefly and Neural Network. Inte. J. Innov. Sci. Rese. Techn, 6(10) (2021)
Khalfaoui, H., Farchane, A., & Safi, S. (2022, May). An Overview of the Security Improvements
of Artificial Intelligence in MANET. In International Conference on Cybersecurity,
Cybercrimes, and Smart Emerging Technologies (pp. 135-146). Cham: Springer
International Publishing.

Khalifa M. M., Nuri O., Ali Alheeti K. M., (2021).New Intrusion Detection System to Protect
MANET Networks Employing Machine Learning Techniques, International Conference
of Modern Trends in Information and Communication Tech. Industry (MTICTI) IEEE.
Khan A. U., Chawhan M. D., Mushrif M. M., Neole B., (2021).Performance Analysis of Adhoc
On-demand Distance Vector Protocol under the influence of Black-Hole, Gray-Hole and
Worm-Hole Attacks in Mobile Adhoc Network, Proceedings of the Fifth Int. Conf. on
Intelligent Computing and Control Systems (ICICCS 2021), IEEE Xplore Part Number:
CFP21K74-ART; ISBN: 978-0-7381-1327-2.
Khudayer, B. H., Alzabin, L. R., Anbar, M., Tawafak, R. M., Wan, T. C., AlSideiri, A., ... & Al-
Amiedy, T. A. (2023). A Comparative Performance Evaluation of Routing Protocols for
Mobile Ad-hoc Networks. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and
Applications, 14(4).
Korir, F., & Cheruiyot, W. (2022). A survey on security challenges in the current MANET
routing protocols. Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances, 12(01), 078-
091.

41
Kumar S., and Kumar J. (2012).Comparative analysis of proactive and reactive routing protocols
in mobile ad-hoc networks (MANET), Journal of Information and Operations
Management, 3(1), pp. 92—95.
Kumar V. and Singla S., (2022). Performance Analysis of Optimized ACO-AOMDV Routing
Protocol with AODV and AOMDV in MANET, in Advances in Computing and Data
Sciences: 6th International Conference, ICACDS 2022, Kurnool, India, April 22–23,
2022, Revised
Kwan-Wu Chin, John Judge, Aidan Williams & Roger Kermode Sydney (2019). Networks and
Communications Lab Motorola Australia Research Centre 12 Lord St, Botany, NSW,
Australia {kwchin, johnj, aidan, rkermode}@arc.corp.mot.com
Luong, N.T., Vo, T.T., Hoang, D.: FAPRP: A machine learning approach to flooding attacks
prevention routing protocol in mobile ad hoc networks. Wireless Communications and
Mobile Computing, 2019, pp. 1–17 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/6869307

M. M. Khalifa, O. Nuri, K. M. Ali Alheeti, (2021), “New Intrusion Detection System to Protect
MANET Networks Employing Machine Learning Techniques,” Int. Conf. of Modern
Trends in Information and Communication Tech. Industry (MTICTI) IEEE.
Mamood, A., & Zengin, A. (2021). Performance Evaluation of MANET Routing Protocols
AODV and DSDV Using NS2 Simulator. Sakarya University Journal of Computer and
Information Sciences, 4(1), 1-10.
Minhas, H. Mahmood, & H. Malik,(2012). Incentive driven cooperation to avoid packet loss in
multihop ad hoc networks, in 2012 International Conference on Emerging Technologies,
2012, 1–6.
Murugesan, P., Chelladurai, C. C., Kuluchamy, P., & Rajendran, U. SECURING MOBILE AD-
HOC NETWORKS USING ROBUST SECURED IPS ROUTING APPROACH
THROUGH ATTACK IDENTIFICATION AND ELIMINATION IN MANETS (2024).

Murugeshwari B., Saral Jeeva Jothi D., Hemalatha B.,Neelavathy Pari S. (2023).Trust Aware
Privacy Preserving Routing Protocol for Wireless Adhoc Network, International Journal
of Engineering Trends and Technology Volume 70 Issue 9, 362-370, September 2022,
ISSN: 2231 – 5381 / https://doi.org/10.14445/22315381/IJETT-V70I9P236 © 2022
Seventh Sense Research Group®
Nithya, R., Amudha, K., Musthafa, A. S., Sharma, D. K., Ramirez-Asis, E. H., Velayutham,
P., ... &Sengan, S. (2022). An optimized fuzzy-based ant colony algorithm for 5G-
MANET. Computers, Materials & Continua, 70(1), 1069-1087.
Oyelakin A.M. & Jimoh R.G. (2018). Simulation of Mobile Ad-hoc Network and its
Applicability in Academic Scenario, in proceedings of 10thiSTEAM Multi-Disciplinary
Conference, February,2018 Conference, Delta State Polytechnic, Ogwuashi-uku, Delta State,
Nigeria,679-687

42
Oyelakin, A. M., Yusuf, S. A., Agboola, R. O., & Abdullahi, F. (2020). A Study on The
Comparative Analysis Of MANET Routing Protocols In Nomadic Community Scenario.
Amity Journal of Computational Sciences (AJCS) Volume 4 Issue 1 ISSN: 2456-6616.
Pandey, K., & Swaroop, A. (2011). A comprehensive performance analysis of proactive, reactive
and hybrid manets routing protocols. arXiv preprint arXiv:1112.5703.
Pooja Rani, Kavita, Sahil Verma and Gia Nhu Nguyen, (2020), Mitigation of Black Hole and
Gray Hole Attack Using Swarm Inspired Algorithm with Artificial Neural Network,
IEEE.
Prasath, N., &Sreemathy, J. (2019). Optimized dynamic source routing protocol for MANETs.
Cluster Computing, 22(Suppl 5), 12397-12409.
Praveen Bondada, Debabrata Samanta Manjit , Kaur Kaur& Heung-No Lee (2022).Data
Security-Based Routing in MANETs Using Key Management Mechanism, January 2022,
Applied Sciences, 12(3):1041,DOI: 10.3390/app12031041
Raheem Ali H. (2011). Security Issues in Mobile Ad-Hoc Network and
Solutions,Telecommunication Systems, 1-6

Raza, N., Umar Aftab, M., Qasim Akbar, M., Ashraf, O., & Irfan, M. (2016). Mobile ad-hoc
networks applications and its challenges. Communications and Network, 8(03), 131-136.
Regassa D., Yeom H. Y., Son Y., (2022), Efficient Attacker Node(s) Detection and Isolation
Schemes in MANETs OLSR Protocol, Int. Conf. on Information Networking (ICOIN)
IEEE.
Revathi, P., Karpagavalli, N., & Angel, K. J. C. A Hybrid Approach For Cost-Effective Routing
And Security For Manets Using BSSO-DSR And AES-ECC Algorithms.
Sbai, O., El boukhari, M.: Data Flooding Intrusion Detection System for MANETs Using Deep
Learning Approach. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Intelligent
Systems: Theories and Applications, pp. 1–5 (2020).
https://doi.org/10.1145/3419604.3419777
Sivapriya, N., & Mohandas, R. (2022). Analysis on Essential Challenges and Attacks on
MANET Security Appraisal. Journal of Algebraic Statistics, 13(3), 2578-2589.
Srilakshmi, U., Alghamdi, S. A., Vuyyuru, V. A., Veeraiah, N., & Alotaibi, Y. (2022). A secure
optimization routing algorithm for mobile ad hoc networks. IEEE Access, 10, 14260-
14269.
Sultana Jeenat& Ahmed Tasnuva (2017).Securing AOMDV protocol in mobile adhoc network
with elliptic curve cryptography, 2017 International Conference on Electrical, Computer
and Communication Engineering (ECCE), February 2017, DOI:
10.1109/ECACE.2017.7912964
Sun .Z, Wei M., Zhang .Z., and Qu .G (2019).Secure Routing Protocol based on Multi-Objective
Ant-colony-optimization for wireless sensor networks, Appl. Soft Comput. J., vol. 77, pp.
366–375.

43
system for smart home IoT devices,” IEEE Internet of Things Journal, vol. 6, no. 5, pp. 9042–
9053, 2019

Thakker, V. M., Reddy, G. M., Kumar, K. V., & Moses, D. (2018). Choosing optimal routing
protocol by comparing different multipath routing protocols in mobile Adhoc networks.
In 2018 2nd International Conference on Inventive Systems and Control (ICISC) (pp.
1284-1290). IEEE.
Thiagarajan R. and M. Moorthi,( 2017). Efficient routing protocols for mobile ad hoc network,”
in Proc. Third International Conference on Advances in Electrical, Electronics,
Information, Communication and Bioinformatics,. 427-43
Thiagarajan, R., Ganesan, R., Anbarasu, V., Baskar, M., Arthi, K., & Ramkumar, J. (2021).
Optimised with secure approach in detecting and isolation of malicious nodes in
MANET. Wireless Personal Communications, 119, 21-35.
Umesh K. S., Mewada S., Iaddhani L., &Bunkar K. (2011).An overview and study of security
issues & challenges in mobile ad-hoc networks (MANET), International Journal of
Computer Science and Information Security, 9(4), pp. 106—111.

Wang, K., Song, M., Bian, G., Shao, B., & Huang, K. (2024). A Lightweight Identity-Based
Network Coding Scheme for Internet of Medical Things. Electronics, 13(7), 1316.

Wu, H., Nabar, S., & Poovendran, R. (2012, April). An energy framework for the network
simulator 3 (ns-3). In 4th International ICST Conference on Simulation Tools and
Techniques.

44