A Detection and Prevention Technique for Man in the Middle Attack in Fog Computing
Open accessAbstract
Due to the large number of IoT devices available, data needed to be processed by cloud service providers has grown exponentially. This leads to increase in the latency of cloud services and by extension latency in many IoT applications. To reduce this latency, computing devices are installed at the edge of the network close to the user. These devices are called “Fog Nodes”. They allow the user to process some data without going all the way to the data center. While the data centers are equipped with abundant resources (i.e. processors, energy and memory), the fog devices are not. This means traditional techniques for preventing intrusion are not applicable at the fog level, because they will incur more latency and/or energy consumption. Therefore, there is a need for low resource demanding, yet strong security system that will protect the fog layer from being attacked. This paper proposes an Intrusion Detection System (IDS) and Intrusion Prevention System (IPS) for Man in the Middle (MitM) attack at the fog layer. The IDS consists of IDS nodes that periodically interrogate nodes one hop away. The IPS uses lightweight encryption to prevent Man in the Middle attack and its variants (i.e. Eavesdropping, Packet Modification and Wormhole attack).
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
A Data Manipulation attack can manipulate data directly at the data center system level, leading to data integrity degradation and system malfunction.
“Moreover, the attacker may choose to manipulate data through Data Manipulation attack [113] directly at the data center system level, leading to data integrity degradation and causing the Prime MotorX system to malfunction.”
From A Critical Overview of Industrial Internet of Things Security and Privacy Issues Using a Layer-Based Hacking Scenario (2023) · cites this paper as [113]
The Introduction says a manipulation-type man-in-the-middle attacker changes data, which supports the data-manipulation part of the claim. The paper locates its attacker in the fog layer (Attacker Model, §3.2), not directly at the data-center system level, and does not establish degradation of data integrity or malfunction of the Prime MotorX system. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Fog and IoT: An Overview of Research Opportunities
Chiang, M., & Zhang, T. (2016) · IEEE Internet of Things Journal · doi:10.1109/jiot.2016.2584538 · Cited by 2,362 · see citing works
The Fog Computing Paradigm: Scenarios and Security Issues
Stojmenovic, I., & Wen, S. (2014) · Annals of Computer Science and Information Systems · doi:10.15439/2014f503 · Cited by 1,037 · see citing works
A Survey on the Internet of Things Security
Zhao, K., & Ge, L. (2013) · International Conference on Computational Intelligence and Security (CIS) · doi:10.1109/cis.2013.145 · Cited by 697 · see citing works
Securing Fog Computing for Internet of Things Applications: Challenges and Solutions
Ni, J., Zhang, K., Lin, X., & Shen, X. (2018) · IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials · doi:10.1109/comst.2017.2762345 · Cited by 659 · see citing works
Strong password-only authenticated key exchange
Jablon, D. P. (1996) · ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review · doi:10.1145/242896.242897 · Cited by 532 · see citing works
A Survey of Lightweight-Cryptography Implementations
Eisenbarth, T., Kumar, S., Paar, C., Poschmann, A., & Uhsadel, L. (2007) · IEEE Design & Test of Computers · doi:10.1109/mdt.2007.178 · Cited by 479 · see citing works
Fog computing security: A review of current applications and security solutions
Khan, S., Parkinson, S., & Qin, Y. (2017) · Journal of Cloud Computing · doi:10.1186/s13677-017-0090-3 · Cited by 409 · see citing works
Authentication and Access Control in the Internet of Things
Liu, J., Xiao, Y., & Chen, C. L. P. (2012) · International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems Workshops · doi:10.1109/icdcsw.2012.23 · Cited by 279 · see citing works
Proposed embedded security framework for Internet of Things (IoT)
Babar, S. D., Stango, A., Prasad, N. R., Sen, J., & Prasad, R. (2011) · International Conference on Wireless Communication, Vehicular Technology, Information Theory and Aerospace & Electronic Systems Technology · doi:10.1109/wirelessvitae.2011.5940923 · Cited by 262 · see citing works
Security of Self-Organizing Networks
Pathan, A. K. (2011) · Auerbach Publications eBooks · doi:10.1201/ebk1439819197 · Cited by 194 · see citing works
TrueLink: A Practical Countermeasure to the Wormhole Attack in Wireless Networks
Eriksson, J., Krishnamurthy, S. V., & Faloutsos, M. (2006) · Proceedings/Proceedings - International Conference on Network Protocols · doi:10.1109/icnp.2006.320200 · Cited by 156 · see citing works
Securing SDN Infrastructure of IoT–Fog Networks From MitM Attacks
Li, C., Qin, Z., Novak, E., & Li, Q. (2017) · IEEE Internet of Things Journal · doi:10.1109/jiot.2017.2685596 · Cited by 149 · see citing works
Desmedt, Y. (2006) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/0-387-23483-7_241 · Cited by 141 · see citing works
Modified DSR protocol for detection and removal of selective black hole attack in MANET
Mohanapriya, M., & Krishnamurthi, I. (2013) · Computers & Electrical Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.compeleceng.2013.06.001 · Cited by 104 · see citing works
Security model and key technologies for the Internet of things
Yang, J., & Fang, B. (2011) · 中国邮电高校学报：英文版 · doi:10.1016/s1005-8885(10)60159-8 · Cited by 51 · see citing works
Detecting Man-in-the-Middle and Wormhole Attacks in Wireless Mesh Networks
Glass, S., Muthukkumarasamy, V., & Portmann, M. (2009) · Proceedings · doi:10.1109/aina.2009.131 · Cited by 43 · see citing works
A Comparison of WirelessHART™ and ISA100.11a
Nixon, M. S., Louis, W. R., & Blvd, H. (2012) · Cited by 36 · see citing works
Detecting Man-in-the-Middle Attacks by Precise Timing
Aziz, B., & Hamilton, G. W. (2009) · International Conference on Emerging Security Information, Systems and Technologies · doi:10.1109/securware.2009.20 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
Review: Security and Privacy Issues of Fog Computing for the Internet of Things (IoT)
Ekanayake, B. N. B., Halgamuge, M. N., & Syed, A. (2017) · Lecture notes on data engineering and communications technologies · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-70688-7_7 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
Energy Consumption Analysis of WirelessHART Adaptor for Industrial Wireless Sensor Actuator Network
Chung, T. D., Ibrahim, R., Asirvadam, V. S., et al. (2017) · Procedia Computer Science · doi:10.1016/j.procs.2017.01.215 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Efficient and scalable public key infrastructure for wireless sensor networks
Kim, D., & An, S. (2014) · doi:10.1109/sncc.2014.6866514 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- B. Potter, B. Fleck, 802.11 Security, O'Reilly Series, O'Reilly Media, Incorporated, 2002. URL https://books.google.com.sa/books?id=RVQ4GgKeEtgC
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Eyeleko, A. H., & Feng, T. (2023) · IEEE Internet of Things Journal · doi:10.1109/jiot.2023.3308195 · Cited by 38 · see citing works
“By implementing these countermeasures, the IIoT processing layer can establish a robust line of defense, safeguarding against potential man-in-the-middle attacks and preserving the integrity of critical resources and data [113].”
BackgroundToward Secure and Trustworthy Vehicular Fog Computing: A Survey
Nazih, O., Benamar, N., Lamaazi, H., & Chaoui, H. (2024) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2024.3371488 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
- Authors
- Aliyu, F., Sheltami, T., & Shakshuki, E. M.
- Affiliations
- King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals (SA)
- Acadia University (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Sheltami, Tarek
- Venue
- Procedia Computer Science
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2018
- Volume
- 141
- Pages
- 24-31
- ISSN
- 1877-0509 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2899764587
- Cited by
- 79
- References
- 21
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 1
- FWCI
- 5.79
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Procedia Computer Science (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Funders
- Acadia University
- Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Network Security and Intrusion Detection
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › IoT and Edge/Fog Computing
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Security in Wireless Sensor Networks
- Keywords
- man-in-the-middle attacks, fog computing, intrusion detection systems, intrusion prevention systems, lightweight encryption, eavesdropping, packet modification, wormhole attack, Internet of Things, network latency
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
