Wireless Sensor Networks

Motivation
• GOAL: Deeply Networked Systems or Pervasive
Networking
• 98% of all processors are not in traditional desktop
computer systems, but in house-hold appliances,
vehicles, and machines on factory floors
• Add reliable wireless communications and sensing
functions to the billions of physically embedded
computing devices to support ubiquitous networked
computing
• Distributed Wireless Sensor Networks is a collection
of embedded sensor devices with networking
capabilities
DAWN Lab / UMBC 2
 Wireless Sensor Network
A Wireless Sensor Network (WSN) is a network of
spatially distributed autonomous sensors that monitor
physical or environmental conditions, such as
temperature, sound, vibration, pressure, motion, or
pollutants, and cooperatively pass their data through
the network to a central location.
 Background, contd.

DAWN Lab / UMBC 4

 Key Components
1. Sensor Nodes:
• Sensors : Detect environmental conditions and convert them into
electrical signals.
• Microcontroller : Processes the sensor data and controls the sensor
node.
• Transceiver : Communicates with other nodes in the network.
• Power Source : Typically batteries or energy-harvesting devices.
2. Sink (or Base Station):
• Collects data from the sensor nodes.
• Acts as an interface between the WSN and the outside world.
3. Network :
• The communication infrastructure that allows data to be transmitted
between sensor nodes and the sink.
 Sensors
Enabled by recent
advances in MEMS
Battery CPU
technology
Integrated Wireless
Transceiver
Wireless
Transceiver Limited in
Energy
Memory
Computation
Storage
Transmission range
Sensing Hardware
Bandwidth

6
Sensor Nodes, contd.

DAWN Lab / UMBC 7

 Sensors (contd.)
The overall architecture of a sensor
node consists of:
The sensor node processing
subsystem running on sensor
node main CPU
The sensor subsystem and
The communication subsystem
The processor and radio board
includes:
TI MSP430 microcontroller with
10kB RAM
16-bit RISC with 48K Program
Flash
Crossbow Mote
IEEE 802.15.4 compliant radio
at 250 Mbps TPR2400CA-TelosB
1MB external data flash
Runs TinyOS 1.1.10 or higher
Two AA batteries or USB
1.8 mA (active); 5.1uA (sleep)

DAWN Lab / UMBC 8

 Characteristics

• Scalability : Can cover large areas by adding more

sensor nodes.
• Fault Tolerance : Can tolerate individual node
failures without significant impact on the overall
network.
• Dynamic Topology : Nodes can join or leave the
network dynamically.
• Power Consumption : Nodes are designed to be
energy-efficient to prolong network life.
 Applications
1. Environmental Monitoring :
• Wildlife Monitoring: Tracking animal movements and habitats.
• Weather Forecasting : Collecting data on temperature, humidity, and
other weather-related metrics.
• - **Pollution Monitoring : Detecting pollutants in air and water.
2. Health Monitoring :
• Patient Monitoring : Continuous health monitoring in hospitals and
homes.
• Elderly Care : Monitoring the health and activity levels of elderly
people.
3. Industrial Monitoring :
• Machine Health Monitoring : Predicting and preventing machinery
failures.
• Process Control : Monitoring and controlling industrial processes.
4. Military Applications :
• Battlefield Surveillance : Monitoring activities in the battlefield.
• Equipment Monitoring**: Tracking the status and location of military
equipment.

5. Smart Homes and Cities:

• Home Automation : Controlling home appliances and systems
remotely.
• Urban Management : Monitoring infrastructure, traffic, and
environmental conditions in cities.
 Applications of sensor networks
Physical security for military operations
Indoor/Outdoor Environmental monitoring
Seismic and structural monitoring
Industrial automation
Bio-medical applications
Health and Wellness Monitoring
Inventory Location Awareness
Future consumer applications, including smart
homes.

DAWN Lab / UMBC 12

 Applications, contd.
cooperative
processing

cooperative
SENSING signalling

THREAT

ALERT

ALERT THREAT
MULTI-HOP
COMMUNICATION
Beam Formation

COMMAND LEVEL

DAWN Lab / UMBC 13

 Applications, contd.

DAWN Lab / UMBC 14

 Challenges
• Energy Efficiency : Developing methods to reduce
power consumption is critical.
• Security : Ensuring data integrity and confidentiality.
• Scalability : Managing large numbers of nodes.
• Data Management : Efficiently handling the large
volume of data generated by sensors.
• Network Maintenance : Addressing node failures
and maintaining network performance.
 Characteristics and challenges
Deeply distributed architecture: localized coordination to
reach entire system goals, no infrastructure with no central
control support
Autonomous operation: self-organization, self-configuration,
adaptation, exception-free
TCP/IP is open, widely implemented, supports multiple
physical network, relatively efficient and light weight, but
requires manual intervention to configure and to use.
Energy conservation: physical, MAC, link, route, application
Scalability: scale with node density, number and kinds of
networks
Data centric network: address free route, named data,
reinforcement-based adaptation, in-network data aggregation

DAWN Lab / UMBC 16

 Challenges, contd.
Challenges
Limited battery power
Limited storage and computation
Lower bandwidth and high error rates
Scalability to 1000s of nodes
Network Protocol Design Goals
Operate in self-configured mode (no infrastructure
network support)
Limit memory footprint of protocols
Limit computation needs of protocols -> simple,
yet efficient protocols
Conserve battery power in all ways possible
DAWN Lab / UMBC 17
 General Overview

Introduction to Wireless Sensor Networks

Data Dissemination and Routing Protocols
Data Gathering
Medium Access Control Protocols
Locationing and Coverage
Testbeds/Applications
Security in Wireless Sensor Networks
Summary & Discussion

DAWN Lab / UMBC 18

 Future Trends
• Integration with IoT: WSNs are becoming integral to
the Internet of Things (IoT), enhancing connectivity
and data sharing across various platforms.
• Advancements in Energy Harvesting : Using
renewable energy sources to power sensor nodes.
• Enhanced Security Protocols : Developing robust
security measures to protect data.
• Machine Learning**: Using AI and machine learning
for better data analysis and decision-making.
WSNs are crucial in bridging the gap between the physical
world and digital systems, providing real-time data and enabling
smarter decision-making across various domains.
Overall Architecture of a sensor node
Application Layer Sensor

Communication
SubSystem Sensor Node CPU

Network Layer

Slow Serial Link

MAC Layer
Physical Layer Radio Board

Forward Packet Path

Wireless Channel

DAWN Lab / UMBC 20

Wireless Sensor Networks (WSN)
Distributed collection of networked sensors

DAWN Lab / UMBC 21

 Networked vs. individual sensors
Extended range of sensing:
Cover a wider area of operation
Redundancy:
Multiple nodes close to each other increase fault
tolerance
Improved accuracy:
Sensor nodes collaborate and combine their data
to increase the accuracy of sensed data
Extended functionality:
Sensor nodes can not only perform sensing
functionality, but also provide forwarding service.
DAWN Lab / UMBC 22
 Focus: Radio Transceiver Usage
• The wireless radio transceiver is typically in three modes:
• Transmit – Maximum power consumption

• Receive

• Idle
• Turned off – Least power consumption
• Sensor node exists in three modes: Active, standby, and
battery dead
• Turnaround time: Time to change from one mode to another
(esp. important is time from sleep to wakeup and vice-versa)
• Protocol design attempts to place node in these different
modes depending upon several factors
• Sample power consumption from 2 sensor nodes shown next

DAWN Lab / UMBC 23

 Energy conservation
• Low power circuit(CMOS, ASIC) design
Physical layer • Optimum hardware/software function division
• Energy effective waveform/code design
• Adaptive RF power control

MAC sub-layer • Energy effective MAC protocol

• Collision free, reduce retransmission and transceiver on-times
• Intermittent, synchronized operation
• Rendezvous protocols
Link layer • FEC versus ARQ schemes; Link packet length adapt.

Network layer • Multi-hop route determination

• Energy aware route algorithm
• Route cache, directed diffusion
Application layer • Video applications: compression and frame-dropping
• In-network data aggregation and fusion

See Jones, Sivalingam, Agrawal, and Chen survey article in ACM WINET, July 2001;
See Lindsey, Sivalingam, and Raghavendra book chapter in Wiley Handbook of Mobile Computing,
Ivan Stojmenovic, Editor, 2002.

DAWN Lab / UMBC 24

Network Architectures

DAWN Lab / UMBC 25

 Network Architectures
Layered Clustered
Architecture Architecture
Base
Base Statio
Statio n
n

Layer 1

Layer 2

Layer 3

Larger Nodes denote Cluster Heads

DAWN Lab / UMBC 26

 Clustered network architecture
• Sensor nodes autonomously form a group called clusters.
• The clustering process is applied recursively to form a hierarchy of clusters.

Tier 2
Tier 1

Tier 1

Tier 0
Tier 0

DAWN Lab / UMBC 27

 Cluster architecture (contd.)
Example - LEACH protocol
It uses two-tier hierarchy
Base Station clustering architecture.
It uses distributed
(( )) algorithm to organize the
Cluster-head
sensor nodes into
(( )) clusters.
(( )) (( ))
Cluster-head The cluster-head nodes
(( ) )
(( ) ) Cluster create TDMA schedules.
(( )) Cluster-head
Nodes transmit data
(( ) ) (( ) ) during their assigned
Cluster slots.
(( )) Cluster The energy efficiency of
Sensor the LEACH is mainly due
to data fusion.
DAWN Lab / UMBC 28
 Layered Network Architecture
• A few hundred sensor nodes
(half/full duplex)
• A single powerful base-station
• Network nodes are organized
into concentric Layers
• Layer: Set of nodes that have
the same hop-count to the
base-station
• Additional Mobile Nodes
traversing the network
• Wireless Multi-Hop
Infrastructure Network
Architecture (MINA)
A 10 node sensor network depicting cluster of node 3;
there are 2 mobile nodes

DAWN Lab / UMBC 29

 Data Dissemination
• In WSN, traffic models are possible:
• Data Collection Model
• Data Diffusion Model
• Data Collection Model: Source sends data to a collection
entity (e.g. gateway): periodically or on-demand
• Data Diffusion Model:
• Source: A sensor node that generates data, based on its
sensing mechanisms’ observations
• Event: Something that needs to be reported, e.g. in target
detection; some abnormal activity
• Sink: A node, randomly located in the field, that is
interested in events and seeks such information

DAWN Lab / UMBC 30

 Data Diffusion: Concept
Sink 1

Sources

Sink 2

DAWN Lab / UMBC 32

 Diffusion: Basics
Data-centric vs. address centric architecture
Individual network address is not critical; Data is important
and is accessed as needed
User can pose a specific task, that could be executed by
sensor nodes
Concept of Named Data: (Attribute, Value) Pair
Sink node requests data by sending “interests” for data
Interests are propagated through the network, setting up
gradients in the network, designed to “draw” data
Data matching the interest is then transmitted towards the
sink, over multiple paths (obtained by the gradients
The sink can then reinforce some of these paths to optimize

DAWN Lab / UMBC 33

 Diffusion Basics, contd.
Design Issues:
How does a sink express its interest in one or
more events?
How do sensor nodes keep track of existing
interests from multiple sinks?
When an event occurs, how does data get
propagated from source(s) to sink(s)?
Can in-network data processing (e.g. data fusion),
data aggregation and data caching help improve
performance?
[Intanagonwiwat et. al.; ACM MobiCom 2000]

DAWN Lab / UMBC 34

 Diffusion Basics, contd
Example Task
{Type = Animal; Interval = 20ms; Time = 10s;
Region = [-100, 100, 200, 400] }
The above task instructs a sensor node in the
specified region to track for animals; If animal is
tracked/detected, then send observations every 20
ms for 10s
The above task is sent via interest messages and all
sensor nodes register this task.
When a node detects an event, it then constructs a
Data Event message

DAWN Lab / UMBC 35

 Diffusion: Basics, contd
Data Event Example:
{Type = Animal; Instance = Tiger;
Location = [101, 201]; Intensity = 0.4;
Confidence = 0.8; Timestamp = 2:51:00}
Interests and Gradients:
For each active task that a sink is interested in:
Sink broadcasts interest to its neighbors
Initially, to explore, it could set large interval (e.g 1s)
Sink refreshes each interest, using timestamps
Each sensor node maintains an interest cache
Interest aggregation is possible
DAWN Lab / UMBC 36
 Diffusion: Interests
When a node receives an interest, it:
Checks cache to see if an entry is present.
If no entry, creates an entry with a single gradient
to neighbor who sent this interest
Gradient specifies the direction and data rate.
Resend interest to a subset of its neighbors
This is essentially flooding-based approach
Other probabilistic, location-based and other
intelligent forwarding approaches possible
Similar to multicast tree formation, at sink instead of
at source
DAWN Lab / UMBC 37
 Diffusion: Interest Propagation
Sink 1

Sources

Sink 2

DAWN Lab / UMBC 38

 Diffusion: Data Propagation
When a sensor node detects a target, it:
Searches interest cache for matching entry
If found, computes highest requested event rate
among its gradients
Instructs sensor sub-system to generate data at
this rate
Sends data to neighbors on its gradient list
Intermediate nodes maintain a data cache
Caches recently received events
Forwards event data to neighbors on its gradient
list, at original rate or reduced rate (intelligently)
DAWN Lab / UMBC 39
 Diffusion: Reinforcement
When sink gets an event notification, it:
Picks a suitable set of neighbor(s) (best link, low
delay, etc.) and sends a refresh interest message,
with higher notification rate (e.g. every 10 ms
instead of every 1s)
This will prune some of its neighbors (since interests in
a node’s cache will expire)
Each selected neighbor forwards this new interest
to a subset of its neighbors; selecting a smaller
set of paths
Negative reinforcement also necessary to de-select
weaker paths if a better path found.
DAWN Lab / UMBC 40
Part III: Data Gathering
Algorithms

DAWN Lab / UMBC 41

 Problem Definition
Objective: Transmit sensed data from each sensor node to a base station
One round = BS collecting data from all nodes
Goal is to maximize the number of rounds of communication before nodes
die and network is inoperable
Minimize energy AND reduce delay
Conflicting requirements

Sensor Nodes

Base station

DAWN Lab / UMBC 42

 Energy*Delay metric
Why energy * delay metric?
Find optimal balance to gather data quickly but in
an energy efficient manner
Energy = Energy consumed per round
Delay = Delay per round (I.e. for all nodes to send
packet to BS)
Why is this metric important?
Time critical applications

DAWN Lab / UMBC 43

 Direct Transmission
Direct Transmission
All nodes transmit to the base station (BS)
Very expensive since BS may be located very far
away and nodes need more energy to transmit
over longer distances
Farther the distance, greater the propagation losses,
and hence higher the transmission power
All nodes must take turns transmitting to the BS
so delay is high (N units for a N-node network)
Better scheme is to have fewer nodes transmit
this far distance to lower energy costs and more
simultaneous transmissions to lower delay

DAWN Lab / UMBC 44

 LEACH
Low Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy
Two-level hierarchy
Base
Station

Larger Nodes denote Cluster Heads

DAWN Lab / UMBC 45

 Scheme #1: PEGASIS
Goals of PEGASIS (Power-Efficient GAthering for
Sensor Information Systems)
Minimize distance nodes must transmit
Minimize number of leaders that transmit to BS
Minimize broadcasting overhead
Minimize number or messages leader needs to
receive
Distribute work more equally among all nodes

DAWN Lab / UMBC 46

 PEGASIS
Greedy Chain Algorithm
Start with node furthest away from BS
Add to chain closest neighbor to this node that
has not been visited
Repeat until all nodes have been added to chain
Constructed before 1st round of communication
and then reconstructed when nodes di
Data fusion at each node (except end nodes)
Only one message is passed at every node
Delay calculation: N units for an N-node network
Sequential transmission is assumed
DAWN Lab / UMBC 47
 PEGASIS

End

Start

DAWN Lab / UMBC 48

 Scheme #2: Binary Scheme
Chain-based as described in PEGASIS
At each level node only transmits to another node
All nodes receiving at any level rise to the next level
Delay: O(log2 N)

Step 4: c3 → BS
Step 3: c3 c7
Step 2: c1→ c3 c5→ c7
Step 1: c0→c1 c2→c3 c4→c5 c6→c7

DAWN Lab / UMBC 50

 Scheme # 3:Chain-based 3 level
For non-CDMA sensor nodes, binary scheme is not
logical
Construct chain as described in PEGASIS
Divide chain into 10 groups (for the 100-node)
To space out simultaneous transmissions to
minimize interference
In each group, nodes will transmit one at a time
Finally, one node out of each group at each level will
contain all the data and will rise to the next level until
finally the leader will transmit to the BS
Total delay = 15 units (9+4+1+1) for 100-nodes
DAWN Lab / UMBC 51
 Chain-based 3 level scheme
Third Level
Two nodes rise to top and non-leader transmits to
leader
Leader transmits to BS

c18 → BS
c18c68
c8 →c18c28c38c48 c58→ c68 c78 c88c98
c0→c1→c2…c7→c8c9 c10→c11…c18c19 …c90 →c91…c98 c99

DAWN Lab / UMBC 52

MAC Protocols for WSN

DAWN Lab / UMBC 53

 MAC Protocols
What is fundamentally different for MAC Protocol
design in WSN?
Low-power operation is even more critical
Reduced coordination and synchronization is
beneficial
Resilience to frequent node failures
Suitably blend with the network architecture
Probably application dependent
Scalability to support large number of nodes
Thousands of nodes likely
Limited bandwidth availability
Would the 802.11 family of protocols work?

DAWN Lab / UMBC 54

 TDM-Based MAC
Considered for Clustered architecture
Nodes are organized into clusters
Each cluster has a clusterhead, that
communicates directly with gateway or BS node
TDMA MAC
The cluster head knows its members’ IDs
Creates a simple TDM schedule, allocating time
slots to members
Broadcasts schedule to members
Schedule may be periodically updated
Rotating cluster heads possible
DAWN Lab / UMBC 55
 TDM-Based MAC, contd.
Advantages:
Simple to coordinate within cluster
No collisions
Can be more energy-efficient: members wake up
only when they have to send/receive data
Disadvantages:
Adjoining clusters need to coordinate to operate
in different channels (or frequencies)
TDM is not very scalable to large number of
nodes: high delays possible
Nodes need to be synchronized within each
cluster
DAWN Lab / UMBC 56
 S-MAC [Ye et. Al. 2002]
Sensor-MAC Protocol proposed in 2002
Assumptions
Network consists of several small nodes,
deployed in an ad hoc manner
Nodes dedicated to a single or few collaborative
applications: Per-node fairness is not critical
In-network processing assumed: e.g. data fusion,
data aggregation, collab signal processing
Long idle periods and occasional burst of data:
higher latency may be tolerated

DAWN Lab / UMBC 57

S-MAC details, contd.
Periodic Listen and Sleep
Mode of operation
Each node sleeps for a
while; wakes up and
then communicates with
its neighbors, as
necessary.
Periodic synch among
neighbors to reduce drift
Pair-wise or group-wise
node synch
Nodes exchange
schedule by broadcast
MAC is still needed to
avoid collisions
DAWN Lab / UMBC 58
Localization (Location Discovery)
Algorithms

DAWN Lab / UMBC 59

 Location Information
It is essential, in some applications, for each node to
know its location
Sensed data coupled with loc. data and sent
We need a cheap, low-power, low-weight, low form-
factor, and reasonably accurate mechanism
Global Positioning Sys (GPS) is not always feasible
GPS cannot work indoors, in dense foliage, etc.
GPS power consumption is very high
Size of GPS receiver and antenna will increase
node form factor

DAWN Lab / UMBC 60

 Indoor Localization
Use a fixed infrastructure
Beacon nodes are strategically placed
Nodes receive beacon signals and measure:
Signal Strength
Signal Pattern
Time of arrival; Time difference of arrival
Angle of arrival
Nodes use measurements from multiple beacons
and use different multi-lateration techniques to
estimate locations
Accuracy of estimate depends on correlation
between measured entity and distance
DAWN Lab / UMBC 61
 Indoor Localization
Examples of Indoor Loc. Systems
RADAR (MSR), Cricket (MIT), BAT (AT&T), etc.
Some approaches require a priori signal
measurement and characterization and database
creation
Node obtains distance estimate by using
database
Not always practical to have database loaded in
the individual node; only some nodes (e.g.
gateway) might carry it.

DAWN Lab / UMBC 62

 Sensor Net. Localization
No fixed infrastructure available
Prior measurements are not always possible
Basic idea:
Have a few sensor nodes who have known
location information
These nodes sent periodic beacon signals
Other nodes use beacon measurements and
triangulation, multi-lateration, etc. to estimate
distance
Following mechanisms presented in Savvides et. al.
in ACM MobiCom 2001
DAWN Lab / UMBC 63
 Sensor Net. Localization, contd.
Receiver Signal Strength Indicator (RSSI) was used to
determine correlation to distance
Suitable for RF signals only
Very sensitive to obstacles, multi-path fading, environment
factors (rain, etc.)
Was not found to have good experimental correlation
RF signal had good range, few 10metres
RF and Ultrasound signals
The beacon node transmits an RF and an ultrasound
signal to receiver
The time difference of arrival between 2 signals is used to
measure distance
Range of up to 3 m, with 2cm accuracy
DAWN Lab / UMBC 64
 Localization algorithms
Based on the time diff. of arrival
Atomic Multi-lateration:
If a node receives 3 becaons, it can determine its
location (similar to GPS)
Iterative ML:
Some nodes not in direct range of beacons
Once an unknown node estimates its location, will
send out a beacon
Multi-hop approach; Errors propagated
Collaborative ML:
When 2+ nodes cannot receive 3 beacons (but
can receive say 2), they collaborate
DAWN Lab / UMBC 65
 Multi-lateration examples
Beacon Nodes

Unknown Nodes

Beacon Nodes

Unknown Nodes

DAWN Lab / UMBC 66

Exposure; Coverage and
Deployment

DAWN Lab / UMBC 67

 Coverage Problems
Coverage: is a measure of the Quality of service of
a sensor network
How well can the network observe (or cover) a given
event?
For example, intruder detection; animal or fire
detection
Coverage depends upon:
Range and sensitivity of sensing nodes
Location and density of sensing nodes in given
region

DAWN Lab / UMBC 68

 Coverage, contd.
Worst-Case Coverage: Areas of breach (lowest
coverage)
Can be used to determine if additional sensors
needed
Best-Case Coverage: Areas of best coverage
Can be used by a friendly user to navigate in
those areas

DAWN Lab / UMBC 69

 Coverage, contd.
Given: A field A with sensors S, where for each sensor $s_i
\in S$, its location (x_i, y_i) is known (How? Based on the
Localization Techniques described earlier). Areas I and F
are initial and final locations of an agent traversing the field.
Problem: Identify P_B, the maximal breach path in S,
starting in I and ending in F
P_B is defined as the locus of points p in the region,
where p is in P_B if the distance from p to the closest
sensor is maximized.
I and F are arbitrarily specified inputs.
Solution: Determine the Voronoi diagram corresponding to
the sensor graph. The path P_B will be composed of line
segments that belong to the Voronoi diagram.

DAWN Lab / UMBC 70

 Voronoi diagrams
In 2D, the Voronoi diagram
of a set of points partitions
the plane into a set of
convex polygons such that:
All points inside a
polygon are closest to
only one site.
The polygons have
edges equidistant from
nearby points.
Related is Delaunay
Triangulation
Connect points in V-
Diag. whose polygons
share a common edge.

DAWN Lab / UMBC 71

 Worst-Case Coverage: Alg.
1. Generate the bounded Voronoi diagram
a. Let U and L denote vertex set and links of diag.

2. Create a graph with vertices from set U and links

from L
a. Weight of link in graph = minimum distance from
all sensors in S
3. Do a breadth-first search to determine a path from I
to F in the graph, such that the path has maximum
edge cost
4. Multiple such breach paths are possible.

DAWN Lab / UMBC 72

 Best-Case Coverage
Problem: Identify P_S, the path with maximum
support in S, starting at I and ending in F.
Solution: Use Delaunay triangulation
The best path will be one connecting some of the
sensor nodes
Similar approach to Max. Breach Path
Use Delaunay instead of Voronoi
The edge cost in the graph G, will be the length of
the Delaunay triangle line segment.

DAWN Lab / UMBC 73

 Examples

Fig. on left shows the bounded Voronoi diagram and the

maximal breach path
Fig. on right shows the Delaunay Triangulation and the
maximal support path
Question: Once these are determined, how to use these?

DAWN Lab / UMBC 74

 Exposure Problems
Exposure is related to the coverage
Exposure may be defined as the expected ability of
observing a target in the sensor field
Formally defined as the integral of the sensing
function (depends on distance from sensors) on a
path from P_s to P_d
Sensing function depends on nature of sensors
Sensor model:

S ( s, p ) =
[d ( s, p)]k
 , k are constants; and d ( s, p) is distance of point p from
sending node s

DAWN Lab / UMBC 75

 Exposure at a point
All-Sensor Field Intensity at Point p in field with n
sensors denoted by {s1 , s2 ,..., sn }
n
I A ( F , p) =  S ( si , p)
i =1

Closest-Sensor Field Intensity at Point p:

S min = sm  S | d ( sm , p)  d ( si , p)si  S
I C ( F , p) = S ( S min , p)

DAWN Lab / UMBC 76

 Exposure along a path
Suppose object O is traveling from point p(t1) to
p(t2) along path p(t).
Exposure for object O during interval t1 to t2 along
p(t) is defined as:
t2
dp(t )
E[ p (t ), t1 , t 2 ] =  I ( A or C ) ( F , p (t )) dt
t1
dt
dp(t )
is the element of arc length
dt
If p(t) = (x(t), y(t)) then
2 2
dp(t )  dx(t )    dy (t )  
=   +    
dt  dt    dt  
DAWN Lab / UMBC 77
 Exposure: Properties
Consider only 1 sensor at location (0,0). Let
1
S[ s(0,0), p( x, y )] = 1
d ( s, p) =
x2 + y2

Determine the path from a=(1,0) to point b=(X,Y)

with minimum exposure
Determine x(t), y(t) such that x(0) = 1; y(0) = 0;
x(1) = X; y(1) = Y and the exposure function is
minimized.
Lemma 1: If b=(0,1), then the minimum exposure
path is     
 cos t , sin t  and E =
 2 2  2

DAWN Lab / UMBC 78

 Exposure: Properties
Lemma 2: Given a sensor s and two points a and b, such
d(s,a)=d(s,b), then the minimum exposure path between a
and b is that part of the circle centered as s and passing
through a and b.
Theorem: Let the sensor be located at (0,0) in a unit field.
The minimum exposure path from (1,-1) to (-1,1) is as below:

S=(0,0)

DAWN Lab / UMBC 79

 Exposure: Properties
Let s be a sensor in a polygonal field with vertices
v1,…,vn.
For the inscribed circle of the polygon, let edge
v_i,v_{i+1} be tangent at point u_i
The minimum exposure path from vertex v_i to
vertex v_j consists of:
Line segment from v_i to u_i
Part of inscribed circle from u_i to u_j
Line segment from u_j to v_j
(OR) in the opposite direction (from v_i to u_j etc)
Problem of MEP between 2 points in same corner or
between 2 points inside the inscribed circle is open
DAWN Lab / UMBC 80
 Generic Exposure Problem
Given a network with randomly placed sensor
nodes, how to determine minimum exp. Path
Solution:
Tessellate the network into a set of equidistant
grid points (with varying degree of precision)
For each edge in the grid network, assign an
edge equal to the exposure along the edge
(integrated from the sensor function)
Using Dijkstra’s algorithm, determine the shortest
path from a source (based on edge weights)
This is the min. exposure path

DAWN Lab / UMBC 81

 Security in Sensor Networks
What is different ?
Unfriendly, unattended environments
Severe resource constraints render most of the
cryptographic mechanisms impossible
PKI is infeasible for sensor networks and have to
rely on symmetric key cryptography
Security has never been more important!
Applications in battlefield management,
emergency response systems and so on
Key management is the most critical issue
Focus of majority of the research
Following is review of some key research in the area
DAWN Lab / UMBC 83
 SPINS-Perrig et al, Berkeley
Complete suite of security protocols for sensor
networks
SNEP (Secure Network Encryption Protocol)
Data Confidentiality
Authentication
Integrity
Freshness
μTESLA
Lightweight version of TESLA for authenticated
broadcast

DAWN Lab / UMBC 84

 SPINS: Applications
Authenticated Routing
Base station can be authenticated using μTESLA
For each time interval, the first packet heard is
chosen as parent, which is authenticated later
Prevents spurious routing
Node-to-Node Key Agreement
A sends B a request with a nonce
B asks BS for a session key using SNEP
BS distributes shared session keys securely to A
and B using SNEP with strong freshness

DAWN Lab / UMBC 85

Key Management Scheme for DSN
Eschenauer et al, UMD (CCS 2002)
Based on probabilistic key sharing
Each node is equipped before deployment with a
key-ring chosen randomly from a common key pool
Each key has an identifier associated with it
Shared secret key is established between two nodes
by one of the two ways:
Broadcasting the key identifiers and comparing
them to find a common key if one exists
Sending a challenge encrypted in a key; a valid
response is a successful decryption of the
challenge establishing a shared key

DAWN Lab / UMBC 86

 Key Mgmt Contd
There may not be a shared key between a pair of
nodes
In such a case a path to one node from the other
is established through the secure links already in
place
A direct secure link is then established
If a node is compromised, its entire key-ring is
revoked from the network
In general for a required probability of 0.5, 75 keys
need to be in the key ring chosen from a pool of
10,000 keys.

DAWN Lab / UMBC 87

 Random Key Predistribution Schemes
Chan, Perrig et al, CMU, 2003
Proposes three random key predistribution schemes
q-Composite random key predistribution
Multi-path key reinforcement
Random pair-wise scheme
q-Composite random key predistribution
Builds on the work of Eschenauer and Gligor (referred to
as basic scheme)
Basic idea is to share q keys between nodes rather than
just one key
Final key is the hash of all q keys
An attacker now needs to capture more nodes in order to
eavesdrop on any link with given probability

DAWN Lab / UMBC 88

q-Composite Predistribution Contd.
However choosing size |S| of common key pool is
tricky
Too large May not find q common keys
between every pair of node
Too small Attacker can get a large sample of
S by capturing just a few nodes
Choose largest |S| such that Pconnect ≥ P
Pconnect is the probability of two nodes sharing
sufficient keys to form a secure link (derived
mathematically)
P is the desired probability that two nodes form a
secure link

DAWN Lab / UMBC 89

q-Composite Predistribution Contd.
q-Composite scheme thus makes small scale
attacks less appealing for an attacker
Attacker can only gain a little additional
information by capturing a few nodes
e.g. amount of additional communication
compromised when 50 nodes are captured is only
4.74% as compared to 9.52% for basic scheme
However makes network more vulnerable if large
number of nodes are captured

DAWN Lab / UMBC 90

 Multi-path Key Reinforcement
Need to update the key once a secure link has been
formed between two nodes
To prevent attacker from obtaining and using the
old key by capturing other nodes
Node A sends j random values over multiple disjoint
secure paths to node B
The new key is computed from all the j values
Attacker has to eavesdrop on j paths in order to
construct the key
The neighbors on those paths are called reinforcing
neighbors

DAWN Lab / UMBC 91

 Multi-path Key Reinforcement Contd
Significant network overheads (~10X)
The method is not as effective when used with q-
Composite
Both the methods essentially do the same thing
But their weakness compound each other
Small key pool and high network overheads
Works well in conjunction with the basic scheme
Reduces the eavesdropping probability 146 times!

DAWN Lab / UMBC 92

 Random pair-wise Key Scheme
Targeted at Node-to-Node authentication without
any help from the base station
Each node need only save a random set of n*p keys
instead of all n-1 keys
p is the smallest probability that any two nodes
have a shared key such that all nodes have
shared keys with some high probability
Nodes are predeployed with m random pair-wise
keys for m other nodes
Node broadcasts its identifier once deployed
Mutual key agreement with the neighbors takes
place by cryptographic handshake

DAWN Lab / UMBC 93

 Random pair-wise Key Scheme Contd
Multi-hop range extension is simple with having
neighbors rebroadcast the identifiers further
Must be used to a limited number of hops to
prevent DoS attack by an adversary
Distributed node revocation is possible by having
nodes broadcast public votes against a misbehaving
node
Mechanism for detecting misbehavior assumed at
each node
If A receives more than a threshold number of votes
are against B, it cuts off all communication with B
Many practical issues arise!

DAWN Lab / UMBC 94

 Random pair-wise Key Scheme Contd
Node replication can be resisted by limiting the max
degree of each node
Degree counting is modeled in a similar way as
vote counting for node revocation
Complete resilience against node capture
A compromised node does not provide any further
information
Large network size supported
n = m/p where m is the key-ring size of a node
and p is the smallest probability that any two
nodes have a shared key such that all nodes
have shared keys with some high probability

DAWN Lab / UMBC 95

Testbeds and Applications

DAWN Lab / UMBC 96

 Habitat Monitoring
Traditional human monitoring methods for habitats
are invasive and cause negative impact
Often, repeated visits necessary to collect data
Ideal will be to establish a group of wireless sensor
networks that sense and wirelessly transmit data
Better for environment; Cheaper, Safer, etc.
Great Duck Island (GDI) Project by College of
Atlantic; Intel and UC Berkeley
Monitor usage patterns of nesting burrows
Changes in burrow conditions during breeding
season
DAWN Lab / UMBC 97
 GDI Project
Establishes multiple clusters of sensor networks
Each cluster or “patch” has a gateway node
Data from clusters forwarded over a wireless LAN
(802.11b) connection to a basestation (part of the
island’s field station)
The base station provides necessary connectivity to
Internet
Sensors sense light, temp, pressure, infra-red,
relative humidity in the burrows
Sensor data is archived & queried in real-time
Users with mobile devices and remote clients
access data

DAWN Lab / UMBC 98

 GDI Project, contd.
The sensor nodes are Berkeley Motes (40 Kbps radio, 4 MHz
ATMEL chips, 512KB storage)
Motes encased in transparent acryclic enclosure
As of July 2002, 32 motes (nine in underground burrows)
Data collection and evaluation in progress

DAWN Lab / UMBC 99

 Smart Kindergarten project
Project at Univ. of California, Los Angeles and an
elementary school
Plans to develop toys with embedded sensors, that
can sense child’s response and wirelessly transmit
data to an infrastructure
The toy can provide visual, aural, motion feedback
and sense child’s speech, physical manipulation,
etc.
Could enhance education process by providing a
better learning environment – individualized,
unobtrusive evaluation by teacher, adaptive, etc.

DAWN Lab / UMBC 100

 Other projects
Airbee Wireless’s Ronald Reagan Airport project:
Every door in the airport could be outfitted with
900-MHz wireless sensors and automated locks,
networked to a central point where rules could be
set for when a door could be opened, by whom,
by time of day, without the need for guards
Q: Can a 900-MHz jammer disrupt the system?
http://wwwcsif.cs.ucdavis.edu/~yick/research/applica
tions.html

DAWN Lab / UMBC 101

 More info…
Reality check: Questions to ask wireless sensor network
vendors
[From http://www.networkworld.com/news/2005/100305-
wireless-sensors.html]
How complex is deployment vs. that of conventional wired
networks?
How stable are standards like Zigbee?
Why go with standard-based approaches vs. possibly
more flexible proprietary mesh networking protocols?
Will radio interference be a factor with multiple sensor nets
with hundreds or even thousands of nodes?

DAWN Lab / UMBC 102

 More info…
Can a deliberate jamming attempt shut down the
entire net?
What tools are available to manage these nets,
and to treat them as part of an enterprise IP net?
How can data from sensor nets be integrated with
existing enterprise applications?
How realistic are battery life projections of months
or years?
What are the total life-cycle costs of sensors nets,
including battery replacement?

DAWN Lab / UMBC 103

 More Information
Wireless Sensor Networks, An Edited Book
Co-Editors: Znati, Sivalingam and
Raghavendra
Springer Publishers, 2004
18 Chapters contributed by leading
researchers in the field
Other Books also available
Ivan Stojmenovic
Feng Zhao
S.S. Iyengar

DAWN Lab / UMBC 104

 Coming Soon Near You
IEEE Communication Society’s Third Annual Intl
Conf. on Sensor and Ad Hoc Comm. & Networks
(SECON)
www.ieee-secon.org/2006
Reston, VA (Hyatt Reston) near Dulles
Sep. 25-29, 2006
Interested in submitting papers, participating in
panels, presenting a demo, SPONSORING or
anything else related, pl contact Krishna
Sivalingam at [email protected] (General Chair)

DAWN Lab / UMBC 105

 Coming Soon Near You
IEEE Communication Society and Create-Net
(Italy)’s Second Annual Intl Conf. on Security and
Privacy for Emerging Areas in Communication
Networks
www.securecomm.org
Baltimore/DC area
Sep./Oct., 2006
Interested in submitting papers, participating in
panels, presenting a demo, SPONSORING or
anything else related, pl contact Krishna
Sivalingam at [email protected] (Steering Cmte
Co-Chair)

DAWN Lab / UMBC 106

 Unsolicited Plug
Crossbow Technology’s Wireless Sensor Network
Training Course
November 9-10, 2005, Towson, MD
Burkshire Marriott Conference Hotel
Contact [email protected]

DAWN Lab / UMBC 107

 Other topics …
Transport protocols
Data compression and data fusion
Low-power design issues
Simulation toolkits/environments specific to Sensor
Networks

DAWN Lab / UMBC 108

 Summary
Motivation for Wireless Sensor Networks
Data Dissemination and related routing protocols
Data Gathering algorithms
MAC and Organization protocols
Localization algorithms
Coverage and Exposure
Applications and Testbeds
Security
Summary

DAWN Lab / UMBC 109