skip to main content
research-article

PPRP: Preserving-Privacy Route Planning Scheme in VANETs

Authors Info & Claims
Published:22 December 2022Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Route planning helps a vehicle to share a message with the roadside units (RSUs) on its path in advance, which greatly speeds the authentication between the vehicle and the RSUs when the vehicle enters the RSUs’ coverage. In addition, since only a small amount of necessary information needs to be shared between the vehicle and the RSUs, route planning can reduce the storage overhead of the vehicle’s on-board unit (OBU) and the RSUs. However, the message sharing requires the assistance of the certification authority (CA), which will lead CA easily to obtain the vehicle’s planning route. Although CA knows the vehicle’s registration information and helps the vehicle to communicate with RSUs, it is unacceptable that the path of their vehicle is obtained by CA for most drivers. In fact, vehicle’s sensitive information such as planning route, starting time, stop place, should be privacy for others including CA. Inspired with the method of oblivious transfer, a preserving-privacy route planning scheme in VANETs is proposed in this article, in which, a vehicle deduces the information of RSUs on its path with the help of CA, while CA knows nothing about which RSUs’ information has been deduced by the vehicle. Later, fast authentication or other service is easily achieved between the vehicle and the RSUs (V2R) with the pre-shared information. After V2R authentication, vehicles could easily communicate with adjacent vehicles with the help of RSUs (V2V). Finally, compared with related schemes, performance evaluation illustrates the proposed scheme is better in terms of time consumption.

REFERENCES

  1. Ahmad A., Din S., Paul A., Jeon G., Aloqaily M., and Ahmad M.. 2019. Real-time route planning and data dissemination for urban scenarios using the internet of things. IEEE Wireless Communications 26, 6 (December2019), 5055. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Alhaidary M., Rahman S. M. M., Zakariah M., Hossain M. S., Alamri A., Haque M. S. M., and Gupta B. B.. 2018. Vulnerability analysis for the authentication protocols in trusted computing platforms and a proposed enhancement of the offpad protocol. IEEE Access 6 (2018), 60716081. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Ali I., Hassan A., and Li. F.2019. Authentication and privacy schemes for vehicular ad hoc networks (VANETs): A survey. Vehicular Communications 16 (April2019), 4561.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Calandriello G., Papadimitratos P., Hubaux J. P., and Lioy A.. 2007. Efficient and robust pseudonymous authentication in VANET. In Proceedings of the 4th ACM International Workshop on Vehicular ad hoc Networks. 1928.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Cheng H. and Liu Y.. 2020. An improved RSU-based authentication scheme for VANET. Journal of Internet Technology 21, 4 (July2020).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Cui J., Wu D., Zhang J., Xu Y., and Zhong H.. 2019. An efficient authentication scheme based on semi-trusted authority in VANETs. IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology 68, 3 (2019), 2972–2986.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Eckhoff D., Sommer C., Gansen T., German R., and Dressler F.. 2010. Strong and affordable location privacy in VANETs: Identity diffusion using time-slots and swapping. In Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE Vehicular Networking Conference. IEEE, 174–181.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Gupta B. B.. 2018. Computer and Cyber Security: Principles, Algorithm, Applications, and Perspectives. CRC Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. He D., Zeadally S., Xu B., and Huang X.. 2015a. An efficient identity-based conditional privacy-preserving authentication scheme for vehicular adhoc networks. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics & Security 10, 12 (December2015), 26812691.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. He D., Zeadally S., Xu B., and Huang X.. 2015b. An efficient identity-based conditional privacy preserving authentication scheme for vehicular ad hoc networks. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics & Security 10, 12 (December2015), 26812691. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Hiraishi Hironori. 2018. Passenger condition based route-planning for cognitive vehicle system. International Journal of Software Science and Computational Intelligence 10, 2 (2018), 2535. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Hsu C. Y., Yang C. S., Yu L. C., Lin C. F., Yao H. H., Chen D. Y., Lai K. R., and Chang P. C.. 2015. Development of a cloud-based service framework for energy conservation in a sustainable intelligent transportation system. International Journal of Production Economics 164 (June2015), 454461.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Hussain M. M. and Beg M. S.. 2019. Using vehicles as fog infrastructures for transportation cyber-physical systems (T-CPS): Fog computing for vehicular networks. International Journal of Software Science and Computational Intelligence (IJSSCI) 11, 1 (2019), 4769.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Jiang D. and Delgrossi L.. 2008. IEEE 802.11p: Towards an international standard for wireless access in vehicular environments. In Proceedings of the Vehicular Technology Conference. IEEE, Singapore, 20362040.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Kamil I. A. and Ogundoyin S. O.. 2019. An improved certificateless aggregate signature scheme without bilinear pairings for vehicular ad hoc networks. Journal of Information Security and Applications 44 (February2019), 184200.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Kaushik S. and Gandhi C.. 2019. Ensure hierarchal identity based data security in cloud environment. International Journal of Cloud Applications and Computing (IJCAC), 9, 4 (2019), 21–36.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Kenney J. B.. 2011. Dedicated short-range communications (DSRC) standards in the united states. In Proceedings of the IEEE. 99, 7 (July2011), 11621182.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Koblitz N.. 1987. Elliptic curve cryptosystems. Mathematics of Computation 48, 177 (1987), 203209. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Kumar V., Ahmad M., Mishra D., Kumari S., and Khan M. K.. 2020. RSEAP: RFID based secure and efficient authentication protocol for vehicular cloud computing. Vehicular Communications 22 (April2020), 100213.1–100213.13.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Sun X., Lin X., Ho P., and Shen X. S.. 2007. A secure and privacy preserving protocol for vehicular communication. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol 56 (2007), 34423456.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Liu J. K., Yuen T. H., Au M. H., and Susilo W.. 2014. Improvements on an authentication scheme for vehicular sensor networks. Expert Systems with Applications 41, 5 (2014), 25592564.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Liu Y., Wang L., and Chen H.. 2015. Message authentication using proxy vehicles in vehicular ad hoc networks. IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology 64, 8 (August2015), 36973710.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Mu Y., Zhang J., Varadharajan V., and Lin Y.. 2003. Robust non-interactive oblivious transfer. IEEE Communications Letters 7, 4 (April2003), 153155. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Pan Y., Li J., Feng L., and Xu B.. 2011. An analytical model for random changing pseudonyms scheme in VANETs. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Network Computing & Information Security. 141145. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Pljonkin A. P.. 2019. Vulnerability of the synchronization process in the quantum key distribution system. International Journal of Cloud Applications and Computing 9, 1 (2019), 5058. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Pournaghi S. M., Zahednejad B., Bayat M., and Farjami Y.. 2018. NECPPA: A novel and efficient conditional privacy-preserving authentication scheme for VANET. Computer Networks 134, 7 (April2018), 7892.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Raya M. and Hubaux J.. 2005. The security of vehicular ad hoc networks. In Proceedings of the 3rd ACM Workshop on Security of ad Hoc and Sensor Networks. ACM Press, 1121.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Shao J., Lin X., Lu R., and Zuo C.. 2016. A threshold anonymous authentication protocol for VANETs. IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology 65, 3 (March2016), 17111720. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Shim K. A.. 2012. An efficient conditional privacy-preserving authentication scheme for vehicular sensor networks. IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology 61, 4 (May2012), 18741883. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Song J., Liu Y., Shao J., and Tang C.. 2020. A dynamic membership data aggregation (DMDA) protocol for smart grid. IEEE Systems Journal 14, 1 (March2020), 900908. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Wang B., Wang Y., Chen R., and Li F.. 2019. A practical authentication framework for VANETs. Security and Communication Networks 2019 (May2019), 111. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. Wang X., Kuang X., Li J., Li J., Chen X., and Liu Z.. 2020. Oblivious transfer for privacy-preserving in VANET’s feature matching. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 22, 7 (2020), 4359–4366.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Wang Y., Zhong H., Xu Y., Cui J., and Guo F.. 2016. Efficient extensible conditional privacy-preserving authentication scheme supporting batch verification for VANETs. Security and Communication Networks 9, 18 (2016), 54605471.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Xu Y., Xun Y., Khalil I., Zeng Y., Huang X., Nepal S., Yang X., and Cui H.. 2019. A lightweight authentication scheme for vehicular ad hoc networks based on MSR. Vehicular Communications 15 (January 2019), 1627.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Zhang C., Lu R., Lin X., Ho P. H., and Shen X.. 2008. An efficient identity-based batch verification scheme for vehicular sensor networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE INFOCOM 2008-The 27th Conference on Computer Communications. IEEE, 246250.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Zhang L., Wu Q., Solanas A., and Domingo-Ferrer J.. 2010. A scalable robust authentication protocol for secure vehicular communications. IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology 59, 4 (May2010), 16061617. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. Zhao Z., Chen J., Zhang Y., and Dang L.. 2015. An efficient revocable group signature scheme in vehicular ad hoc networks. Ksii Transactions on Internet & Information Systems 9, 10 (October2015), 42504267.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Zhu H., He X. Y., Liu X. M., and Li H.. 2015. PTFA: A secure and privacy-preserving traffic flow analysis scheme for intelligent transportation system. International Journal of Embedded Systems 8, 1 (December2015), 886.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. PPRP: Preserving-Privacy Route Planning Scheme in VANETs

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in

          Full Access

          • Published in

            cover image ACM Transactions on Internet Technology
            ACM Transactions on Internet Technology  Volume 22, Issue 4
            November 2022
            642 pages
            ISSN:1533-5399
            EISSN:1557-6051
            DOI:10.1145/3561988
            Issue’s Table of Contents

            Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 22 December 2022
            • Online AM: 3 February 2022
            • Accepted: 16 October 2020
            • Revised: 17 September 2020
            • Received: 1 August 2020
            Published in toit Volume 22, Issue 4

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • research-article
            • Refereed

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader

          Full Text

          View this article in Full Text.

          View Full Text

          HTML Format

          View this article in HTML Format .

          View HTML Format
          About Cookies On This Site

          We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

          Learn more

          Got it!