Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/3369740.3369787acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicdcnConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

COIDS: A Clock Offset Based Intrusion Detection System for Controller Area Networks

Authors Info & Claims
Published:19 February 2020Publication History

ABSTRACT

Controller Area Network (CAN) is an in-vehicle communication protocol which provides an efficient and reliable communication link between Electronic Control Units (ECUs) in real-time. Recent studies have shown that attackers can take remote control of the targeted car by exploiting the vulnerabilities of the CAN protocol. Motivated by this fact, we propose Clock Offset-based Intrusion Detection System (COIDS) to monitor in-vehicle network and detect any intrusion. Precisely, we first measure and then exploit the clock offset of transmitter ECU's clock for fingerprinting ECU. We next leverage the derived fingerprints to construct a baseline of ECU's normal clock behaviour using an active learning technique. Based on the baseline of normal behaviour, we use Cumulative Sum method to detect any abnormal deviation in clock offset. Particularly, if the deviation in clock offset exceeds an unexpected positive or negative value, COIDS declares this change as an intrusion. Further, we use sequential change-point detection technique to determine the exact time of intrusion. We perform exhaustive experiments on real-world publicly available datasets primarily to assess the effectiveness of COIDS against three most potential attacks on CAN, i.e., DoS, impersonation and fuzzy attacks. The results show that COIDS is highly effective in defending all these three attacks. Further, the results show that COIDS considerably faster in detecting intrusion compared to a state-of-the-art solution.

References

  1. M. Basseville, I. V. Nikiforov, et al. 1993. Detection of abrupt changes: theory and application. Vol. 104. Prentice Hall Englewood Cliffs.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. S. Checkoway, D. McCoy, B. Kantor, D. Anderson, H. Shacham, S. Savage, K. Koscher, A. Czeskis, F. Roesner, and T. Kohno. 2011. Comprehensive Experimental Analyses of Automotive Attack Surfaces. In Proc. of USENIX Security Symposium. 77--92.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. K. T. Cho and K. G. Shin. 2016. Finger printing Electronic Control Units for Vehicle Intrusion Detection. In Proc. of USENIX Security Symposium. 911--927.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. K. T. Cho and K. G. Shin. 2017. Viden: Attacker identification on in-vehicle networks. In Proc. of ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security. 1109--1123.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. W. Choi, K. Joo, H. J. Jo, M. C. Park, and D. H. Lee. 2018. VoltageIDS: Low-Level Communication Characteristics for Automotive Intrusion Detection System. IEEE Trans. on Information Forensics and Security 13, 8 (2018), 2114--2129.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. E. Weise. 2018. Chinese group hacks a Tesla for the second year in a row. [Online] Accessed on October 15. (2018). [Online]: https://eu.usatoday.com/story/tech/2017/07/28/chinese-group-hacks-tesla-second-year-row/518430001/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. I. D. Foster, A. Prudhomme, K. Koscher, and S. Savage. 2015. Fast and Vulnerable: A Story of Telematic Failures. In Proc. of 9th USENIX Workshop on Offensive Technologies. 1--9.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. B. Groza and P. S. Murvay. 2019. Efficient Intrusion Detection with Bloom Filtering in Controller Area Networks. IEEE Trans. on Information Forensics and Security 14, 4 (2019), 1037--1051.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. B. Groza, S. Murvay, A. V. Herrewege, and I. Verbauwhede. 2017. Libra-can: Lightweight broadcast authentication for controller area networks. ACM Trans. on Embedded Computing Systems 16, 3 (2017), 1--25.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. H. Lee, S. H. Jeong and H. K. Kim. 2018. CAN Dataset for intrusion detection (OTIDS). [Online]: http://ocslab.hksecurity.net/Dataset/CAN-intrusion-dataset. (2018). Accessed on October 15, 2018.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. M. L. Han, B. I. Kwak, and H. K. Kim. 2018. Anomaly intrusion detection method for vehicular networks based on survival analysis. Vehicular communications 14 (2018), 52--63.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. T. Hoppe, S. Kiltz, and J. Dittmann. 2008. Security threats to automotive CAN networks--practical examples and selected short-term countermeasures. In Proc. of International Conference on Computer Safety, Reliability, and Security. 235--248.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. K. Huang, Q. Zhang, C. Zhou, N. Xiong, and Y. Qin. 2017. An efficient intrusion detection approach for visual sensor networks based on traffic pattern learning. IEEE Trans. on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems 47, 10 (2017), 2704--2713.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. M. Kneib and C. Huth. 2018. Scission: Signal Characteristic-Based Sender Identification and Intrusion Detection in Automotive Networks. In Proc. of ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security. 787--800.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. L. Constantin. 2018. Researchers hack Tesla Model S with remote attack. Accessed on October 15. (2018). [Online]: http://www.pcworld.com/article/3121999/security/researchers-demonstrate-remote-attack-against-tesla-models.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. V. H. Le, J. D. Hartog, and Z. Zannone. 2018. Security and Privacy for Innovative Automotive Applications: A Survey. Computer Communications 132 (2018), 17--41.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. H. Lee, S. H. Jeong, and H. K. Kim. 2017. OTIDS: A novel intrusion detection system for in-vehicle network by using remote frame. In Proc. of 15th Annual Conference on Privacy, Security and Trust (PST). 57--5709.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. J. Liu, S. Zhang, W. Sun, and Y. Shi. 2017. In-vehicle network attacks and countermeasures: Challenges and future directions. IEEE Network 31, 5 (2017), 50--58.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. M. Marchetti and D. Stabili. 2017. Anomaly detection of CAN bus messages through analysis of ID sequences. In Proc. of IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV). 1577--1583.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. J. Matsumura, Y. Matsubara, H. Takada, M. Oi, M. Toyoshima, and A. Iwai. 2013. A simulation environment based on omnet++ for automotive can--ethernet networks. Analysis Tools and Methodologies for Embedded and Real-time Systems (2013), 1--44.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. S. Mazloom, M. Rezaeirad, A. Hunter, and D. McCoy. 2016. A Security Analysis of an In-Vehicle Infotainment and App Platform. In Proc. of 10th USENIX Workshop on Offensive Technologies. 1--12.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. C. Miller and C. Valasek. 2015. Remote exploitation of an unaltered passenger vehicle. In Black Hat USA. 1--91.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. D. Mills. 1992. Network Time Protocol (Version 3) specification, implementation and analysis. Internet Request For Comments 1305 (1992).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. S. Nie, L. Liu, and Y. Du. 2017. Free-Fall: Hacking Tesla from Wireless to Can Bus. In Black Hat USA. 1--16.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. H. Olufowobi, U. Ezeobi, E. Muhati, G. Robinson, C. Young, J. Zambreno, and G. Bloom. 2019. Anomaly Detection Approach Using Adaptive Cumulative Sum Algorithm for Controller Area Network. In Proc. of ACM Workshop on Automotive Cybersecurity (AutoSec). 25--30.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. A. I. Radu and F. D. Garcia. 2016. LeiA: A lightweight authentication protocol for CAN. In Proc. of European Symposium on Research in Computer Security (ESORICS), Vol. 9879 of LNCS. 283--300.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. S. U.Sagong, X. Ying, A. Clark, L. Bushnell, and R. Poovendran. 2018. Cloaking the clock: emulating clock skew in controller area networks. In Proc. of 9th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Cyber-Physical Systems. 32--42.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. S. U. Sagong, X. Ying, R. Poovendran, and L. Bushnell. 2018. Exploring attack surfaces of voltage-based intrusion detection systems in controller area networks. ESCAR Europe (2018), 1--13.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. A. G. Tartakovsky, A. S. Polunchenko, and G. Sokolov. 2012. Efficient computer network anomaly detection by change-point detection methods. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing 7, 1 (2012), 4--11.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. A. G. Tartakovsky, B. L. Rozovskii, R. B. Blazek, and H. Kim. 2006. A novel approach to detection of intrusions in computer networks via adaptive sequential and batch-sequential change-point detection methods. IEEE Trans. on Signal Processing 54, 9 (2006), 3372--3382.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. W. Wu, R. Li, G. Xie, J. An, Y. Bai, J. Zhou, and K. Li. 2019. A Survey of Intrusion Detection for In-Vehicle Networks. IEEE Trans. on Intelligent Transportation Systems (2019), 1--15, DOI: 10.1109/TITS.2019.2908074.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. X. Ying, S. U. Sagong, A. Clark, L. Bushnell, and R. Poovendran. 2019. Shape of the Cloak: Formal Analysis of Clock Skew-Based Intrusion Detection System in Controller Area Networks. IEEE Trans. on Information Forensics and Security 14, 9 (2019), 2300--2314.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. COIDS: A Clock Offset Based Intrusion Detection System for Controller Area Networks

    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
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      ICDCN '20: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Distributed Computing and Networking
      January 2020
      460 pages
      ISBN:9781450377515
      DOI:10.1145/3369740

      Copyright © 2020 ACM

      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: 19 February 2020

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed limited

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader