MATEC Web of Conferences 150, 06038 (2018) https://doi.org/10.

1051/matecconf/201815006038
MUCET 2017

Classification of Security Attacks in VANET: A Review of

Requirements and Perspectives
Mohammed Ali Hezam Al Junaid1, Syed A. A1, Mohd Nazri Mohd Warip1, Ku Nurul Fazira Ku Azir1, Nurul Hidayah Romli1
1 School of Computer and Communication Engineering University Malaysia Perlis, Malaysia.

Abstract. Vehicular Ad Hoc Network (VANET) is a pillar of the envisioned Intelligent Transport
System (ITS) and a subset of Mobile Ad Hoc Network that grants the communication in between the
vehicles alongside with the absence of established communication infrastructure. Exposure to
vulnerabilities of Vehicular Ad-Hoc Network (VANET) has been shown to be related to its nature of
the environmental. For this reason, VANET security becomes a critical challenge that need to be
resolved. In this paper, we assess the VANET security issues and discuss the challenges in VANET.
Equally important, we comparatively review the security requirements, the type of attacks and
capabilities of attackers present in VANET.

1 Introduction
This paper is organized as follows; In Section 2, we
Recently, Vehicular Ad Hoc Network (VANET) is discuss the architecture of VANET. Section 3 presents the
fast becoming a key catalyst in the Internet of Things characteristics of VANET. Section 4 reviews the
(IoT) area. In general, Vehicular Ad Hoc Network taxonomy of security concept in VANET and divided into
(VANET) is a portion of Mobile Ad Hoc Network three subsections. The first sub-section reviews the type
(MANET) which receiving numerous attention from of the attackers, the second sub-section discuss the
researchers and automotive industry [1]. In addition, capabilities of the attackers while the last sub-section
VANET is capable in improving road safety by allowing presents the series of attacks that compromised in
each of vehicles on the road communicates to each other VANET. In Section 5, we present the network challenges
with inadequate fixed infrastructures [2]. VANET in VANET. Section 6 explains the security requirements
applications are graded into safety applications and non- in VANET. Conclusion is provided in Section 7.
safety applications [3]. The former relates to the safety-
comfort application in which linked to the safety of users.
2 The VANET Architecture
It aids in providing an alert and warning information to
the users regarding to any incidents occurs on the road VANET can be categorized into three which are (1) Pure
such as accidents. The latter consists of the non-safety IV. TAXONOMY OF SECURITY CONCEPT IN
applications responsible in providing comfort to the users VANET Cellular/WLAN architecture, (2) Pure ad hoc
and acts as traffic-enhancer. Additionally, VANET architecture and (3) Hybrid architecture. Figure 1 exhibits
provides legitimate information to the users on the road in the network In VANET, vulnerabilities are presented due
order to increase the road and users safety. However, it is to the architecture in VANET. wireless medium used. As
not guaranteed that vehicular network environment is get a result, VANET are exposed to various kinds of attacks
off from any jeopardized since VANET is exposed to the that could disrupt the communication operations between
vulnerabilities. vehicles. Thus, the security concept in VANET as shown
in Figure 2 can be classified into three which are (1)
It One of the key challenges in the implementation of
Attackers, (2) Attackers Capabilities and (3) Type of the
VANET in relation to security is providing secure
Attacks. In sub-section 4.1, six types of the attackers are
vehicular communication. The authors in [4] examined
discussed. Sub-section 4.2 reviews four potentials that
that there are lots of attacks and threat that can
can.
compromise the network and communication. The most
potential attacks that VANET faces are classified into data
threat and VANET system threat. Denial of service
attacks is one of the malicious attacks that can deny the
On-board units (OBU) or Road Side Units (RSU) from
entering the network as well as interruption to the radio
channels.

* Corresponding author: aljunaid200@gmail.com

© The Authors, published by EDP Sciences. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
License 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
MATEC Web of Conferences 150, 06038 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201815006038
MUCET 2017

3.5. Mobility Modelling

The pattern of mobility in VANET is dependent on the
traffic environment, vehicle’s speed and driving
behaviour. facilitate the attackers to launch the attacks.
Sub-section 4.3 defines the type of attacks based on (1)
Attacks on Confidentiality, (2) Attacks on Integrity, (3)
Attacks on Availability, (4) Attacks on
Authentication/Identification, and (5) Attacks on Privacy.

Fig. 1. The Network Architecture of VANET [3] .

Generally, the communication and information

exchanged in VANET independents from any fixed
infrastructure. This possibly because of VANET
environment is highly dynamic. According to authors in
[3] proposed, the architecture of Fig. 1. The Network
Architecture of VANET [3]
The communications patterns in VANET can be classified
into.
 Vehicle-to-Vehicle (V2V) communications
 Vehicle-to-Infrastructure (V21) communications
 Infrastructure-to-Infrastructure (I2I) communications

3 VANET Characteristics
VANET is well-known as the subspace of MANET.
However there are few characteristics of VANET that
makes different from MANET, whereas VANET
exhibited complexity in designing it as well as more
challenges compared to MANET [3].

3.1. Frequent Disconnected Network

Vehicles are moving while exchanging information. Due
to the rapid topology changes, the connections between
two vehicles are easily disconnected. Usually the
disconnections occur in infrequent networks.

Fig. 2. Taxonomy of Security Concept in VANET

3.2. Rapid Topology Changes
Due to the fast moving of vehicles, VANET topology 3.5.1. Type of the Attackers
changes quickly.
According to the [4], attackers can be categorized based
on the following category:
3.3. Battery Power and Storage Capacity  Vandal: This kind of attacker is ill-motivated. The
The communications in MANET consumes battery power just want to show their abilities to attacks.
conversely in VANET, the power and storage is
 Hacker: The hacker is motivated by the enthusiasm
boundless. and interest without getting back any benefit from
the attacking.
3.4. Communication Environment.
 Malicious hacker: The malicious hacker is driven by
Obstacles in VANET are presented in dense network as the monetary purposes of organizational or for
well as sparse network. Trees, buildings, and other objects personal/political gain.
could obstruct the communications in VANET especially
in dense network. For this reason, routing protocol for  Insider vs. Outsider: The former relates to the
sparse and dense networks should be considered. attacker that is authenticated in the network and

2
MATEC Web of Conferences 150, 06038 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201815006038
MUCET 2017

known best about the network. The latter uses the

attacker from the outside having a limited
knowledge about the network that they want to
penetrate.

3.5.2. Capabilities of Attackers

 Technical: Experience and Expertise With adequate
experiences and skills, attackers are able to generate
attacks against the network for example like
extracting the program code and secret keys in order
to launch the attacks. Fig. 3. Before Basic Level Timing Attack Occurs [9]
 Resources: Attackers are dependent on three main
key resources like tools, budget and manpower.
Without these key resources, it is hard for the
attackers to achieve their goals.

 Coverage Area: The coverage area of the attackers

is depending on the attackers ‘capabilities and nature
of attacks. The rookie attackers could be controlled
one of the Dedicated Short-Range Communication
(DSCR) channel within the range of 1000 meters
whilst the expertise could covered more area and
DSCR channels compared to the rookie attackers.

3.5.3. Type of Attacks

The communication medium used in VANET is through

the open air which make possible for attackers to
penetrate and invade the networks. The real intentions of Fig.4. After Basic Level Timing Attack Occurs [9]
the attackers are to create problems with the legitimate
vehicles in the network [5]. The attacks are classified as In Figure 3 presents the extended level of timing attack
the following: occurs in
 Attacks on Confidentiality: Eavesdropping in VANET.
VANET is targeting against the confidentiality and
occurs in network layer. It operates by sniffing the
conversation in between two nodes. As a result, this
attack enables the attacker to intercept the
communication, steal the password and important
data. The attacker can masquerade itself as one of
the node, or located itself as false RSU with the aim
to catch up valuable information [6][7].
 Attacks on Integrity: Timing Attack, without
altering any contents in the message, the attacker
carries on this attack by adding delay which causes
the user to receive the message behind the time.
Consequently, user may face traffic congestion or
even worse, accidents. It is important to realize that
the information and messages deliveries in VANET
should be received by the users at the appropriate
time [3][8]. In addition, timing attack is divided into
two levels which are (1) Basic Level and (2) Fig. 5. Extended Level of Timing Attack [9]
Extended Level. Both levels are targeting users in
the vehicular network, where the basic level only
pointed to the user in peer-to-peer (P2P) Bogus Information and Bush Telegraph Bogus
communication while extended level is rigorous information attacks involving forwarding the counterfeit
compared to basic level since it focuses on group of or false information throughout the network, intended to
users [9]. Figure 1 and 2 shows the basic level of ignite disarray. In return, the attacker will gain the benefit
timing attack occurs in VANET. from it [10].

3
MATEC Web of Conferences 150, 06038 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201815006038
MUCET 2017

 Attacks on Availability: Denial of Service Attack 3.5.4. Attacks on Authentication / Identification

(DOS) Denial of Service attack is the most common
intrusive attack against the availability. In fact, it can Masquerading To perform masquerading attack, an
take place in each layer across the network. The attacker needed to enter the network and has functioning
purposes of the attacker could be denying the legal onboard unit. Attacker can disguised itself as legitimate
vehicles from accessing the network, control the node and carry out any of attacks. The easiest attack to be
vehicle resources and jamming the communication launched in a network is masquerading attack [12].
channels [11]. DOS can be classified into three levels  Replay Attack: By injecting back the received packet into
of attacks which are (1) Basic Level, (2) Extended the network, the location table of the node is being
Level and (3) Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) poisoned by replaying beacons. This kind of attack is
Attack [5]. called as replay attack. On the other hand, in order to
 Distributed Denial of Service Attack This kind of continuously defended from replay attack, VANET must
attack is dangerous because it is launched from maintained accurate source of time that used to keep
different locations. Consequently, the impact of this cache of the received messages [12].
attack is dispersed in the network.  Position Faking It is easier for an attacker to alter its
 Broadcast Tampering Through broadcast tampering position in a network with unsecured communications.
attack, attacker practically injecting erroneous Under that circumstance, accurate authentication and
messages which lead to disturbance to the network. frequent reporting of node positions are required. Through
Likewise, this attack is akin to bogus information location reporting, masquerading or impersonation is
attacks. But in contrary, broadcast tampering only futile. Possibly through position faking in unsecured
involving internal attackers [12] [8]. communication will lead the attacker to falsify their own
 Malware Malware is abbreviation of malicious position, creating additional vehicle identifiers which
software which created in order to contaminate the known as Sybil attack or blocking other nodes from
nodes or the network system in VANET. Malware receiving important messages [12].
such like worms or virus could take an action during  GPS Spoofing By making nodes thinking that they are in
software exchange or software update likely initiated the different location, nodes are easily fooled by the
by the insider [12] attackers. This kind of attack can be carried out by
 Spamming This attack is very hard to control due to producing false reading in the GPS devices. GPS spoofing
the missing of fixed infrastructure and centralised permits the attackers to generate stronger signal than
administration in VANET. Spam messages could signal that generated by genuine satellite by using GPS
increase the latency in communication; thus, will satellite simulator [12]
causing the nodes not to receive the messages on time.  Message Tampering In this attack, attackers could modify
 Black Hole Attack In this type of attack, the malicious the messages that being exchanged in the V2V and V2I
node will attracts the victims by advertising itself with communications. Message tampering attacks are arising
a fresh route altogether with low hop count. The from the vulnerabilities in authentications [12].
attacker is free to reply Route Reply (RREP) packet to  Message Suppression/Fabrication/Alteration There are
victim without concerning its routing table. A false two ways those attackers can disable itself from
route will be created and sent to the victim during the responding to any beacons; either physically disabling the
flooding of Route Request (RREQ) packet in inter-vehicle communication or altering the application
flooding-based routing protocol [13]. [12].
 Worm Hole Attack Entangle two attackers; a band  Key and/or Certificate Replication In this case, attackers
wormhole is created when these two attackers are next could erode the system by making several nodes with the
to each other and advertising themselves to the other same identity. This attack can be carried out by replicating
nodes that they have the shortest path to the key management and/or certificate. The purpose of the
destination. Both of the attackers will placed attacker is to bemuse the authorities and forbid the
themselves in the most vital position in the network identification of attacker [12].
and forming an overlay tunnel over the wireless  Sybil Attack The attack is launched by sending wrong
medium in order to intercept the communications numerous messages to the other node but with different
throughout the network. This is the most preferable forgery identity of the sender. As a result, for example,
attack by the attackers because they can strengthens other nodes will leave the road in order to ease the attacker
themselves when throughout the establishment at to pass through the road freely. In this case, the real
strong strategic location in VANET [14]. identities of the sender are hidden and the attackers
 Greedy Drivers The purpose of greedy drivers is to created a delusion to the other nodes.
conquer all the network resources for its own used.  Node Impersonation During the communication between
They can create havoc by set up forged traffic jammed the sender and receiver, the attacker may modified the
information so that other nodes will deviated from the message from the originator and send it to the receiver.
attacker path. The attacker wisely will be modified the Therefore, the malicious message may seems like
MAC layer parameters in order to expedite this attack originated from the sender. This problem could be curbing
[15]. by assigning the unique identifier to each vehicle nodes.
Henceforth, the real identity of the message originator
could be detected.

4
MATEC Web of Conferences 150, 06038 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201815006038
MUCET 2017

3.5.5. Privacy Since one of characteristic of VANET is high

mobility, the network topology and channel face rapid
Identity Revealing The identity and the location of the changes. Because of that, structures that able to maintain
target nodes are divulging in this attack. The attack is while rapid topology changes occur, should be deployed.
carried by monitoring the target node and sends “virus”
to the nearby vehicle node. When the nearby vehicles are Article II. B. Congestion and Collision Control
overwhelmed with virus will take the ID and the location
The limitless network creates congestion and collision
of the target node. during peak hours since the traffic load is high.

4. Network Challenges in VANET 4.5. C. Environmental Impact

The key fundamental challenges in deploying vehicular In VANET, electromagnetic waves are used in
system in real-life are not an easy task as it needs to communication. Unfortunately, electromagnetic waves
address many issues and identified the required solutions. can affect the environment. Thus, the environment should
According to [16], the main challenges that encountered be taken into account before deploying it.
by VANET are as following aspects;

4.1. Wireless Access Technology 4.6. D. MAC Design

There are limited technologies available to be used as core Since VANET are using the shared medium, MAC design
base in VANET. Those technologies are included cellular become big challenges in VANET.
technology; IEEE 802.11p based technology and Article III. E. Security
combined wireless access.
Security of VANET must be fulfilled since VANET
provides road safety applications.
4.2. Spectrum Issues
The FCC in US has allocated 75MHz of spectrum at
5.9GHz for car-to-car and car-to-infrastructure Equally important, the social and economic challenges are
communications. Unfortunately, a continuous spectrum is being discussed based on the issues on how to convince
not available in Europe. After that Car2Car CC has the manufacturers to build up an application that can
proposed allocations of 2x10 MHz for primary use which reveal the traffic violation. This application additionally
is for the safety applications at 5.9 GHz range. will help the user to get information on the road such as
Conversely, this band is utilized as control channel in US police trap. While in [17] and [18], VANET challenges
and it allocation in Europe would grants as world-wide are listed out into (1) Mobility, (2) Volatility, (3) Network
harmonization. Scale and (4) Bootstrap. In addition, authors in [8] added
up (5) Privacy vs. Authentication and (6) Privacy vs.
Liability as additional challenges. The challenges issued
4.3. C. Routing Issues
are explained as follow;
Three main routing algorithms that available in VANET
A. Mobility
can be combined with concept ‘carry and forward’. Those
algorithms are (1) opportunistic forwarding, (2) trajectory VANET has high mobility due to rapid changes of the
based forwarding and (3) geographic forwarding. topology.
Furthermore, mixing two or multiple approaches also
could be done as hybrid solutions. B. Volatility

The connection between vehicles will not last long due to

4.4. D. Security and Privacy fast movements and changes in the directions of vehicles.
Security and privacy are two issues that need to be C. Network scale
concentrated in developing the solutions. This is because
several threats are available that potentially could Since the number of vehicles around the world increasing
disrupted the traffic as well as compromising the private around to 800 millions, hence, network scalability
information like driver’s information. becomes difficult. Throughout the time, another issue
arises due to the absence of global authority that used to
manage the standard for the network.
However, authors in [7] classified the challenges in
VANET which sub-divided to (1) Technical Challenges D. Bootstrap
and (2) Social and Economic Challenges. The first aspect
is with regard to the technical challenges; there are five Up until now, only few vehicles are equipped with DSCR.
key issues that have been discussed as follows; Thus, the communications only limited to a few vehicles
and developers must take into account about this issue.
Article I. A. Network Management

5
MATEC Web of Conferences 150, 06038 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201815006038
MUCET 2017

5. Security Challenges in VANET [2] C. Kruegel and T. Toth, “A survey on

intrusion detection systems,” TU Vienna,
Security issues in VANET are critical due to Austria, vol. 109, no. 1, pp. 6–15, 2000.
vulnerabilities exist during information transmission
[3] O. Pattnaik and B. K. Pattanayak,
which causing VANET exposed to the attacks. In order to
maintain a secure vehicular communication and networks,
“SECURITY IN VEHICULAR AD HOC
VANET security system should satisfy with the NETWORK,” vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 337–346,
requirements. Some of the requirements are essential for 2014.
all networks, but some are definite for VANET only [17]. [4] C. Y. Shim, “A taxonomy for DOS attacks in
Those requirements are; VANET,” 2014 14th Int. Symp. Commun.
Inf. Technol., pp. 26–27, 2014.
A. Authentication [5] H. Hasbullah, I. A. Soomro, and J. A. Manan,
In order to allow the communication between vehicles “Denial of Service (
which sending and receiving information, VANET should DOS ) Attack and Its Possible Solutions in
authenticate each of them. This process may comprise the VANET,” World Acad. Sci. Eng. Technol.,
identification of the sender identity and the legitimacy of vol. 4, no. 5, pp. 411–415, 2010.
the sender to use the network. [6] J. M. De Fuentes and A. I. González-tablas,
“Overview of security issues in Vehicular Ad-
B. Availability
hoc Networks,” Science (80-. )., 2010.
Availability is defined as the degree of the VANET [7] R. S. Raw, M. Kumar, and N. Singh, “Security
system that must be operable and available when needed. Challenges, Issues and Their Solutions for
A fast response time also must applicable for some VANET,” Int. J. Netw. Secur. Its Appl., vol.
applications. 5, no. 5, pp. 95–105, 2013.
C. Privacy [8] M. Bharat, K. S. Sree, and T. M. Kumar,
“Authentication Solution for Security Attacks
Privacy is one of the most important requirements in in VANETs,” vol. 3, no. 8, pp. 7661–7664,
VANET. Privacy must ensure that the identity of the 2014.
drivers and the location of the vehicles are not being [9] I. A. Sumra, J. A. B. Manan, H. Hasbullah,
exposed. and B. S. Iskandar,
D. Integrity “Timing Attack in Vehicular Network 2 VANET
Applications and Time,” pp. 151–155.
The information exchange in between the sender and the [10] J. T. Isaac, S. Zeadally, and J. S. Cá mara,
receiver should be free from the alteration attacks. Thus, “Security attacks and solutions for vehicular
information can be trusted. ad hoc networks,” IET Commun., vol. 4, no.
E. Non-repudiation 7, p. 894, 2010.
[11] K. M. A. Alheeti, A. Gruebler, and K. D.
It ensures that the origin of the information cannot be Mcdonald-maier, “An Intrusion Detection
denying that it has sending the information. System Against Malicious Attacks on the
6 Conclusion Communication Network of Driverless Cars,” IEEE
Consum. Commun. Netw. Conf., no. 12, pp.
In summary, safety is the main attention for the road users. 916–921, 2015.
VANET has an ability to provide safety requirements by [12] S. Zeadally, R. Hunt, Y.-S. Chen, A. Irwin,
providing the information on the roads to the users. and A. Hassan,
However, VANET is not immune from any vulnerabilities “Vehicular ad hoc networks (VANETS): status,
and threats. Because of that, secure solutions in order to results, and challenges,” Telecommun. Syst.,
enhance the security of the information in VANET must
vol. 50, no. 4, pp. 217–241, 2012.
be deployed. Therefore, it is important to maintain the
network availability and develop trust to the information
[13] V. Bibhu, “Performance Analysis of Black
in VANET. Hole Attack in Vanet,” no. October, pp. 47–
54, 2012.
References [14] S. M. Safi, A. Movaghar, and M.
Mohammadizadeh, “A novel approach for
[1] A. Agrawal, A. Garg, N. Chaudhiri, S. Gupta, avoiding wormhole attacks in VANET,” 2nd
D. Pandey, and T. Int. Work. Comput. Sci. Eng. WCSE 2009,
Roy, “Security on Vehicular Ad Hoc Networks ( vol. 2, pp. 160–165, 2009.
VANET ) : A Review Paper,” vol. 3, no. 1, [15] M. N. Mejri and J. Ben-Othman, “Detecting
2013. greedy behavior by linear regression and
watchdog in vehicular ad hoc networks,”

6
MATEC Web of Conferences 150, 06038 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201815006038
MUCET 2017

Glob. Commun. Conf. (GLOBECOM), 2014

IEEE, no. ii, pp. 5032–5037, 2014.
[16] J. Jakubiak and Y. Koucheryavy, “State of the
Art and Research Challenges for VANETs,”
2008 5th IEEE Consum. Commun. Netw.
Conf., pp. 912–916, 2008.
[17] S. S. Shinde and S. P. Patil, “Various Issues in
Vehicular Ad hoc Networks : A Survey,” vol.
1, no. 2, pp. 399–403, 2010.
[18] G. Samara, W. a. H. Al-Salihy, and R. Sures,
“Security Analysis of Vehicular Ad Hoc
Nerworks (VANET),” Netw. Appl. Protoc.
Serv. (NETAPPS), 2010 Second Int. Conf.,
pp. 55–60, 2010.