Physical Layer Security 139
techniques that implement standalone solutions, like the one proposed here. WBPLSec
is a reliable physical layer solution against information disclosure attacks, such as
eavesdropping. This solution is a trade‐off between security and communication reliability, because for fixed symbol energy, E s , increasing the jamming energy, E J , a wider
security area is achieved with a lower P out . On the other hand, when E J increases, the
watermark extraction is getting worse with a higher P e [27]. Furthermore, the proposed
method exploits the non‐degraded wiretap channel without any assumption on Eve’s
position and channel. One spreading code is utilized to implement SS watermarking.
The wide utilization of SS communications makes the sharing of one PN code acceptable for this implementation. The WBPLSec shares the same information in terms of
spreading code when compared with a, SS communication.
In comparison, with the iJAM, the proposed protocol offers the following advantages:
● it is a full‐rate protocol improving the major weakness of iJAM; and
● it has P out two times better than iJAM.
The iJAM is an interesting protocol, but it implements a physical layer security with a
split to half the data‐rate. The proposed scheme is an advanced version of iJAM. Both
protocols utilize SS techniques, and even though the authors implement DSSS for
WBPLSec, the same concept can be applied using OFDM, making the jammed samples
indistinguishable from the clean samples. The worldwide proliferation of SS communication makes the utilization of a spreading code for physical layer security reasonable for
both iJAM and WBPLSec. The utilization of SS watermarking yields WBPLSec to work full
rate. Furthermore, the achieved results show how the proposed protocol can be a valuable
technique for deploying security, creating a secure region around the legitimate receiver.
The physical layer security is one of the most promising techniques for low‐power sensor
networks and 5G devices. The avoidance of upper layers’ cryptography makes the physical
layer security attractive as a standalone security solution that can also improve the battery
life, because it saves computation when compared to encryption. Soderi et al. presented
the lower energy consumption of the WBPLSec when compared with iJAM [27].
References
1 Shannon, C. (1940) Communication theory of secrecy systems. The Bell System
Technical Journal, 28(4), 656–715.
2 Wyner, A. (1975) The wire‐tap channel. The Bell System Technical Journal, 54(8),
1355–1387.
3 Leung‐Yan‐Cheong, S. and Hellman, M. (1978) The Gaussian wire‐tap channel. IEEE
Transactions on Information Theory, 24(4), 451–456.
4 Csiszar, I. and Korner, J. (1978) Broadcast channels with confidential messages. IEEE
Transactions on Information Theory, 24(3), 339–348.
5 Peterson, R.L., Ziemer, R.E. and Borth, D.E. (1995) Introduction to Spread Spectrum
Communications. Prentice‐Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
6 Cox, I.J., Kilian, J., Leighton, F. and Shamoon, T. (1997) Secure spread spectrum
watermarking for multimedia. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 6(12), 1673–1687.
7 Cox, I.J., Miller, M. and McKellips, A. (1999) Watermarking as communications with
side information. Proceedings of the IEEE, 87(7), 1127–1141.
techniques that implement standalone solutions, like the one proposed here. WBPLSec
is a reliable physical layer solution against information disclosure attacks, such as
eavesdropping. This solution is a trade‐off between security and communication reliability, because for fixed symbol energy, E s , increasing the jamming energy, E J , a wider
security area is achieved with a lower P out . On the other hand, when E J increases, the
watermark extraction is getting worse with a higher P e [27]. Furthermore, the proposed
method exploits the non‐degraded wiretap channel without any assumption on Eve’s
position and channel. One spreading code is utilized to implement SS watermarking.
The wide utilization of SS communications makes the sharing of one PN code acceptable for this implementation. The WBPLSec shares the same information in terms of
spreading code when compared with a, SS communication.
In comparison, with the iJAM, the proposed protocol offers the following advantages:
● it is a full‐rate protocol improving the major weakness of iJAM; and
● it has P out two times better than iJAM.
The iJAM is an interesting protocol, but it implements a physical layer security with a
split to half the data‐rate. The proposed scheme is an advanced version of iJAM. Both
protocols utilize SS techniques, and even though the authors implement DSSS for
WBPLSec, the same concept can be applied using OFDM, making the jammed samples
indistinguishable from the clean samples. The worldwide proliferation of SS communication makes the utilization of a spreading code for physical layer security reasonable for
both iJAM and WBPLSec. The utilization of SS watermarking yields WBPLSec to work full
rate. Furthermore, the achieved results show how the proposed protocol can be a valuable
technique for deploying security, creating a secure region around the legitimate receiver.
The physical layer security is one of the most promising techniques for low‐power sensor
networks and 5G devices. The avoidance of upper layers’ cryptography makes the physical
layer security attractive as a standalone security solution that can also improve the battery
life, because it saves computation when compared to encryption. Soderi et al. presented
the lower energy consumption of the WBPLSec when compared with iJAM [27].
References
1 Shannon, C. (1940) Communication theory of secrecy systems. The Bell System
Technical Journal, 28(4), 656–715.
2 Wyner, A. (1975) The wire‐tap channel. The Bell System Technical Journal, 54(8),
1355–1387.
3 Leung‐Yan‐Cheong, S. and Hellman, M. (1978) The Gaussian wire‐tap channel. IEEE
Transactions on Information Theory, 24(4), 451–456.
4 Csiszar, I. and Korner, J. (1978) Broadcast channels with confidential messages. IEEE
Transactions on Information Theory, 24(3), 339–348.
5 Peterson, R.L., Ziemer, R.E. and Borth, D.E. (1995) Introduction to Spread Spectrum
Communications. Prentice‐Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
6 Cox, I.J., Kilian, J., Leighton, F. and Shamoon, T. (1997) Secure spread spectrum
watermarking for multimedia. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 6(12), 1673–1687.
7 Cox, I.J., Miller, M. and McKellips, A. (1999) Watermarking as communications with
side information. Proceedings of the IEEE, 87(7), 1127–1141.