Loading…

Feature Selection for RF Fingerprinting With Multiple Discriminant Analysis and Using ZigBee Device Emissions

The proliferation of low-cost IEEE 802.15.4 ZigBee wireless devices in critical infrastructure applications presents security challenges. Network security commonly relies on bit-level credentials that are easily replicated and exploited by hackers. Unauthorized access can be mitigated by physical la...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:IEEE transactions on information forensics and security 2016-08, Vol.11 (8), p.1862-1874
Main Authors: Bihl, Trevor J., Bauer, Kenneth W., Temple, Michael A.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c326t-68115d81a86b627b9037be9e744d26f29a194aec622290b2999f34937da0473d3
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c326t-68115d81a86b627b9037be9e744d26f29a194aec622290b2999f34937da0473d3
container_end_page 1874
container_issue 8
container_start_page 1862
container_title IEEE transactions on information forensics and security
container_volume 11
creator Bihl, Trevor J.
Bauer, Kenneth W.
Temple, Michael A.
description The proliferation of low-cost IEEE 802.15.4 ZigBee wireless devices in critical infrastructure applications presents security challenges. Network security commonly relies on bit-level credentials that are easily replicated and exploited by hackers. Unauthorized access can be mitigated by physical layer (PHY) security measures that exploit device-dependent emission characteristics that are sufficiently unique to discriminate devices. RF distinct native attribute (RF-DNA) fingerprinting is a PHY-based security measure, which computes statistical features extracted from such device emissions. However, the RF-DNA fingerprints can be numerous, correlated, and noisy, therefore, a dimensional reduction analysis (DRA) via feature selection is, therefore, of interest. Device classification with DRA feature subsets is evaluated using a multiple discriminant analysis (MDA) classifier. Determining feature relevance from MDA was generally dismissed in prior RF fingerprinting work and is seldom considered in other applications. Here, the MDA feature relevance is revisited using a proposed eigen-based MDA loadings fusion (MLF) methodology. The MDA classification models are adopted and used to assess device identification (ID) classification and verification performance for both the authorized and unauthorized (rogue) devices using a claimed versus actual biometric methodology. Performance is compared for six DRA methods using: 1) a two-sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov test; 2) one-way analysis of variance F-test statistics; 3) a Wilk's lambda ratio; 4) generalized relevance learning vector quantized-improved relevance; 5) randomly selected; and 6) the proposed MLF method. Quantitative and qualitative dimensionality assessment methods are compared and contrasted to establish upper bounds on the number of retained features. Experimentally collected ZigBee emissions are considered and ZigBee device classification and ID verification performance using DRA subsets are compared with a full-dimensional feature set. Results show that DRA via the proposed MLF method is superior and more robust than competing methods.
doi_str_mv 10.1109/TIFS.2016.2561902
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_ieee_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_ieee_primary_7464336</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ieee_id>7464336</ieee_id><sourcerecordid>4073221621</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c326t-68115d81a86b627b9037be9e744d26f29a194aec622290b2999f34937da0473d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkU9Lw0AQxYMoWKsfQLwsePGSuv-yyR5rbbRQEWyL4CVskkndkiZ1dyP027uhpQdP8w6_95iZFwS3BI8IwfJxOUsXI4qJGNFIEInpWTAgUSRCgSk5P2nCLoMrazcYc05EMgi2KSjXGUALqKFwum1Q1Rr0kaJUN2swO6Mb5xX61O4bvXW107sa0LO2hdFb3ajGoXGj6r3VFqmmRCvb0196_QQeg19dAJputbU-2l4HF5WqLdwc5zBYpdPl5DWcv7_MJuN5WDAqXCgSQqIyISoRuaBxLjGLc5AQc15SUVGpiOQKCkEplTinUsqKccniUmEes5INg4dD7s60Px1Yl_kNCqhr1UDb2YwkNOJSJJh69P4fumk74y_yVCyp4DiJuKfIgSpMa62BKvOP2SqzzwjO-gKyvoCsLyA7FuA9dwePBoATH3PBGRPsD_kEgKE</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1792640854</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Feature Selection for RF Fingerprinting With Multiple Discriminant Analysis and Using ZigBee Device Emissions</title><source>IEEE Xplore (Online service)</source><creator>Bihl, Trevor J. ; Bauer, Kenneth W. ; Temple, Michael A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Bihl, Trevor J. ; Bauer, Kenneth W. ; Temple, Michael A.</creatorcontrib><description>The proliferation of low-cost IEEE 802.15.4 ZigBee wireless devices in critical infrastructure applications presents security challenges. Network security commonly relies on bit-level credentials that are easily replicated and exploited by hackers. Unauthorized access can be mitigated by physical layer (PHY) security measures that exploit device-dependent emission characteristics that are sufficiently unique to discriminate devices. RF distinct native attribute (RF-DNA) fingerprinting is a PHY-based security measure, which computes statistical features extracted from such device emissions. However, the RF-DNA fingerprints can be numerous, correlated, and noisy, therefore, a dimensional reduction analysis (DRA) via feature selection is, therefore, of interest. Device classification with DRA feature subsets is evaluated using a multiple discriminant analysis (MDA) classifier. Determining feature relevance from MDA was generally dismissed in prior RF fingerprinting work and is seldom considered in other applications. Here, the MDA feature relevance is revisited using a proposed eigen-based MDA loadings fusion (MLF) methodology. The MDA classification models are adopted and used to assess device identification (ID) classification and verification performance for both the authorized and unauthorized (rogue) devices using a claimed versus actual biometric methodology. Performance is compared for six DRA methods using: 1) a two-sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov test; 2) one-way analysis of variance F-test statistics; 3) a Wilk's lambda ratio; 4) generalized relevance learning vector quantized-improved relevance; 5) randomly selected; and 6) the proposed MLF method. Quantitative and qualitative dimensionality assessment methods are compared and contrasted to establish upper bounds on the number of retained features. Experimentally collected ZigBee emissions are considered and ZigBee device classification and ID verification performance using DRA subsets are compared with a full-dimensional feature set. Results show that DRA via the proposed MLF method is superior and more robust than competing methods.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1556-6013</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1556-6021</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1109/TIFS.2016.2561902</identifier><identifier>CODEN: ITIFA6</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: IEEE</publisher><subject>Assessments ; Classification ; Computer information security ; Devices ; dimensional reduction ; Discriminant analysis ; F-statistic ; Feature extraction ; feature selection ; Fingerprint recognition ; Fingerprinting ; Kolmogorov-Smirnov ; loadings ; Methodology ; Methods ; multiple discriminant analysis ; Network security ; Performance evaluation ; physical layer ; Radio frequency ; RF-DNA ; Robustness ; Security ; Unauthorized ; verification ; Wilk's Lambda ; Zigbee</subject><ispartof>IEEE transactions on information forensics and security, 2016-08, Vol.11 (8), p.1862-1874</ispartof><rights>Copyright The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. (IEEE) 2016</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c326t-68115d81a86b627b9037be9e744d26f29a194aec622290b2999f34937da0473d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c326t-68115d81a86b627b9037be9e744d26f29a194aec622290b2999f34937da0473d3</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-2431-2749</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7464336$$EHTML$$P50$$Gieee$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,54796</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bihl, Trevor J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bauer, Kenneth W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Temple, Michael A.</creatorcontrib><title>Feature Selection for RF Fingerprinting With Multiple Discriminant Analysis and Using ZigBee Device Emissions</title><title>IEEE transactions on information forensics and security</title><addtitle>TIFS</addtitle><description>The proliferation of low-cost IEEE 802.15.4 ZigBee wireless devices in critical infrastructure applications presents security challenges. Network security commonly relies on bit-level credentials that are easily replicated and exploited by hackers. Unauthorized access can be mitigated by physical layer (PHY) security measures that exploit device-dependent emission characteristics that are sufficiently unique to discriminate devices. RF distinct native attribute (RF-DNA) fingerprinting is a PHY-based security measure, which computes statistical features extracted from such device emissions. However, the RF-DNA fingerprints can be numerous, correlated, and noisy, therefore, a dimensional reduction analysis (DRA) via feature selection is, therefore, of interest. Device classification with DRA feature subsets is evaluated using a multiple discriminant analysis (MDA) classifier. Determining feature relevance from MDA was generally dismissed in prior RF fingerprinting work and is seldom considered in other applications. Here, the MDA feature relevance is revisited using a proposed eigen-based MDA loadings fusion (MLF) methodology. The MDA classification models are adopted and used to assess device identification (ID) classification and verification performance for both the authorized and unauthorized (rogue) devices using a claimed versus actual biometric methodology. Performance is compared for six DRA methods using: 1) a two-sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov test; 2) one-way analysis of variance F-test statistics; 3) a Wilk's lambda ratio; 4) generalized relevance learning vector quantized-improved relevance; 5) randomly selected; and 6) the proposed MLF method. Quantitative and qualitative dimensionality assessment methods are compared and contrasted to establish upper bounds on the number of retained features. Experimentally collected ZigBee emissions are considered and ZigBee device classification and ID verification performance using DRA subsets are compared with a full-dimensional feature set. Results show that DRA via the proposed MLF method is superior and more robust than competing methods.</description><subject>Assessments</subject><subject>Classification</subject><subject>Computer information security</subject><subject>Devices</subject><subject>dimensional reduction</subject><subject>Discriminant analysis</subject><subject>F-statistic</subject><subject>Feature extraction</subject><subject>feature selection</subject><subject>Fingerprint recognition</subject><subject>Fingerprinting</subject><subject>Kolmogorov-Smirnov</subject><subject>loadings</subject><subject>Methodology</subject><subject>Methods</subject><subject>multiple discriminant analysis</subject><subject>Network security</subject><subject>Performance evaluation</subject><subject>physical layer</subject><subject>Radio frequency</subject><subject>RF-DNA</subject><subject>Robustness</subject><subject>Security</subject><subject>Unauthorized</subject><subject>verification</subject><subject>Wilk's Lambda</subject><subject>Zigbee</subject><issn>1556-6013</issn><issn>1556-6021</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpdkU9Lw0AQxYMoWKsfQLwsePGSuv-yyR5rbbRQEWyL4CVskkndkiZ1dyP027uhpQdP8w6_95iZFwS3BI8IwfJxOUsXI4qJGNFIEInpWTAgUSRCgSk5P2nCLoMrazcYc05EMgi2KSjXGUALqKFwum1Q1Rr0kaJUN2swO6Mb5xX61O4bvXW107sa0LO2hdFb3ajGoXGj6r3VFqmmRCvb0196_QQeg19dAJputbU-2l4HF5WqLdwc5zBYpdPl5DWcv7_MJuN5WDAqXCgSQqIyISoRuaBxLjGLc5AQc15SUVGpiOQKCkEplTinUsqKccniUmEes5INg4dD7s60Px1Yl_kNCqhr1UDb2YwkNOJSJJh69P4fumk74y_yVCyp4DiJuKfIgSpMa62BKvOP2SqzzwjO-gKyvoCsLyA7FuA9dwePBoATH3PBGRPsD_kEgKE</recordid><startdate>20160801</startdate><enddate>20160801</enddate><creator>Bihl, Trevor J.</creator><creator>Bauer, Kenneth W.</creator><creator>Temple, Michael A.</creator><general>IEEE</general><general>The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. (IEEE)</general><scope>97E</scope><scope>RIA</scope><scope>RIE</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SC</scope><scope>7SP</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>L~C</scope><scope>L~D</scope><scope>F28</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2431-2749</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20160801</creationdate><title>Feature Selection for RF Fingerprinting With Multiple Discriminant Analysis and Using ZigBee Device Emissions</title><author>Bihl, Trevor J. ; Bauer, Kenneth W. ; Temple, Michael A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c326t-68115d81a86b627b9037be9e744d26f29a194aec622290b2999f34937da0473d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Assessments</topic><topic>Classification</topic><topic>Computer information security</topic><topic>Devices</topic><topic>dimensional reduction</topic><topic>Discriminant analysis</topic><topic>F-statistic</topic><topic>Feature extraction</topic><topic>feature selection</topic><topic>Fingerprint recognition</topic><topic>Fingerprinting</topic><topic>Kolmogorov-Smirnov</topic><topic>loadings</topic><topic>Methodology</topic><topic>Methods</topic><topic>multiple discriminant analysis</topic><topic>Network security</topic><topic>Performance evaluation</topic><topic>physical layer</topic><topic>Radio frequency</topic><topic>RF-DNA</topic><topic>Robustness</topic><topic>Security</topic><topic>Unauthorized</topic><topic>verification</topic><topic>Wilk's Lambda</topic><topic>Zigbee</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bihl, Trevor J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bauer, Kenneth W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Temple, Michael A.</creatorcontrib><collection>IEEE All-Society Periodicals Package (ASPP) 2005-present</collection><collection>IEEE All-Society Periodicals Package (ASPP) 1998-Present</collection><collection>IEEE Xplore</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts</collection><collection>Electronics &amp; Communications Abstracts</collection><collection>Mechanical &amp; Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts – Academic</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Professional</collection><collection>ANTE: Abstracts in New Technology &amp; Engineering</collection><jtitle>IEEE transactions on information forensics and security</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bihl, Trevor J.</au><au>Bauer, Kenneth W.</au><au>Temple, Michael A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Feature Selection for RF Fingerprinting With Multiple Discriminant Analysis and Using ZigBee Device Emissions</atitle><jtitle>IEEE transactions on information forensics and security</jtitle><stitle>TIFS</stitle><date>2016-08-01</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>11</volume><issue>8</issue><spage>1862</spage><epage>1874</epage><pages>1862-1874</pages><issn>1556-6013</issn><eissn>1556-6021</eissn><coden>ITIFA6</coden><abstract>The proliferation of low-cost IEEE 802.15.4 ZigBee wireless devices in critical infrastructure applications presents security challenges. Network security commonly relies on bit-level credentials that are easily replicated and exploited by hackers. Unauthorized access can be mitigated by physical layer (PHY) security measures that exploit device-dependent emission characteristics that are sufficiently unique to discriminate devices. RF distinct native attribute (RF-DNA) fingerprinting is a PHY-based security measure, which computes statistical features extracted from such device emissions. However, the RF-DNA fingerprints can be numerous, correlated, and noisy, therefore, a dimensional reduction analysis (DRA) via feature selection is, therefore, of interest. Device classification with DRA feature subsets is evaluated using a multiple discriminant analysis (MDA) classifier. Determining feature relevance from MDA was generally dismissed in prior RF fingerprinting work and is seldom considered in other applications. Here, the MDA feature relevance is revisited using a proposed eigen-based MDA loadings fusion (MLF) methodology. The MDA classification models are adopted and used to assess device identification (ID) classification and verification performance for both the authorized and unauthorized (rogue) devices using a claimed versus actual biometric methodology. Performance is compared for six DRA methods using: 1) a two-sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov test; 2) one-way analysis of variance F-test statistics; 3) a Wilk's lambda ratio; 4) generalized relevance learning vector quantized-improved relevance; 5) randomly selected; and 6) the proposed MLF method. Quantitative and qualitative dimensionality assessment methods are compared and contrasted to establish upper bounds on the number of retained features. Experimentally collected ZigBee emissions are considered and ZigBee device classification and ID verification performance using DRA subsets are compared with a full-dimensional feature set. Results show that DRA via the proposed MLF method is superior and more robust than competing methods.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>IEEE</pub><doi>10.1109/TIFS.2016.2561902</doi><tpages>13</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2431-2749</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1556-6013
ispartof IEEE transactions on information forensics and security, 2016-08, Vol.11 (8), p.1862-1874
issn 1556-6013
1556-6021
language eng
recordid cdi_ieee_primary_7464336
source IEEE Xplore (Online service)
subjects Assessments
Classification
Computer information security
Devices
dimensional reduction
Discriminant analysis
F-statistic
Feature extraction
feature selection
Fingerprint recognition
Fingerprinting
Kolmogorov-Smirnov
loadings
Methodology
Methods
multiple discriminant analysis
Network security
Performance evaluation
physical layer
Radio frequency
RF-DNA
Robustness
Security
Unauthorized
verification
Wilk's Lambda
Zigbee
title Feature Selection for RF Fingerprinting With Multiple Discriminant Analysis and Using ZigBee Device Emissions
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-26T08%3A49%3A54IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_ieee_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Feature%20Selection%20for%20RF%20Fingerprinting%20With%20Multiple%20Discriminant%20Analysis%20and%20Using%20ZigBee%20Device%20Emissions&rft.jtitle=IEEE%20transactions%20on%20information%20forensics%20and%20security&rft.au=Bihl,%20Trevor%20J.&rft.date=2016-08-01&rft.volume=11&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=1862&rft.epage=1874&rft.pages=1862-1874&rft.issn=1556-6013&rft.eissn=1556-6021&rft.coden=ITIFA6&rft_id=info:doi/10.1109/TIFS.2016.2561902&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_ieee_%3E4073221621%3C/proquest_ieee_%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c326t-68115d81a86b627b9037be9e744d26f29a194aec622290b2999f34937da0473d3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1792640854&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ieee_id=7464336&rfr_iscdi=true