Physical Layer Security for V2I Communications: Reflecting Surfaces Vs. Relaying
Wireless vehicular network (WVN) is exponentially gaining attention from industries and researchers since it is the Keystone of intelligent transportation systems (ITS). Despite the sophisticated features and services that it can offer, it is susceptible to networking attacks such as eavesdropping t...
Gespeichert in:
| Hauptverfasser: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext bestellen |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | |
|---|---|
| container_issue | |
| container_start_page | |
| container_title | |
| container_volume | |
| creator | Mensi, Neji Rawat, Danda B Balti, Elyes |
| description | Wireless vehicular network (WVN) is exponentially gaining attention from
industries and researchers since it is the Keystone of intelligent
transportation systems (ITS). Despite the sophisticated features and services
that it can offer, it is susceptible to networking attacks such as
eavesdropping threats where the confidential transmitted signal could be
overheard by a malicious entity. In this paper, we intend to study the physical
layer security (PLS) where we consider the eavesdropping attack for
vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I) communications. We analyze the average secrecy
capacity, under different scenarios by comparing the performances of employing
the decode-and-forward (D relay, the amplify-and-forward fixed gain (AFFG)
relay, and the intelligent reflecting surface (IRS). Actually, this comparison
investigates the efficiency of IRS comparing to the traditional relaying
systems, since it was introduced as a novel paradigm in wireless technology
with highly promising potential, especially in 5G and 6G. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.48550/arxiv.2010.07216 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>arxiv_GOX</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_arxiv_primary_2010_07216</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2010_07216</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a676-c0a44d3d28112bbe59b9c4610f3a15705233b17ce805a4beb3c7a2b795d3b68d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNotj8tKxDAYRrNxIaMP4Mq8QGvuad1J8TJQcHCG2ZY_aTIT6EWSVuzbW0dXHxw-DhyE7ijJRSEleYD4Hb5yRlZANKPqGu125yUFCx2uYXER752dY5gW7MeIj2yLq7Hv52F9TGEc0iP-cL5zdgrDCe_n6MG6hI8pX3kHy0pv0JWHLrnb_92gw8vzoXrL6vfXbfVUZ6C0yiwBIVresoJSZoyTpSmtUJR4DlRqIhnnhmrrCiJBGGe41cCMLmXLjSpavkH3f9pLUvMZQw9xaX7Tmksa_wHc3kjj</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Physical Layer Security for V2I Communications: Reflecting Surfaces Vs. Relaying</title><source>arXiv.org</source><creator>Mensi, Neji ; Rawat, Danda B ; Balti, Elyes</creator><creatorcontrib>Mensi, Neji ; Rawat, Danda B ; Balti, Elyes</creatorcontrib><description>Wireless vehicular network (WVN) is exponentially gaining attention from
industries and researchers since it is the Keystone of intelligent
transportation systems (ITS). Despite the sophisticated features and services
that it can offer, it is susceptible to networking attacks such as
eavesdropping threats where the confidential transmitted signal could be
overheard by a malicious entity. In this paper, we intend to study the physical
layer security (PLS) where we consider the eavesdropping attack for
vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I) communications. We analyze the average secrecy
capacity, under different scenarios by comparing the performances of employing
the decode-and-forward (D relay, the amplify-and-forward fixed gain (AFFG)
relay, and the intelligent reflecting surface (IRS). Actually, this comparison
investigates the efficiency of IRS comparing to the traditional relaying
systems, since it was introduced as a novel paradigm in wireless technology
with highly promising potential, especially in 5G and 6G.</description><identifier>DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.2010.07216</identifier><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020-10</creationdate><rights>http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0</rights><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>228,230,780,885</link.rule.ids><linktorsrc>$$Uhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2010.07216$$EView_record_in_Cornell_University$$FView_record_in_$$GCornell_University$$Hfree_for_read</linktorsrc><backlink>$$Uhttps://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2010.07216$$DView paper in arXiv$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Mensi, Neji</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rawat, Danda B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Balti, Elyes</creatorcontrib><title>Physical Layer Security for V2I Communications: Reflecting Surfaces Vs. Relaying</title><description>Wireless vehicular network (WVN) is exponentially gaining attention from
industries and researchers since it is the Keystone of intelligent
transportation systems (ITS). Despite the sophisticated features and services
that it can offer, it is susceptible to networking attacks such as
eavesdropping threats where the confidential transmitted signal could be
overheard by a malicious entity. In this paper, we intend to study the physical
layer security (PLS) where we consider the eavesdropping attack for
vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I) communications. We analyze the average secrecy
capacity, under different scenarios by comparing the performances of employing
the decode-and-forward (D relay, the amplify-and-forward fixed gain (AFFG)
relay, and the intelligent reflecting surface (IRS). Actually, this comparison
investigates the efficiency of IRS comparing to the traditional relaying
systems, since it was introduced as a novel paradigm in wireless technology
with highly promising potential, especially in 5G and 6G.</description><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>GOX</sourceid><recordid>eNotj8tKxDAYRrNxIaMP4Mq8QGvuad1J8TJQcHCG2ZY_aTIT6EWSVuzbW0dXHxw-DhyE7ijJRSEleYD4Hb5yRlZANKPqGu125yUFCx2uYXER752dY5gW7MeIj2yLq7Hv52F9TGEc0iP-cL5zdgrDCe_n6MG6hI8pX3kHy0pv0JWHLrnb_92gw8vzoXrL6vfXbfVUZ6C0yiwBIVresoJSZoyTpSmtUJR4DlRqIhnnhmrrCiJBGGe41cCMLmXLjSpavkH3f9pLUvMZQw9xaX7Tmksa_wHc3kjj</recordid><startdate>20201014</startdate><enddate>20201014</enddate><creator>Mensi, Neji</creator><creator>Rawat, Danda B</creator><creator>Balti, Elyes</creator><scope>GOX</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20201014</creationdate><title>Physical Layer Security for V2I Communications: Reflecting Surfaces Vs. Relaying</title><author>Mensi, Neji ; Rawat, Danda B ; Balti, Elyes</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a676-c0a44d3d28112bbe59b9c4610f3a15705233b17ce805a4beb3c7a2b795d3b68d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Mensi, Neji</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rawat, Danda B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Balti, Elyes</creatorcontrib><collection>arXiv.org</collection></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext_linktorsrc</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Mensi, Neji</au><au>Rawat, Danda B</au><au>Balti, Elyes</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Physical Layer Security for V2I Communications: Reflecting Surfaces Vs. Relaying</atitle><date>2020-10-14</date><risdate>2020</risdate><abstract>Wireless vehicular network (WVN) is exponentially gaining attention from
industries and researchers since it is the Keystone of intelligent
transportation systems (ITS). Despite the sophisticated features and services
that it can offer, it is susceptible to networking attacks such as
eavesdropping threats where the confidential transmitted signal could be
overheard by a malicious entity. In this paper, we intend to study the physical
layer security (PLS) where we consider the eavesdropping attack for
vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I) communications. We analyze the average secrecy
capacity, under different scenarios by comparing the performances of employing
the decode-and-forward (D relay, the amplify-and-forward fixed gain (AFFG)
relay, and the intelligent reflecting surface (IRS). Actually, this comparison
investigates the efficiency of IRS comparing to the traditional relaying
systems, since it was introduced as a novel paradigm in wireless technology
with highly promising potential, especially in 5G and 6G.</abstract><doi>10.48550/arxiv.2010.07216</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext_linktorsrc |
| identifier | DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.2010.07216 |
| ispartof | |
| issn | |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_arxiv_primary_2010_07216 |
| source | arXiv.org |
| title | Physical Layer Security for V2I Communications: Reflecting Surfaces Vs. Relaying |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-02T12%3A35%3A44IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-arxiv_GOX&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Physical%20Layer%20Security%20for%20V2I%20Communications:%20Reflecting%20Surfaces%20Vs.%20Relaying&rft.au=Mensi,%20Neji&rft.date=2020-10-14&rft_id=info:doi/10.48550/arxiv.2010.07216&rft_dat=%3Carxiv_GOX%3E2010_07216%3C/arxiv_GOX%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |