Countermeasures | Attacks | Review |
Switching option | Dos | Ensures availability, effective in alleviating DoS attacks. However, it is difficult to be implemented as it requires additional hardware and efficient processing units. |
APDA | Dos | Detects attacks before the verification time, hence reduces the overhead delay and improves the security. |
RRDA | Dos Sybil | Increases the response time, but it used as an additional approach after implementing the APDA approach. |
IP-chock | Dos Sybil Impersonation/Masquerading | Efficient and effective in terms of detection time, storage capacity and computational cost. |
Received signal strength | Sybil | Efficient regarding detection time and economic cost, and has good performance. However, it violates the privacy requirement. |
Footprint | Sybil | Preserves the privacy requirement. However, any compromised RSU can be exploited by attackers to get fake legal trajectories. |
Resemblance of the neighboring nodes | Sybil Impersonation/Masquerading | Efficient and effective in terms of computational cost, detection rate, and communication overhead. But it needs more investigations in high-density areas like traffic jam |
PLPCA | Information Disclosure | Effective and has good performance in hiding road and traffic information. |
LESPP | Information Disclosure | Feasible and has good performance as it reduces the computation cost and decreases the communications overhead. |
Digital Signature | Information Disclosure Suppression/Alteration Impersonation/Masquerading | Effective, simple and suitable approach to be implemented in securing vehicular networks. But it has high communications overhead. |
DMN | DoS Sybil Suppression/Alteration Impersonation/Masquerading | Improves the network utilization and performance, and has good throughput and packet delivery ratio, in addition to low end to end delay. |