Introducing Network Coding to RPL: The Chained Secure Mode (CSM)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current standard of Routing Protocol for Low Power and Lossy Networks (RPL) incorporates three modes of security: the Unsecured Mode (UM), Preinstalled Secure Mode (PSM), and the Authenticated Secure Mode (ASM). While the PSM and ASM are intended to protect against external routing attacks and some replay attacks (through an optional replay protection mechanism), recent research showed that RPL in PSM is still vulnerable to many routing attacks, both internal and external. In this paper, we propose a novel secure mode for RPL, the Chained Secure Mode (CSM), based on the concept of intra-flow Network Coding. The main goal of CSM is to enhance RPL's resilience against replay attacks, with the ability to mitigate some of them. The security and performance of a proof-of-concept prototype of CSM were evaluated and compared against RPL in UM and PSM (with and without the optional replay protection) in the presence of Neighbor attack as an example. It showed that CSM has better performance and more enhanced security compared to both the UM and PSM with the replay protection. On the other hand, it showed a need for a proper recovery mechanism for the case of losing a control message.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".