4.7 Article

Secrecy Transmission With a Helper: To Relay or to Jam

Journal

Publisher

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TIFS.2014.2374356

Keywords

Physical layer security; ergodic secrecy rate; cooperative jamming; power allocation

Funding

  1. NSFC [61102081, 61172092, 61172093, 61221063]
  2. Specialized Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education of China [20110201120013, 20130201110014]
  3. New Century Excellent Talents Support Fund of China [NCET-13-0458]
  4. Industrial Research Fund of Shaanxi Province [2012GY2-28]
  5. Fok Ying Tong Education Foundation [141063]
  6. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central University [2013jdgz11]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this paper, we consider the problem of secure communications for a four-node system consisting of one source, one destination, one eavesdropper, and one helper. We investigate the question of which role should the helper act to improve the secrecy, to jam, or to relay. Two transmission schemes are investigated: 1) direct transmission scheme (DTS) with jamming and 2) relay transmission scheme (RTS). We consider both the path-loss and fading-in channel models and define a notion of distance normalized signal-to-noise-ratio (DN-SNR) to account for propagation. The ergodic secrecy rate (ESR) is adopted as the performance metric and semi-closed-form expressions of ESR for the two schemes are derived. Additionally, optimal power allocations in both low and high DN-SNR regimes are characterized analytically. We give the performance comparison of the two schemes from the perspective of energy efficiency in the low DN-SNR regime, and characterize the secrecy degree of freedom in the high DN-SNR regime. In the high DN-SNR regime, DTS provides higher secrecy rate compared with RTS, while in the low DN-SNR regime, RTS outperforms DTS. Furthermore, we show that eavesdropper's position impacts greatly on security.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available