A METHOD FOR IDENTIFYING A TASK AUTHORIZATION

Abstract

In an ad hoc mesh network, roles are assignment to the different network nodes, for example mesh point or mesh portal. The invention envisages that a network node identifies the certification and thus the permitted roles of another network node before it sends a message to said other network node. This ensures that the roles maintain their integrity and the security in the network is enhanced.

Description

CROSS REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is the US National Stage of International Application No. PCT/EP2007/052570, filed Mar. 19, 2007 and claims the benefit thereof. The International Application claims the benefits of German application No. 10 2006 017 029.6 filed Apr. 11, 2006, and German application No. 10 2206 036 107.5 filed Aug. 2, 2006, all three applications are incorporated by reference herein in their entirety.

FIELD OF INVENTION

The invention relates to a method for safeguarding a transmission of a message from a first network node to a second network node as well as to a network node.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Self-organizing networks are currently standardized within IEEE 802.11S. In this standard different node classes are envisaged within the IEEE. Such node classes are for example:

• • Mesh Point (MP)
  • Mesh Access Point (MAP)
  • Lightweight Mesh Point (LWMP)
  • Station (STA)
  • Mesh Portal (MPort).

These node classes, also referred to as roles, define functions which a particular network node can execute in the network. The node classes or roles thus correspond to the technical facilities of a respective network node in the network.

SUMMARY OF INVENTION

The object underlying the invention is to specify a method and a network node with which increased security is provided as regards its roles.

This object is achieved in respect of the method and the network node by the features of the claims.

The method for identifying a task authorization for a task for a first network node comprises the following steps:

• • Determining a security requirement assigned to the task;
  • Checking whether the first network node fulfills the security requirement;
  • If is does not, refusing the task authorization for the first network node.

The network involved can be a wired network or a wireless network. Wired networks are for example Ethernet networks or optical networks. Wireless network include WLAN networks, ad-hoc networks or mesh networks for example The network can also consist of a mixture of the categories given.

One advantage of the inventive method lies in its enhanced security. The reason for this is that the task authorization is refused if the first network node does not fulfill the security requirement.

in a preferred embodiment of the invention the task comprises the receipt of a message to be sent by a network node to the first network node. Preferably the refusal includes the suppression of a transmission of the message from a network node to the first network node.

The result of this is that the security for the transmission of messages is increased. For transmission of the message the network node checks the security requirement assigned to the message. If the first network node does not meet this requirement, the transmission of the message to the latter is suppressed.

In an advantageous embodiment of the invention the security requirement is determined on the basis of the message type. Possible types of message are as follows:

• • a message intended for the first network node;
  • a message intended to be routed by the first network node;
  • a route message, especially a Route Request or Route Reply message;
  • a message of a further network node without mesh capabilities for routing into a mesh network.

In an alternate embodiment of the invention the task comprises routing a message of a network node by the first network node. Preferably the refusal includes not entering or removing the network node from a routing table of the network node.

The result able to be achieved by this is that a first network node which does not meet the security requirement will not be used at a later time for example for routing messages. This removal from the routing table means that it will no longer be necessary to check the security requirement at the later time.

It is useful for the check to be performed by the network node. This results in only a low load being imposed on the network by additional messages.

In an advantageous embodiment of the invention a certificate of the first network node is used for checking the security requirement, especially a certificate in accordance with X.509v3 Preferably the certificate has attributes on the basis of which the check is undertaken.

The use of an attribute certificate has the advantage, as well as certification of an identity, of also making possible a certification of a characteristic linked to the identity, i.e. an attribute. It is thus possible for example to issue a certificate with an attribute “Mesh Portal” to a network node.

Preferably a network node class is used as a task authorization, especially one of the following network node classes:

• • Mesh Point;
  • Mesh Access Point;
  • Lightweight Mesh Point;
  • Station;
  • Mesh Portal.

This produces the advantage of the second network node being allocated a clear role, i.e. a node class, and simultaneously of the checking of the security requirement ensuring a secure transmission of the message. A further result is that a network node cannot always execute its full technical capabilities in the network.

The network node has a processing unit which is embodied such that, to determine a task authorization for a task for a first network node, it is able to undertake a determination of a security requirement assigned to the task, a check whether the first network node meets the security requirement and, if it does not, a refusal of the task authorization for the first network node.

The network node can for example be a VoIP-enabled telephone, a laptop, a mobile telephone, a PDA or a printer. Further possibilities are a computer, a router or a gateway.

Preferably the network node is embodied such that the refusal comprises the first network node not being entered into or being removed from the routing table of the network node.

In a preferred embodiment of the network node the task comprises receiving a message to be sent by a network node to the first network node and the refusal comprises the suppression of a transmission of the message to be sent.

The network features at least one such inventive network node. Preferably it is embodied as an ad-hoc network or a mesh network.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

Further details and advantages of the invention are explained on the basis of the drawing. The figures show:

FIG. 1 a mesh network.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF INVENTION

The typical network shown in FIG. 1, the embodiments of which will be used as a basis to present the inventive method, consists of a first through fifth network node K1 . . . K5, a gateway G and a WLAN-enabled network node W. Furthermore the Internet I is shown schematically in FIG. 1, connected to the gateway G and the first network node K1.

In the network there are wireless connections F between the gateway G and the second network node K2, between the second network node K2 and the fourth, fifth and third network node K4, K5, K3, between the fourth network node K4 and the fifth network node K5, between the fifth network node K5 and the third network node K3, between the first network node K1 and the third network node K3, as well as between the WLAN-enabled network node W and the first and third network node K1, K3. There are also cabled connections K between the Internet I and the gateway G as well as between the Internet I and the first network node K1.

Each of the network nodes K1 . . . K5, as well as the gateway G and the WLAN-enabled network node W is assigned a respective attribute certificate. This is checked to allow an assignment of roles, i.e. network node classes, to the network nodes K1 . . . K5, the gateway G and the WLAN-enabled network node W.

The WLAN-enabled network node W is not enabled for the mesh network. In order to be able to communicate with the mesh network, i.e. the network nodes K1 . . . K5 or the gateway G or the Internet I, the WLAN-enabled network node W must be given access to the mesh network. This requires a network node K1 . . . K5 with a technical capability to function as a Mesh Access Point (MAP), and with the authorization to do this. Furthermore this network node K1, K3 must be in direct connection with the WLAN-enabled network node W. In this typical network the first and third network node K1, K3 should be technically capable of making it possible for the WLAN-enabled network node W to have access to the mesh network. Furthermore however only the first network node K1 should have the attribute “Mesh Access Point” in its attribute certificate. The third network node K3 does not have this attribute in its attribute certificate. This means that the third network node K3 may not assume the role, i.e. network node class, of a Mesh Access Point. The WLAN-enabled network node W takes on the checking of the corresponding attribute certificate. For example the WLAN-enabled network node W would like to send a message to the fourth network node K4. The WLAN-enabled network node W knows about the presence of the first and third network node K1, K3. It now first checks the attribute certificate of the third network node K3, by sending a message to this network node K3 and receiving the attribute certificate as a reply from the third network node K3. The outcome of the check on the attribute certificate is that third network node K3 may not assume the role of a Mesh Access Point. The WLAN-enabled network node W therefore does not send the message to the third network node K3. The outcome of a similar check on the first network node K1 is that the first network node K1 may assume the role of the Mesh Access Point. The WLAN-enabled network node W thus sends its message directed to the fourth network node K4 to the first network node K1, which routes said message, for example via the third and fifth network node K3, K5 to the fourth network node K4.

For routing of messages of the WLAN-enabled network node W to the fourth network node K4 via the first network node K1 further roles are necessary at the third and fifth network nodes K3, K5. In this case the role concerned is that of a Mesh Point (MP). Before the first network node K1 routes the message of the WLAN-enabled network node W to the third network node K3, it checks whether the third network node K3 may fulfill the role of a Mesh Point. The first and third network nodes K1, K3 are members of the mesh network. The first network node K1 thus maintains the third network node K3 in a routing table. Also stored in this routing table are the roles that the third network node K3 may fulfill, based on its attribute certificate. In the example given the third network node K3 is to be able to assume the role of a Mesh Point. This means that the third network node K3 may route the message from the WLAN-enabled network node W within the mesh network. It is thus ensured in this exemplary embodiment that, although the third network node K3 may not undertake the connection of merely WLAN-enabled network nodes W to the mesh network, it may however route messages, even those from the WLAN-enabled network node W into the mesh network if they thus do not come directly from the WLAN-enabled network node W. The first network node K1 thus sends the message to the third network node K3. In a similar way the third network node K3 checks whether the fifth network node K5 may route the message. Since also the fifth network node K5 in this example may assume the role of a Mesh Point, the third network node K3 sends to the fifth network node K5. No further checking is required for routing the message to the fourth network node K4, for which the message is intended.

In the given example for the message of the WLAN-enabled network node W it has been assumed that each network node K1, K3, K5 lying on the way knows the path to the fourth network node, i.e. the next network node on the route. If however this is not the case, a routing algorithm must be executed. If the Ad hoc On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV) routing protocol is used, Route-Request messages are sent from the egress node for routing. If these reach the respective destination node K1 . . . K5 or another network node K1 . . . K5, that knows a route to the destination node K1 . . . K5 Route-Reply messages are sent back to the egress node. In this exemplary embodiment of the inventive method even before sending of the Route-Request messages it is checked in each case whether a receiving network node K1 . . . K5 may assume the role of a Mesh Point for routing messages. If a respective network node K1 . . . K5 does not do this, the Route-Request message is not send. This avoids routes being found that contain a network node which does have the necessary authorization, since a routing of messages via such a route would not be successful.

It is also possible in one embodiment variant to check in the Route-Reply messages whether a corresponding network node has the necessary authorization for assuming a role as the Mesh Point. Since a Route-Reply message is normally sent as a unicast message, it must be ensured here that a path will actually be found. To this end for example a number of Route-Reply messages can be sent. Another possibility lies in carrying out a repeated execution of the routing method with Route-Request and Route-Reply messages until a suitable path is found.

A further role to be checked represents the role of the Mesh Portal. A network node with the Mesh Portal role can provide a connection between network node K1 . . . K5 in the mesh network and network nodes in an external network, such as for example the Internet I. To make sure that this functionality also can only be offered by network nodes K1 . . . K5 authorized to do so can, each network node K1 . . . K5, wishing to send a message to the Internet I checks the attribute certificate of the respective next routing network node K1 . . . K5 to see whether only one further hop exists in the mesh network between the Internet I and the current network node K1 . . . K5. This prerequisite is fulfilled if the next following routing network node K1 . . . K5, G represents a Mesh Portal from the technical standpoint. In this case it must be checked whether this network node may also assume the role of the Mesh Portal.

To this end an example is given in which the third network node K3 would like to send a message into the Internet I. In the given example network there are two options. On the one hand the message can be sent via the gateway G to the Internet I, on the other via the first network node K1.

However in this example it is the case that only the gateway G has an authorization to act as a Mesh Portal in its attribute certificate. The first network node K1 does not have this attribute in its attribute certificate. The first network node K1, despite its connection to the Internet I, may thus not route any messages from the mesh network to the Internet I. The third network node K3 now establishes for example that the path to the Internet I is at its shortest via the first network node K1. Before the message is sent to the first network node K1 it checks the attribute certificate of the first network node K1 however. Since the first network node K1 would already be that network node which would have to undertake the routing into the Internet I, the attribute certificate of the first network node K1 is checked by the third network node K3 as to whether the first network node K1 may assume the role of a Mesh Portal. This is not the case. The third network node K3 must thus seek another route for its message into the Internet I. Such a route is available for example via the second network node K2 and the gateway G. A check is now due, as described above, as to whether the second network node K2 may assume the function of a Mesh Point, in order to be able to route the message to the gateway G at all. This is the case. The message is thus transmitted to the second network node K2.

A check as to whether the second network node K2 may assume Mesh Portal functionality does not have to be conducted by the third network node K3. The reason for this is that two links of the mesh network are still to be negotiated from the third network node K3 to the gateway G. In its turn this means that the second network node K2 is not that network node which takes care of a direct routing of the message into the Internet I.

The second network node K2 in its turn must check for the gateway G, whether the latter may execute the Mesh Portal function. According to the attribute certificate of the gateway G the latter is authorized for executing the role of the Mesh Portal. Thus the second network node K2 may route the message to the gateway G. The gateway G in its turn takes care of routing the message into the Internet I.

The second network node K2 must know or be able to establish for the message of the third network node K, that it has the Internet I as its destination. This is for example able to be detected on the basis of the address area of the destination address of that of the message.

There is a further embodiment variable for checking the role of the Mesh Portal. In this alternative all network nodes wishing to offer a mesh portal function, i.e. those wishing to assume the network node class of the Mesh Portal, must send messages into the network, with which they make their function known. In this alternative these messages are only accepted, if a simultaneous checking of its attribute certificate by the other network node K1 . . . 5 of the network is successful, i.e. if the corresponding network node may offer the Mesh Portal functionality.

In a further variant, to discover Mesh Portal network nodes, a similar mechanism is employed as is used for routing via Route Request and Route Reply messages. This means that a network node K1 . . . 5, wishing for example to send a message into the Internet I, typically sends Mesh Portal Request messages into the network. Mesh Portal reply messages are however only sent if a further network node K1 . . . 5 has a Mesh Portal network node as its neighboring node. Furthermore the Mesh Portal reply messages are only sent if a check has also been made for the neighboring nodes as to whether its attribute certificate allows it to assume the role of Mesh Portal.

By means of the inventive method and for example the execution options of the inventive method described it is made possible to maintain different roles of network nodes in for example multi-hop mesh networks and thereby for example to implement the security features necessary for enterprise networks. Via the definition of additional attributes, which describe further roles for example, there is also the option of designing a significantly finer security management. Furthermore the attribute certificates employed are also able to be used for safeguarding services on higher layers, for example the certification of components and services in Service Discovery protocols.

A second embodiment of the invention consists of the routing tables for messages being created in a passive manner at the network nodes K1 . . . 5. In a passive manner means that beacon messages are primarily used for creating the routing tables.

A network node K1 . . . 5 accepts the beacon messages (beacons) that it can receive and creates a routing table from these. The beacons each contain in this second embodiment the security certificate of the sending network node K1 . . . 5. A network node K1 . . . 5 that receives a beacon only inserts the sending network node K1 . . . 5 into its routing table if the security for routing is fulfilled, i.e. if its attribute certificate contains the Mesh Point role as an attribute.

The result achieved is that a message can be routed without new checking of the attribute certificate, since only the network nodes K1 . . . 5 are in the routing table which enter into consideration at all for routing.

It is worthwhile here to maintain routing tables for different roles, i.e. node classes. Thus a first routing table can be used for routing messages within the mesh network; i.e. the first routing table only contains network nodes K1 . . . 5, that may assume the role of Mesh Point. A second routing table is used to hold such network nodes K1 . . . 5 as may exercise the role of Mesh Portal or Mesh Access Point. Depending on the task set, a network node K1 . . . 5 can look into one of the routing tables for the network node K1 . . . 5 to which it may route a predetermined message.

FIG. 2 shows a typical execution sequence of a process which runs in a network node K1 . . . 5, if a message is to be sent from this network node K1 . . . 5 to a destination node. In this case the message can originate from the network node K1 . . . 5 itself or can already have been sent to this for routing. The process is executed in this way if the destination node is not directly accessible for the network node K1 . . . 5, i.e. if routing through an intermediate node is necessary.

In a first step S1 the network node K1 . . . 5 receives the message for routing. In a second step S2 the network node K1 . . . 5, decides on the intermediate node to which the message is to be routed. This decision can typically be made on the basis of a routing table. In a subsequent third step S3 the network node K1 . . . 5, checks whether an attribute certificate for the intermediate node is known to it. If is not, an attempt is made in an intermediate step S31 to obtain this attribute certificate. This is done by a request message being transmitted to the intermediate node in which the intermediate node is requested to send its attribute certificate in a response to the network node K1 . . . 5.

With the now known attribute certificate the network node K1 . . . 5 checks in a fourth step S4, whether the attribute certificate has the necessary attribute for the routing, i.e. whether the intermediate node may undertake the routing. If it may not, the network node K1 . . . 5 returns to the second step S2 and attempts to find another intermediate node.

If however the intermediate node may accept the task, in a fifth step the network node K1 . . . 5 sends the message to the intermediate node.

Claims

1.-15. (canceled)

16. A method for identifying a task authorization for a task for a first network node, comprising:

determining a security requirement assigned to the task;

checking whether the first network node fulfills the security requirement; and

if the security requirement is not fulfilled, refusing the task authorization for the first network node.

17. The method as claimed in claim 16, wherein the task comprises the receipt of message to be sent by a network node to the first network node.

18. The method as claimed in claim 16, wherein the refusal includes a suppression of sending the message from the network node to the first network node.

19. The method as claimed in claim 18, wherein the determination of the security requirement undertaken is based on the type of message.

20. The method as claimed in claim 18, wherein the determination of the security requirement undertaken is based on at least one of the following types:

a message intended for the first network node,

a message intended to be routed by the first network node,

a Route-Request or Route-Reply message, or

a message from a non-mesh-enabled further network node for routing into a mesh network.

21. The method as claimed in claim 16, wherein the task comprises the routing of a message of a network node by the first network node.

22. The method as claimed in claim 21, wherein the refusal comprises not entering and/or removing an entry of the network node from a routing table of the network node.

23. The method as claimed in claim 21, wherein the check is conducted by the network node.

24. The method as claimed in claim 23, wherein a certificate of the first network node is used for checking a security request.

25. The method as claimed in claim 23, wherein a certificate of the first network node in accordance with X.509v3 is used to check a security request.

26. The method as claimed in claim 24, wherein the certificate has attributes on the basis of which the check is conducted.

27. The method as claimed in claim 26, wherein a network node class is used as the task authorization.

28. The method as claimed in claim 27, wherein the network node class is selected from the group consisting of: mesh point, mesh access point, lightweight mesh point, station, and mesh portal.

29. A network node, comprising:

a processing unit constructed and arranged such that, to determine a task authorization for a task for a first network node, the node determines a security requirement assigned to the task, to check whether the first network node meets the security requirement, and to refuse the task authorization for the first network node if the first network node does not meet the security requirement.

30. The network node as claimed in claim 29, wherein the refusal comprises not entering the first network node into or removing it from a routing table of the network node.

31. The network node as claimed in claim 29, wherein the task comprises the receipt of a message to be sent by a network node to the first network node and the refusal includes suppression of the transmission of the message to be sent.

32. A network, comprising:

at least one network node,

wherein the at least one network node has: a processing unit embodied, to determine a task authorization for a task for a first network node, where the node determines a security requirement assigned to the task, to check whether the first network node meets the security requirement, and to refuse the task authorization for the first network node if the first network node does not meet the security requirement.

33. The network in accordance with claim 32, wherein the network is an ad-hoc network or a mesh network.