Table 1 Feature-level comparison of DBlock-Auth with recent blockchain-enabled MANET approaches.
Aspect | DBlock-Auth (this paper) | Careem & Dutta (2020) | Lwin et al. (2020) |
|---|---|---|---|
Core goal | End-to-end secure MANET: auth → clustering → trust-routed delivery with lightweight encryption | Reputation-based routing using blockchain to record node behavior and select reputed paths | Blockchain-based lightweight trust management embedded into OLSR |
Authentication | BPUF (registration on chain + PUF C–R at auth) | No PUF; reputation transactions logged on chain | No PUF; focuses on trust computation and validation process design |
Trust basis | MuMoTR: direct > indirect trust weighting for route selection. (Proposed Work/Trusted Route Selection.) | Reputation score per node from on-chain behavior | Distributed trust framework with lightweight consensus |
Clustering/CH | Sim-Score (mobility, distance, node degree) + TOPSIS CH selection | Not CH-centric; route selection uses reputed nodes | Built around OLSR; not CH-centric |
Data protection | Light HB encryption for confidentiality/integrity | Not the focus; reputation discourages misbehavior | Hardens control/data via blockchain trust; encryption not the main focus |
Ledger/consensus | Distributed ledger (zone-organized network); consensus details abstracted in manuscript | Uses blockchain to validate routing actions & persist reputation | Proposes lightweight consensus tailored for MANET constraints |
Testbed/metrics | NS-2; reports PDR, throughput, residual energy, security level (Table 3) | COMSNETS 2020 study; reports PDR gains vs. conventional routing (≈ + 12% noted in summaries) | Prototype/sim with OLSR integration; validation time/overhead reductions reported |
