Blog

Introduction

A mobile ad hoc network (MANET) is a connection of mobile gadgets that self-configures [1, 2, 6, 8]. MANET is a new developing telecommunication that enables people to communicate without relying on infrastructural facilities, irrespective of their locality. It is commonly known as “infrastructure-less” connectivity. The network is the fastest expanding network because of cheaper, smaller, and more efficient gadgets. There is no centralized method for packet routing, and mutual trust is the primary criterion for inter-node communication [8, 15]. This paper will outline security issues in MANET, elaborate on the most recent attacks, and compare well-known secure routing protocols.

In MANET, devices should discover the existence of other devices and execute the appropriate configuration to permit data and utility sharing and interaction. Ad hoc networking permits gadgets to retain network connections and add and remove appliances from the network with ease [9]. Due to mobility nodes, risks from infiltrated nodes within the network, inadequate security systems, topology changes, scalability, and absence of central control, MANETs are more susceptible than wired networks. MANET is more vulnerable to malicious attacks as a result of these flaws.

It is devoid of any permanent structures, such as entry points or connection points [5, 7, 9]. MANET is linked via wireless links/cables and has no centralized administration. Where wireless connection is not available, or a wired backbone is not viable, cellular ad hoc connectivity can be set up [11]. All provisional network services are configured and created on the fly. As a result, security in provisional networks becomes a built-in flaw due to a lack of framework needed and vulnerability to wireless connection attacks.

Many ad hoc networking protocols have been developed, such as Destination-Sequenced Distance Vector (DSDV) [1], Ad hoc On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV) [14], Dynamic Source Routing (DSR) [4], and Optimized Link State Routing Protocol (OLSR) [3]. However, they all require that all hubs are coordinated and dependable and that no security measure is used. Because there is no centralized management to control the connected devices functioning in the network, security in the mobile ADHOC network is significant.

Most Recent Attacks to MANET

Because of the problems it poses to the network protocol, MANETs has become one of the most popular topics of recent studies. Current wired network security techniques cannot be readily applied to MANETs, making MANETs far more prone to security threats. Many experts are working to address MANET’s significant flaws, including restricted bandwidth, battery capacity, processing capacity, and security [11, 14]. Even though there is a great deal of work being done on this topic, notably routing assaults and their associated countermeasures, there is still a lot of work to be done.

MANET lacks a centralized monitoring server [1, 5, 13, 15]. The lack of control makes it harder to identify threats since traffic monitoring in a complex flexible, and large-scale ad-hoc network is challenging. Understanding the many types of assaults is often the initial step in creating effective security mechanisms. The attacks might occur from within and external of the network. For protected data transfer, MANET connectivity security is critical.

Figure I: Various Types of Attacks on MANETS

Passive Attacks

Passive attacks are those that do not affect the network’s regular operation [5]. Attackers listen in on network traffic without modifying it. If an attacker is somewhat able to understand data collected through surveillance, privacy can be compromised [2]. Because the network’s functionality is unaffected, detection of these attacks is difficult.

Eavesdropping

Eavesdropping involves overhearing without exerting any further effort. This results in the communication being intercepted, read and conversed with by an unauthorized receiver [2]. Mobile hosts share a wireless channel in a MANET. By nature, the majority of wireless transmission uses RF spectrum and broadcasts [5]. The transmission of messages can be intercepted, and a false message can be inserted into the network.

Traffic Monitoring

It can be built to identify communication parties and functionality that could be used to launch additional assaults [7]. Other wireless networks, such as WLAN, satellite, and cellular, are also susceptible to these same vulnerabilities.

Traffic Analysis

A passive attack called traffic analysis is used to learn which nodes connect and how much data is handled [12, 15].

Syn Flooding

It is a denial of service (DoS) attack. An attacker can keep requesting additional connections until the necessary resources by each link are depleted, or the threshold is reached [15]. It puts valid nodes under significant resource constraints.

Active Attacks

Active attacks are those carried out by compromised users that incur a cost in terms of resources to carry them out. Active assaults entail altering the network traffic or creating a fake stream [3, 10, 15]. Explicit or implicit active attacks are manifested. Hubs that are not part of the network carry out external assaults.  Internal assaults are carried out by network nodes that have been infiltrated. The rogue node(s) can target MANET in various methods to impair routing processes, including delivering fraudulent messages on multiple occasions, faking routing data, and advertising faking connections [2, 4].

Black Hole Attack

In a black hole intrusion, an attacker publishes a null statistic for all endpoints, causing all nodes in its proximity to divert packets to it [12]. A malicious hub broadcasts false routing data, pretending to have discovered the best path, inducing other legitimate nodes to send digital data through it. A corrupt router dumps all packets rather than transmitting them. An intruder monitors the queries in a flooding-centered protocol.

Wormhole Attack

A wormhole intrusion happens when a hacker intercepts transmissions at one connection point, “channels” them to a different point, and then broadcasts them into the system from that location. When navigation control messages are transmitted, routing can be disturbed. Therefore, a wormhole is a conduit created by two collaborating attackers. In AODV [14], and DSR [7] this attack might hinder any paths from being discovered and could even generate a wormhole for packets that are not addressed to themselves due to transmission. Wormholes are challenging to identify since the path through which information is transmitted frequently not of the constituent of the primary network [15]. Wormholes are harmful since they can disrupt without the network’s awareness.

Location Disclosure Attack

Via the adoption of traffic analytical methods or basic tapping and surveillance procedures, an intruder can determine a hub or architecture position inside an existing network and thereby violate the network’s confidentiality obligation [4, 8]. Attackers attempt to ascertain the credentials of sender and receiver and examine traffic to ascertain the network’s traffic sequence and follow variations to that trend [9, 13]. Discharge of this type of information is disastrous for security reasons.

Flooding

Malicious users may insert erroneous control information and user data into the connection or generate shadow packets that tunnel around because of incorrect routing data, ultimately consuming traffic and computing resources in the end [5]. It has a particularly negative impact on ad hoc networks, as its nodes typically have restricted battery and processing capability. Bandwidth may also be a financial factor, depending on the package provided [9]. Any congestion that explodes the network’s or a particular node’s bandwidth statistics can significantly damage costs.

Spoofing Attacks

Spoofing is a type of intrusion in which the hacker identifies a different hub in the network; thus, the intruder gets communication intended for the specific node [11]. Typically, this type of assault is undertaken to acquire entry to the network to conduct more attacks that could severely disable it. This kind of intrusion can be conducted by any malignant hub with sufficient information about the connection to generate a fake Identifier for one of its associate nodes [4, 8, 10]. Using that Identifier and a good incentive can misdirect other hubs into establishing paths approaching the node in question instead of the legitimate node.

This study attempted to classify the various forms of ad hoc security assaults only based on their features to shorten the mitigation duration significantly from the initial categorization. By classifying attacks into these multiple broad groups, the naming process becomes less complicated.

 

Comparison between Well-known Secure routing protocols for MANETS

MANET lacks a defined protection mechanism, which means it is convenient to both authorized network users and malevolent intruders [13]. One of the primary problems in MANET is the existence of malicious nodes, making it challenging to create a solid security program capable of protecting MANET against other routing assaults [9]. However, these solutions are incompatible with MANET resource limits, such as restricted speed and battery capacity, due to the high traffic load associated with key transfer and verification. MANETs can function independently or in conjunction with a wired infrastructure, frequently via a gateway hub that participates in both networks to transfer traffic [3]. This adaptability, along with its ability to self-organize, is one of MANET’s greatest assets, as well as one of its most significant security flaws.

Significantly, while some techniques based on cryptography and access control appear promising, however, they are too costly for resource-constrained MANETs. They are not yet ideal in terms of balancing efficacy and competence [1, 4]. While some techniques work effectively when just a single malicious node is present, they may not be appropriate when numerous collaborating intruders are present. Additionally, some may necessitate the use of functional applications, for example, a GPS or the alteration of the current protocol.

MANETs are primarily embedded in the Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) [4] or the Internet Protocol (IP) [2] suite to facilitate communication. While the movement of the nodes in MANETs enables effectiveness, it is also the primary rationale for assaults on such networks, some of which have been explored thus far. Routing protocols are broadly classified according to their technique for updating routing information, their adoption of transitory information for routing, their routing architecture, and their exploitation of particular resources [6].

Each routing procedure requires safe data transport. MANET security package standards are identical to those of any wired or wireless network infrastructure. The following are five critical security objectives that must be met to secure data and resources against attack [6, 9, 11].

Authentication

Verification guarantees that only legitimate nodes communicate or transmit data.  Without authorization, any hostile node in the connection might masquerade as a trustworthy node, impairing data flow between the hubs.

Availability

Convenience guarantees that services survive and continue to operate in the event of an intrusion. It refers to the concept that network operations should be accessible at all times. The systems that ensure MANET reliability should be capable of dealing with various threats, including denial of service assaults, energy starvation assaults, and node misconduct.

Confidentiality

Confidentiality guarantees that data is only available to the designated recipient. Except for the transmitter and recipient nodes, no other network user can access the information. It is accomplished through the use of data encryption methods.

Integrity

Integrity guarantees that no malicious node modifies the sent data. 

Non-Repudiation

Refusal to recant assures that neither the transmitter nor the recipient may dispute a message that has been delivered. Non-repudiation assists in identifying and isolating compromised nodes.

Outline of Available Protocols

Security procedures for MANETs may be broadly classified into three classes: prevention, discovery, and response. Prevention protocols are used to prohibit the attacker node from initiating any activity [11, 13]. This methodology necessitates encryption to establish the secrecy, virtue, and non-disapproval of routing packet data. The discovery and response mechanisms aim to determine any spiteful node or activity in the connectivity and take appropriate measures to ensure the correct routing [10, 13, 15]. Core, Confidant, Pathrater, Byzantine Algorithm, and Watchdog are just a few examples.

Figure II: Diagram of Secure Routing Protocols

Classification of Secure Routing Protocols for MANET

Solutions Based on Cryptography

It is divided into symmetric and asymmetric cryptographic solutions.

Solutions Based on Symmetric Cryptography

The Secure Routing Protocol (SRP) [9] is a technique created to safeguard essential routing procedures that use broadcast to query for routes. It may be used to extend a variety of current responsive routing procedures, most notably the DSR [4]. Between an origin and a target node, a security association (SA) is essential.  The SA is expected to be formed by the use of a public key among multiple communicating hubs.

Likewise, the Security-aware Ad hoc Routing (SAR) [4] technique is a MANET routing solution that adds protection aspects into path detection as parameters. Notwithstanding, whereas conventional non-protected routing algorithms determine the abridged channel between multiple network users, SAR may determine a route with the appropriate protection characteristics [3]. SAR may be implemented to any fundamental ad hoc routing technique (DSR or AODV) to incorporate the security metric into path request communication.  A primary downside of SAR is the enormous cost it adds to the routing mechanism, as each intermediary node must conduct cryptography.

Asymmetric Cryptography Solutions

As defined in [6], Authenticated Routing for Ad hoc Networks (ARAN) is a protected packet transmission technology anchored on essential techniques.  ARAN employs an encryption-decryption technique to ensure verification, integrity protection, and the refusal to recant messages [6, 7]. It is divided into two independent operating phases. The first stage is the provisional approval step, which necessitates a credible certificate authority (CA). All hubs must approach the CA to access the network and get a license for their domain and shared key [6]. The certifying expert makes its public key available to all network users. The procedure’s second functional step is the path discovery procedure, which enabled end-to-end verification. It verifies that the endpoint was attained.

Figure III: Route Discovery in the ARAN Protocol

Similarly, path maintenance in ARAN is accomplished through the use of ERR notifications that are certified by the nodes that create them to indicate known vulnerabilities [6].

Figure IV: Route Maintenance in ARAN Protocol

Solution Based on one-way Hash Chain

The Secure Efficient Ad hoc Distance vector (SEAD) [7] is a protected ad hoc connection routing technique built on the architecture of the DSDV transmission algorithm, specifically the DSDVSQ variant [10] of this technique. SEAD authenticates hop tally and series numbers using cryptographic hash functions and does not employ any irregular cryptographic processes [8, 13]. Each node in SEAD generates its hash string by executing a uni-directional hash operation to a randomly generated value. Additionally, certain pieces from the hash chain are employed to encrypt the routing technique’s upgrades. The technique, however, is predicated on the presence of a means for authenticating a single piece in a hash chain among multiple hubs [4]. As a result, when a node sends or transmits a routing upgrade, it contains a single hash chain figure for each element in the configuration.

To avert the formation of routing circles, SEAD recommends two distinct ways for authenticating the origin of each routing upgrade message [8, 15]. The initial recommendations involve clock integration among the ad hoc network’s nodes and broadcast verification techniques. The second technique presupposes a mutual confidential key for the multiple nodes to authenticate a routing upgrade message using a message authentication code (MAC) [4] across the nodes. SEAD offers robust defense against attackers attempting to produce wrong routing information but cannot defend against the wormhole attack.

Hybrid Solutions

SAODV is a recommended hybrid solution that is an enhancement to the AODV routing technique [11]. The suggested enhancements use cryptographic identities to authenticate the communications’ non-modifiable elements. A uni-directional hash chain to protect the hop-count feature inside the RREQ and RREP texts is the only adjustable aspect of AODV communication [5, 7, 8]. The technique necessitates a critical management system that enables each node to get public keys from the other network users. SAODV provides security characteristics such as integrity, verification, and non-repudiation.

Nonetheless, SAODV’s efficiency is degraded as a result of the usage of irregular cryptography. Additionally, SAODV is vulnerable to the Wormhole attack [12]. Furthermore, hop count verification through hash chains is insecure, as a rogue node may relay a notice without increasing the hop volume.

Similarly, the Secure Link State Routing Protocol (SLSP) [11] is a recommended technique for safeguarding preemptive routing in MANET and disseminating route information for regional and network-broad surveyed architectures. SLSP can be adopted as an autonomous approach for effective connection routing or in conjunction with a responsive provisional routing procedure as part of a composite routing architecture [4, 6, 10]. The SLSP, on the other hand, demands the presence of an irregular key duo for each of a hub’s network interfaces. With regards to public key dissemination, SLSP makes no use of a central server. The node distributes the shared key to the nodes in its immediate neighborhood.

Figure V: Comparison Table of Secure Routing Protocols

Detection and Reaction Schema

Byzantine Algorithm

The Byzantine Algorithm technique is adopted to safeguard the connection against Byzantine faults, which encompass packet alteration, packet loss, and assaults perpetrated by selfish or malevolent hubs [4, 11]. It is divided into three phases: path exploration, Byzantine fault discovery, and weight control of links. When an originator node wishes to convey a signal, it transmits a path appeal packet to its peers, including the address of origin, the terminal address, a hash value, a weighted index, and the secret key used for verification.

When the transitional hub collects the RREQ packet, it examines an RREQ item in its table. If no item for the RREQ exists, it checks the identification key and adds it to the list, rebroadcasting it to other hubs [11]. When the target node is attained, the key is verified, and a route reply message is created (RREP). When the originator node receives the RREP packet, it verifies the confidential key. Additionally, it contrasts the attained path to the current path. If the receiving path is superior to the current one, this path should be added to its list.

Figure VI: The Three Phases of Byzantine Algorithm

During the fault identification stage, each intermediary node transmits a reply to the base node for every packet collected [8, 11]. When the tally of unanswered packets exceeds a predefined limit, a failure is recorded on the route. Similarly, the procedure determines the load of the links during the link weight control step. If the defect diagnosis phase identifies a connection as bad, the associated weight number is raised. During the path discovery stage, the connection with the lowest weight entry will be considered superior.

Core

CORE (a cooperative reputation technique for enforcing node collaboration in MANET) [15] is an approach that is based on nodes cooperating. It employs a popularity list and a monitoring method to determine if a hub is collaborative or disruptive [4]. The popularity list feature stores information about intermediary nodes and their related status or ratings. The Watchdog element computes the equation and returns the value of popularity. A sender and one or more intermediary nodes are required for this protocol. When an intermediary node declines to collaborate with the source node, the CORE technique reduces the intermediary node’s repudiation [3]. It can result in the network’s probe node being eliminated.

Confidant

The Confidant (Cooperation of Nodes: Fairness in Dynamic Ad hoc Networks) algorithm is used to identify non-collaborative nodes [3, 11]. The monitor, the popularity mechanism, the route manager, and the trust manager are the components of this protocol. The monitor element is in charge of passively acknowledging every packet it transmits. The trust control component is accountable for the transmission and receipt of alarm notifications [5].  The component that manages reputation keeps a list of nodes and their related rankings. Ratings are updated using a value equation that employs lightweights when an alert is generated for a malfunctioning node and heavier weights when clear evidence becomes available [5]. The route control element is responsible for managing all routing data packet, including the inclusion, removal, and modification of pathways based on input from the popularity mechanism.

Watchdog and Pathrater

The watchdog and pathrater protocols are used to identify rogue nodes that reject relaying packets after previously agreeing to do so [6, 7, 10]. The watchdog must monitor whether or not the subsequent node in the route is sending the data packet. Otherwise, it will be interpreted as malevolent action. The pathrater’s role is to analyze and determine the most dependable route from the watchdog’s findings. When a network user sends digital data to another node in the route, it listens to see whether the adjacent hub will likewise send it and checks whether the subsequent node does not change the packet before relaying it [6]. Suppose a router engages in suspicious activity such as denial of service attacks or data packet manipulation. In that case, the watchdog will raise the node’s fault rating—this failure rate aids in determining the most dependable route between endpoints.

Figure VII: A Demonstration of Trust Architecture within a Node

Summary

This article discussed the most widely used techniques for protecting routing in MANETS. The research of the many suggested security mechanisms revealed that the intrinsic properties of MANETs, such as frequently dynamic configurations and poor infrastructure, exacerbate the already massive challenge of safe routing. This study demonstrates that none of the proposed safe routing methods can achieve all security objectives. Numerous safe routing methods for MANETs employ multi-hop routing instead of single-hop routing to transmit packets to their destinations. Numerous systems for secure routing have relied on cryptography approaches. The confidentiality of mobile nodes is ensured by connectivity authentication, and all intermediary nodes are needed to validate the routing data’s digital certificates cryptographically. Other designs make use of trust measuring units.

Nevertheless, the core concept in all safe routing solutions is to incorporate more data into exchanging packets, routing list information transfers, and other protection processes offered in these technologies. Therefore, protecting and upgrading how routing digital data packets are conveyed over the wireless link while incurring a minimal performance expenditure. Additionally, the security burden is primarily due to the computational effort of the cryptographic techniques employed in repetitive routing operations. However, if a safe routing procedure suffers from significant overheads that render it inefficient, the protocol becomes effectively worthless.

Conclusion

The article described the different security objectives, vulnerabilities, and existing routing methods that fulfill MANET security needs. The adaptability, simplicity, and efficiency with which MANETS may be established suggest that they will find broader applicability. It leads to ad-hoc networks wide open for development to satisfy the demands of these demanding applications. A more demanding objective for ad hoc network security is to design a multifaceted security approach integrated into perhaps every element of the connection, leading to defense-in-depth against various established and undiscovered security risks. As a result, the paper recommends enhancements to the AODV routing technique to enable secure network layer communication in MANETs.

References

[1] Abdel-Fattah, F., Farhan, K. A., Al-Tarawneh, F. H., & AlTamimi, F. (2019, April). Security challenges and attacks in dynamic mobile ad hoc networks MANETs. In 2019 IEEE Jordan international joint conference on electrical engineering and information technology (JEEIT) (pp. 28-33). IEEE.

[2] Aluvala, S., Sekhar, K. R., & Vodnala, D. (2016). An empirical study of routing attacks in mobile ad-hoc networks. Procedia Computer Science, 92, 554-561.

[3] Desai, A. M., & Jhaveri, R. H. (2019). Secure routing in mobile ad hoc networks: a predictive approach. International Journal of Information Technology, 11(2), 345-356.

[4] Islabudeen, M., & Devi, M. K. (2020). A smart approach for intrusion detection and prevention system in mobile ad hoc networks against security attacks. Wireless Personal Communications, 112(1), 193-224.

[5] Jhaveri, R. H., & Patel, N. M. (2017). Attack‐pattern discovery-based enhanced trust model for secure routing in mobile ad‐hoc networks. International Journal of Communication Systems, 30(7), e3148.

[6] Kannammal, A., & Roy, S. S. (2016, March). Survey on secure routing in mobile ad hoc networks. In 2016 International Conference on Advances in Human-Machine Interaction (HMI) (pp. 1-7). IEEE.

[7] Krishnan, R. S., Julie, E. G., Robinson, Y. H., Kumar, R., Tuan, T. A., & Long, H. V. (2020). Modified zone-based intrusion detection system for security enhancement in mobile ad hoc networks. Wireless Networks, 26(2), 1275-1289.

[8] Kumar, S., & Dutta, K. (2016). Intrusion detection in mobile ad hoc networks: techniques, systems, and future challenges. Security and Communication Networks, 9(14), 2484-2556.

[9] Kumar, S., & Dutta, K. (2016). Securing mobile ad hoc networks: Challenges and solutions. International Journal of Handheld Computing Research (IJHCR), 7(1), 26-76.

[10] Liu, G., Yan, Z., & Pedrycz, W. (2018). Data collection for attack detection and security measurement in mobile ad hoc networks: A survey. Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 105, 105-122.

[11] Meddeb, R., Triki, B., Jemili, F., & Korbaa, O. (2017, May). A survey of attacks in mobile ad hoc networks. In 2017 International Conference on Engineering & MIS (ICEMIS) (pp. 1-7). IEEE.

[12] Mohammed, A. S., Yuvaraj, D., Sivaram, M., & Porkodi, V. (2018). DETECTION AND REMOVAL OF BLACK HOLE ATTACK IN MOBILE AD HOC NETWORKS USING GRP PROTOCOL. International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science, 10(6).

[13] Moudni, H., Er-rouidi, M., Mouncif, H., & El Hadadi, B. (2016, March). Secure routing protocols for mobile ad hoc networks. In 2016 international conference on information technology for organizations development (IT4OD) (pp. 1-7). IEEE.

[14] Moudni, H., Er-Rouidi, M., Mouncif, H., & El Hadadi, B. (2016, March). Attacks against AODV routing protocol in mobile ad-hoc networks. In 2016 13th international conference on computer graphics, imaging and visualization (cgiv) (pp. 385-389). IEEE.

[15] Sarika, S., Pravin, A., Vijayakumar, A., & Selvamani, K. (2016). Security issues in mobile ad hoc networks. Procedia Computer Science, 92, 329-335.

Summary of the 5G Security Architecture

Markedly, the security structure of cellular networks is stratified and categorized by domain in layout (Arfaoui et al., 2018). It is structured in the following format;

Figure I: Security Architecture for 5G Network

Network access security is a collection of defense aspects that allow a UE to safely validate and gain entry into network services, including 3GPP and non-3GPP entry, to secure against intrusion on the (radio) terminals (Arfaoui et al., 2018). Similarly, the connectivity sphere security is a collection of safety services that enable network buds to interchange communication and data plane in a secure manner. It specifies safety protocols for connections between entrance and backbone networks and the home and the visited networks.

The user domain security is a series of security features that ensures that users have safe access to mobile devices. Internal authentication protocols, such as a PIN code, are used by mobile equipment to maintain security between the mobile equipment and the universal SIM (Gupta et al., 2018). Conversely, appdomain surveillance is a safety feature that makes it possible for software in the consumer and service domains to safely interchange messages. The application domain’s security measures are open to the whole cellular network and are supported by ASPs.

Notably, the SBA domain protection is a collection of safety features that facilitate the SBA layout’s network functions to steadily communicate within the serving interconnections sphere and other network realms (Ji et al., 2018). Network service enrollment, exploration and approval security features, and safety for service-centered terminals, are among these features. Finally, the noticeability and configurability of protection are aspects that facilitate the user to be enlightened if a safety aspect is not operational.

5G protection layout, similar to 4G protection design, comprises the home, transport, application, and serving stratum, safely separate from one another. The transport layer is at the basement of the design and has a low safety responsiveness (Yao et al., 2019).  Some UE parameters, all gNodeB parameters, and select key network components like the UPF are included. Except for the UE functions, none of these functions use sensitive data like permanent subscription identifiers (SUPIs) or user root keys.

Notably, the Access and Mobility Management Feature (AMF), Network Repository Function (NRF), Security Edge Protection Proxy (SEPP), and Network Exposure Function (NEF) are all part of the serving stratum, which has reasonably high protection responsiveness (Gupta et al., 2018). The Authentication Server Function (AUSF) and Unified Data Management (UDM) of the provider’s home interconnectivity, and the USIM in the UE, are both parts of the home stratum, which encompasses delicate information such as SUPIs, user login credentials, and high-end keys.

Application layout is closely linked to access providers but scarcely connected with operator interconnectivity. It involves 5G software that, identical to 4G counterparts, require an E2E protection guarantee for services that demand high safety besides transport protection (Ji et al., 2018). Regulators must track all four strata in terms of cybersecurity risks. Simultaneously, service providers must examine the application layout, operant must supervise the home, transport, and serving structure, and accessories dealers must concentrate on the basic network accessories.

Research Problem

Users’ private information and communication data, wireless and core network hardware and software properties, system resource valuables, as well as usernames, login credentials, logs, settings, and charging data records (CDRs) managed and preserved by operators are all key assets of 5G networks (Gupta et al., 2018). Hackers target wireless interconnectivity to infiltrate users’ private information or jeopardize network or computing resource availability.

5G security threats and risks entail verification, safety framework, and code handling, radio access network (RAN) protection, and safety inside NG-UE. Additional risks include security architecture, validation, signature privacy, and network segmentation safety, relay protection, and interconnectivity domain safety. Similarly, security noticeability and arrangement, password protections, interconnection and transfer, individual-based data, broadcast safety, and administration security, security visibility, and cryptographic techniques are also 5G security threats.

5G Network Security Solutions

According to Yao et al. (2019), a safety architecture is a technique for implementing a protected structure that includes a tool case for modeling secure networks, safety design concepts, and a collection of protection parameters and processes for implementing the protection controls required to meet the system’s safety goals.

Enhanced Cryptographic Algorithm and Radio Network Protection

Future 5G specifications can support 256-bit cryptographic algorithms, ensuring that 5G network algorithms are sufficiently resistant to quantum computer attacks (Yao et al., 2019). Notably, the data handling segment and the radio unit are architecturally divided into 5G base stations. A stable interface connects the CU and the DU. Even if the intruder gains access to the radio module, this isolation hinders the hacker from accessing the administrator’s network.

Enhanced User Privacy Protection

Stable IDs (global telephone benefactor identities) are transferred in unencrypted text via a wireless interface in second, third, and fourth-generation networks. Hackers may use man-in-the-middle attacks to monitor users by exploiting this vulnerability (Ji et al., 2018). Users’ stable IDs (SUPIs) are disseminated in cipher text in 5G networks to protect against such attacks. Additionally, cross-operator protection in 5G will be offered by protection intermediary servers, a progression of the 4G communication firewall. 5G networks have adopted the home interconnection cryptography for irregular encoding to avoid the disclosure of subscriber identifiers.

Better Roaming Security.

In most cases, operators must establish relations with third-party operators. By exploiting intermediary operators’ computers, hackers can falsify authentic backbone network buds to launch SS7 attacks and other attacks (Yao et al., 2019). Security Edge Protection Proxy (SEPP) is a 5G SBA specification that implements E2E safety protection for cross-operant communication at the transport and device layers. It prohibits intermediary operators’ equipment from interfering with delicate information (such as keys, user IDs, and SMS) sent between baseline networks.

Key Hierarchy and Secondary Authentication

5G uses key segregation to enforce the revised trust model. It preserves the confidentiality of data transmitted by the user and reduces the damage if a part of the system is breached (Arfaoui et al., 2018). Similarly, secondary authentication is used for data transfer networks exterior of the network provider’s jurisdiction, such as Wi-Fi. It is important to note that the network and gadgets in 5G are jointly verified.

Critique

A 5G protection layout fundamentally does not offer answers to the network’s safety risks or which perils require complex countermeasures. Such examination should be based on a cross-sector risk, exposure, and hazard analysis, which takes the network’s safety goals into account (Arfaoui et al., 2018). The analysis should culminate in an exposure intervention plan that specifies whether to minimize the threats by enforcing specific protection measures, recognizing the risk by hoping it will not occur or cause significant damage, or passing responsibility for risk management to other stakeholders directly or implicitly.

Figure II: Schedule for 5G Standardization

Markedly, network slicing helps mobile operator split their core and radio networks into several virtual blocks with different amounts of capital and priority for different types of traffic (Olimid & Nencioni, 2020). When a network has these hybrid network functions that serve multiple slices, there is a lack of mapping between the application and transport layers identities, according to a study of 5G core networks that include both shared and dedicated network functions.

Suppose an attacker has access to the 5G service-based infrastructure. In that case, they will be able to access data and conduct denial-of-service attacks through several slices due to this loophole in industry standards (Olimid & Nencioni, 2020). It is because of the combined use of 5G NR and an LTE network hub, allowing the networks to inherit all vulnerabilities of the LTE networks.

Similarly, software-defined networking (SDN) and interconnectivity parameter virtualization are at the heart of the 5G network core (NFV). HTTP and REST API protocols are heavily used in SDN and NFV. On the Internet, these protocols are well-known and commonly used. Therefore, any adversary can access tools for detecting and exploiting vulnerabilities making hacking 5G to become simpler (Yao et al., 2019). Additionally, with most user equipment on the 5G network being IoT devices, millions of such interconnected devices offer an opportunity for botnets due to poor device protection and scalable malware distribution.

Not every operator is effective in securing the network hub and safeguarding it from all sides. The administration has become much more complicated as SDN and NFV are introduced for interconnectivity slicing in 5G (Arfaoui et al., 2018). In 5G connectivity, flexibility is possible at the expense of heightened intricacy and settings to control. Because of this adaptability, there’s an increased chance of protection-breaking configuration errors. It is especially true with network slicing.

Rather than configuring only a single network, network providers would be required to develop extensive slices, each with its own set of challenges and service specifications. It has serious consequences for security. When the number of parameters and configuration burden grows, so does the risk of a security breach (Olimid & Nencioni, 2020). This is particularly true when multiple operators build 5G network infrastructure together or when multiple virtual network providers use a single 5G connectivity.

Conclusion

The majority of risks and problems that 5G network safety faces are identical to those of 4G. Concerning new offerings, attention must be focused on entry validation for intermediary apportionment access administrators. 3GPP safety guidelines are factoring the safety threats and remedies to the 5G structures, such as connectivity partitioning and service-based architecture (SBA). Similarly, given the widespread adoption of cloud architecture in 5G, the safe use of computing resource assets must be considered. With telecom networks being slow to change, mobile operators need to safeguard security for both 5G and the evolution and interworking with preceding network generations.

References

Arfaoui, G., Bisson, P., Blom, R., Borgaonkar, R., Englund, H., Félix, E., & Zahariev, A. (2018). A security architecture for 5G networks. IEEE Access, 6, 22466-22479.

Gupta, A., Jha, R. K., & Devi, R. (2018). The security architecture of a 5g wireless communication network. International Journal of Sensors Wireless Communications and Control, 8(2), 92-99.

Ji, X., Huang, K., Jin, L., Tang, H., Liu, C., Zhong, Z., & Yi, M. (2018). Overview of 5G security technology. Science China Information Sciences, 61(8), 1-25.

Olimid, R. F., & Nencioni, G. (2020). 5G network slicing: a security overview. IEEE Access, 8, 99999-100009.

Yao, J., Han, Z., Sohail, M., & Wang, L. (2019). A robust security architecture for SDN-based 5G networks. Future Internet, 11(4), 85.

Introduction

It has been 45 years since groundbreaking legislation made it possible for students with learning impairment to attend similar community schools as children without special educational accommodations. The first special education services aimed to discourage irresponsibility among at-risk children living in urban slums. Urban school districts developed manual training courses to complement their general education courses. Over time, there have several court cases and legislative action that has influenced policy direction on special education in the United States. This paper outlines several legal cases, legislative and executive action that has influenced the evolution of special education, the personal abilities enhanced in service provision, and the best practices developed.

Role of Cases in Shaping and Improving Services

Supreme Court Decision Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (17 May 1954)

Topeka’s Panel of Education, a lawsuit in which the U.S. Supreme Court collectively (9–0) resolved on 17 May 1954, that ethnic favoritism in communal schools breached the fourteenth constitutional reform prohibits states from refusing balanced protection of the laws to any person within their authority. In this massive lawsuit, the Supreme Court ruled that isolating children in public learning institutions based on ethnicity was unlawful (Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 1954). It effectively terminated authorized racial separation in the United States’ communal schools, overturning the 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson case’s “separate but equal” concept.

After two preponderance verdicts and cautious, if obscure, wording, Brown’s Supreme Court’s resolution against the education panel encountered significant opposition. Along with the palpable anti-discriminatory, some legal theorists thought the verdict violated legal proceedings by depending heavily on sociological evidence rather than criterion or current law (Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 1954). Today, education is perhaps the most important function of state and local government. Brown has since been seen as similarly significant in banning inequity on the grounds of impairment by Congress. This ruling significantly impacted subsequent disability statutes, such as the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (E.H.A.) and the Americans with Disabilities Act (A.D.A.).

The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) (9 April 1965)

The Primary and High School Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) (P.L. 89-10) was endorsed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson on 9 April 1965 (Paul, 2016). It culminated in the proliferation of state education agencies and the states assuming a larger role in education policymaking. This legislation elevated education to the forefront of the nation’s fight against poverty and established a precedent for fair access to high-quality education. The ESEA is a sprawling piece of legislation that funds elementary and high school education while stressing high prospects and transparency.

As prescribed by the Act, funds are authorized for professional advancement, teaching materials, educational program funding, and parental involvement promotion. On 9 April 1965, the Act was signed into law, and its appropriations were to be carried out over five years (Paul, 2016). Since the Act’s inception, the government has reauthorized it every five years. Numerous updates and modifications have been implemented during these reauthorizations.

 

Pennsylvania Association of Retarded Children (PARC) v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (8 October 1971)   

Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Citizens (PARC) v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 334 F. Supp. 1257 (E.D. Pa. 1971) was litigation in which the complainant sued the defendant (PARC), currently known as The Arc of Pennsylvania, over a statute that empowered communal schools to refuse free schooling to learners who had attained the age of eight but had not yet achieved the intellectual age of five. Notably, the State had exploited the statute on several instances to refuse liberal public schooling to children who struggled to integrate into learning settings and colleges.

It was the first significant court case establishing disability equity for students. The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania filed and settled the lawsuit between 1971 and 1972. Since the vocabulary adopted in this situation is obsolete compared to common use, the term “mentally retarded” entails any mental infirmity. The petition argued that every child, even if they have an intellectual disability, is entitled to receive liberal education (PARC v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 1971). Additionally, it was claimed that not having access to free schooling services would have a detrimental effect on a child’s growth.

While intellectually disabled children would gain disparately relative to other kids, they would learn self-help skills. Additionally, the more schooling disabled children get, the more they will prosper in the future. Pennsylvania’s schooling legislation at the time called for the denial of students’ due process rights in addition to their right to a liberal communal education. Plaintiffs contended that this was both illegal and unfair.

Judge Masterson of the United States District Court issued a consent decree declaring the current legislation limiting children from six to twenty-one years of age unlawful (PARC v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 1971). Additionally, it was claimed that Pennsylvania was accountable for offering free communal schooling to all children; it implied that no kid, regardless of disability, could be restrained from accessing free communal educational services by the Commonwealth. The level of education and preparation provided to disabled children had to be comparable to general students.

  Mills v. Board of Education of the District of Columbia (17 December 1971)

The litigation of Mills against the District of Columbia’s education panel in 1971 was a lawsuit that brought major reforms in the education sector. The court determined that learners with impairments must receive community schooling regardless of their ability to pay for it (Mills v. Bd. of Education, 1971). The decision established that Columbia’s district education board was not permitted to refuse these persons access to publicly funded educational opportunities. Exceptional students included those with emotional and intellectual disorders, as well as those with behavioral problems.

The case included children who were refused educational opportunities due to their perceived exceptionalities. The exceptionalities included mental retardation, emotional disturbance, physical handicap, and hyperactivity (Mills v. Bd. of Education, 1971). The education board failed to offer training for these youngsters, resulting in a violation of the board’s regulations. The State seems to have decided that all children should receive an education and that classes should be established after Congress appropriated funds.

The judge determined that if adequate funds are not available to cover all of the system’s necessary and desirable resources and programs, the accessible finances must be distributed properly such that no kid is completely expelled from a communally funded schooling. The schooling must be compatible with their requirements and with the potential to take advantage of it. The inefficiencies of the District of Columbia communal education system, whether due to inadequate financing or managerial incompetence, cannot be allowed to affect the exceptional or disabled kid disproportionately.

Congressional Investigation of 1972

Congress commenced an investigation to determine the population of children with compensatory education requirements was being treated unacceptably. According to the Commission of Education for the Disabled, there were almost eight million kids in need of learning disability education (Chiamulera, 2017). The extent of the issues confronting America’s impaired learners became clear in 1972 when a legislative report reported that 1.75 million youngsters with impairment were not obtaining schooling services, two hundred thousand were institutionalized, and another 2.5 million received an inadequate education.

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973

The 1973 Rehabilitation Act’s Section 504 was the country’s pioneer impairment civil liberty statute. It forbids inequity against disabled persons in federally funded services and paved the way for the passage of the A.D.A. (Gargiulo & Bouck, 2019). It has been updated several times to ensure its continued usefulness. Section 504 mandates recipients to offer adequate educational program to learners with disabilities that are tailored to their unique needs in an identical manner that services to learners without infirmity are tailored to their needs. According to the Section 504 regulations, an adequate education for a student with a disability can include regular classroom instruction, regular classroom instruction with supplemental services, and special schooling and correlated services.

If a school district violates any clause of the Section 504 law or regulations, the district is considered to be out of compliance (Gargiulo & Bouck, 2019). Initially, Office for Civil Rights (O.C.R.) makes an effort to put the school system into voluntary compliance by negotiating a remedial action concession. If O.C.R. is incapable of obtaining voluntary adherence, imposition action may be taken. For example, O.C.R. can initiate administrative proceedings against the recipient to terminate the recipient’s Department of Education financial assistance.

Notably, Section 504 applies to eligible students with disabilities who attend schools that receive financial aid from the federal government. To qualify for Section 504 protection, a learner must have a physical or intellectual disability that significantly restricts single or multiple main life tasks, has a report of such a disability or is recognized as possessing such a disability (Gargiulo & Bouck, 2019). Additionally, it extends to all public elementary and secondary schools and the majority of private schools and colleges that receive federal funding.

Consequently, Section 504 ensures that individuals with disabilities have the right to equal accommodations when participating in these services and events. To be protected by Section 504, a learner must be between the ages of three and twenty-two, depending on the curriculum and state and federal law (Gargiulo & Bouck, 2019). An impairment, chronic disease, or other illness that significantly impairs or abates a learner’s capacity to access education in a schooling setting due to a training, behavioral, or health-based position is considered an impairment under Section 504.

As per Section 504, any individual can recommend a learner for the appraisal (Gargiulo & Bouck, 2019). While anybody, such as parents or a physician, can request, O.C.R. has indicated in a staff notice that the school district must also have cause to hold the student requires Section 504 services due to a disability. Placement resolutions need to be undertaken by a team of individuals informed concerning the infant, the significance of the assessment information, the available induction options, the criteria for the least restrictive setting, and comparable facilities.

Mattie T. et al. v. Johnson (1975) – A Mississippi Specific Case

Before 1975, individuals with severe disabilities received little or no training. Individuals with moderate mental retardation were classified as “educable” and provided the ability to acquire basic academic skills and social skills. Individuals with more serious disabilities were classified as “trainable” and instructed in self-help and social skills (Mattie T. et al. v. Johnson, 1975). The first class action case was brought in 1975 to support all Mississippi learners with infirmities and those accused of having an impairment.

The lawsuit sought to hold the Mississippi Department of Education (M.D.E.) accountable for failing to assure that local institution districts acknowledged, evaluated, and provided adequate schooling programs to children with impairment (Mattie T. et al. v. Johnson, 1975). The parties entered into a Consent Decree in 1979. For more than two decades, the M.D.E. consistently refused to adhere to the initial decree’s criteria. After more than a year of lengthy consultation, the teams reached an agreement in the summer of 2003 on a revised concession proclamation that would remain in force until 2011.

The latest concession proclamation includes enhancements to Child Find, the Least Restrictive Environment (L.R.E.), and the non-biased evaluation of minority learners for compensatory learning. The M.D.E. has retained the services of multiple federal experts to support the State in enforcing the provisions of the concession injunction. Attorneys from the Center and co-counsel (Southern Disability Law Center) closely track the State’s progress.

 Education of All Handicapped Children Act (E.H.A.), otherwise known as Public Law 94-142 (29 November 1975)      

Congress established the E.H.A. in 1975 to assist state and local governments in securing the interests of Hector and other kids, infants, children, and toddlers with impairment, as well as their families, in meeting their requirements and enhancing outcomes (Alvarado & Rodriguez, 2018). President Gerald Ford signed the E.H.A. into law which necessitated all states that obtained funds from the national government to offer equivalent access to schooling for kids with impairment.

Legislative proposed for all disabled students to have a privilege to educate and create a mechanism for holding State and local school bureau responsible for offering schooling services to all disabled kids (Alvarado & Rodriguez, 2018). Originally, the legislation concentrated on guaranteeing that disabled youngsters have entry to schooling and fair and reasonable procedures for enforcing the law. The legislative incorporated a comprehensive framework of legal counterbalance known as systemic protections to protect children’s and parents’ rights.

Additionally, the Act mandated school districts to establish administrative processes by which parents of impaired children could appeal to their offspring’s education. After exhausting governmental remedies, parents were given the authority to request judicial review of the administration’s decision.

This decree commanded that all community schools obtaining federal finances to provide equal schooling chances and lunch daily to students with physical and intellectual impairment. Public institutions were expected to assess disabled students and develop an instructional strategy with parent feedback that mirrored the training experience of non-handicapped learners as closely as possible.

Additionally, P.L. 94-142 provides a clause stating that impaired learners should be put in the slightest prohibitive setting possible—one that grants for the greatest probable interaction with non-disabled learners. Segregated schooling is appropriate only where the existence or seriousness of the condition precludes the achievement of academic goals in the normal study halls (Alvarado & Rodriguez, 2018). The legislation provides a fair and just legal provision that ensures an impartial hearing when parents of disabled children have a dispute with the school system.

The bill was passed to ensure that children who need special education services have access to the services and ensure that decisions regarding programs for students with disabilities are made fairly and reasonably (Alvarado & Rodriguez, 2018). Additional goals include defining special education-specific management and auditing standards and offering federal assistance to states to educate students with disabilities.

Public Law 99-457, Amendment to All Handicapped Children Act (8 October 1976)

            Public Law 94-142 is a 1975 federal law that ensures free community schooling and related programs to all impaired children ages 5 to 21 (DREDF, 2021). This legislation was revised in 1986 by Public Law 99-457, which expanded the age range for critical care to include children ages 3-5. Additionally, in a section titled Infants and Toddlers, states were given the option to expand these programs, designated timely intercession program, to kids aged between birth and three years. Today, it has a sizable impact on public education, with about 10% of all students receiving special education.

There were no exemptions: neither the seriousness nor the type of the handicap, nor the absence of an adequate educational program, nor even a lack of available funds, were considered.

 Handicapped Children’s Protection Act [HCPA] (6 August 1986)

The HCPA represents a major victory for civil liberties and disability activists. It builds on the 1975 Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EAHCA). According to Powell (2015), the EAHCA requires that public schools receive federal financial assistance have nondiscriminatory access to training and food dispensation for students with impairment; the HCPA introduces a provision addressing litigation expenses for people who win in a case based on the EAHCA.

It amends the E.H.A. to provide for the payment of fair lawyers’ fees, legal costs, and expenses to the parents or guardians of a disabled child who win in a civil action based on the EAHCA to uphold the youth’s privilege to a liberal adequate public schooling (Powell, 2015). EAHCA determines that such charges be focused on market rates for the type and quality of services rendered in the region in which the litigation occurred. It prohibits the payment of certain fines, expenditures, and costs with finances given to the State under such Act.

EAHCA provides the defined provisions of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 relating to bias against the impaired based on grants and services from the national government shall be implemented in compliance with stipulations on kindergarten, elementary, high school, and adult schooling programs and services (Powell, 2015). Additionally, it allows for communal access to court decisions and an unofficial process for resolving complaints.

It provides that involvement in a casual complaint settlement meeting with the local educational department, State, or transitional educational department shall not impact the convenience or provision of any privileges of the disabled child’s parents under such Act’s procedural safeguard provisions (Powell, 2015). EAHCA establishes an anti-retaliation clause concerning the implementation of, the exercise of jurisdiction under, or the right protected by legislation to support all impaired children’s education.

Public Law 101-476, modification of P.L. 94-142 (1 January 1990)  

The amendment is based on the 1954 landmark desegregation case Brown against Topeka’s education panel (347 U.S. 483). The statute was called the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) by public law 101-476, which modified Public Law 94-142 (Powell, 2015). It mandated that each learner have a personal transition scheme as part of their I.E.P. by 16. The strategy enables the coordination of various programs and interagency collaborations to assist students in transitioning to post-secondary functions such as independent living, technical training, and supplementary schooling experiences (Powell, 2015). IDEA increased two new programs to the perspective of related programs such as social work and recovery therapy. Additionally, autism and horrific brain injury were added as different disability types.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (4 June 1997)

The IDEA is an American statute that guarantees that learners with disabilities receive a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) customized for their requirements (DREDF, 2021). IDEA is divided into four sections the common provisions, help for the training of all kids with impairment, both elementary school-age children and preschool programs. Section C covers toddlers and youngsters with disabilities, while section D deals with federal activities to enhance the support programs for children with impairment.

P.L. 105-17 preserves the main engagement of initial federal laws in this region, encompassing the promise of FAPE in the least prohibitive setting for all children with disabilities, as well as the guarantee of due process and procedural protections. Under section B of the IDEA, school districts’ responsibility to guardians planted private institution learners with impairment (DREDF, 2021). IDEA Part B can provide benefits to disabled students in private schools if their parents place them. Simultaneously, it imposes no restrictions on private schools.

Congressional amendments to IDEA (3 December 2004)

IDEA 2004 aims to re-entitle IDEA in accordance with No Child Left behind (NCLB) and bring education statute up to date (Lipkin & Okamoto, 2015). Notably, a difference in I.Q. performance is no longer needed to diagnose a particular learning impairment. Response to Intervention (R.T.I.) can be used in conjunction with special education evaluations since R.T.I. interventions are evidence-based. The teams that design individualized education programs (I.E.P.s) depend on academic-reviewed publications. Therefore, student evolution is tracked daily using written measurable objectives.

Without determining if the behavior is a symptom of the impairment, a learner with an impairment could be detached to a provisional alternative environment for up to forty-five academic days if the conduct involved a firearm, illicit substances, or bodily injury (Lipkin & Okamoto, 2015). The model of an educational dispute-resolution framework was explained—changes in special education eligibility and assessment processes.

No Child Left Behind or Every Student Succeeds Act (2015)

The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) is the primary federal law governing elementary and secondary general education (Alvarado & Rodriguez, 2018). It applies to all students enrolled in public schools. When ESSA was enacted in 2015, it supplanted the contentious NCLB. Although the two laws are distinct, they share certain characteristics. States must consider more than test scores when assessing schools under ESSA. NCLB placed a premium on academic achievement and evaluated schools largely based on state reading and math test scores.

At the moment, states are required to administer oral and mathematical tests to learners in grades three up to grade eight and once in secondary school. Notably, states are accountable for school performance (Alvarado & Rodriguez, 2018). The law establishes a structure, but it is a malleable one. Under the federal system, each State can establish its targets for student achievement.

 American’s with Disabilities Act (A.D.A.)

In 1990, the A.D.A. was endorsed into law. Civil liberty legislation restrains inequity against individuals with an impairment in all aspects of life, such as employment, education, and transportation (DREDF, 2021). The legislation’s objective is to guarantee that individuals with impairment have equal liberties and chances. The Act also governs the delivery of educational services to public and private schools.

The A.D.A. covers nonsectarian private schools, but religious organizations, private schools, and institutions operated by religious organizations are not; the A.D.A. provided additional protection when used in conjunction with Section 504 acts (DREDF, 2021). For qualified students with disabilities to perform critical job functions, reasonable arrangements are necessary. It is true for any aspect of a special education program that is community-based and includes work preparation or placement.

Personal Abilities Enhanced in Service Provision

Having solutions available for children to use when confronted with unexpected questions or significant changes in test-taking habits will help relieve some of the uncertainty that students experience during these phases. Teens will face important exams with courage and preparedness thanks to special education tutoring. Children with learning impairment who obtain compensatory education coaching are much more comfortable in the classroom than children who do not. Such satisfaction can result in fewer behavioral issues, such as Anger, Depression, Frustration, and Anxiety. Similarly, tutors can help students define their specific learning styles through an individualized Education Plan (I.E.P.), allowing them to learn how to become and stay responsible for their learning needs.

Trying to interpret information while keeping up with the rest of the group can be difficult. Students with special needs frequently panic as instructors and peers advance to new concepts and skills, particularly when a new study is scheduled to expand on formerly bestowed knowledge. When such learners have admittance to compensatory education coaching, they will have plenty of opportunities to revisit challenging subject matter, practice new techniques for correctly conceptualizing and comprehending certain subjects, and plan for the transition to more complex content.

Best Skills and Practices Developed

While all school districts want to narrow the performance gap and improve results for learners with special needs and others who fail, school and district policies are not always coordinated to accomplish this goal. Districts that emphasize outcomes have been effective in raising performance for students with special needs and other students who struggle.

Students’ significant developments include concerning consultation; local educational agencies (L.E.A.s) are now expected to meet with private institution administrators before performing child discovery activities in private institutions (DREDF, 2021). Similarly, there is no individual right to care since school districts are required to offer a genuine opportunity for equal inclusion in their special education program for impaired private institution learners who are parentally placed and who reside within their district.

Each child must have a written Individual Educational Plan (I.E.P.) created by a team comprised of the teacher, parents, and other individuals with specialized training and experience working with disabled children. Among the accommodations that can be used are illuminated textbooks, additional time for exams or tasks, peer help with note-taking, and regular feedback (Gargiulo & Bouck, 2019). Additional approaches include an additional collection of the workbook for home study, computer-assisted teaching, expanded print, conclusive reinforcement, and conduct modification schedules. Class schedule reorganization for visual aids, desired seating arrangements, lecture recording, oral examinations, and individual contracts are also included.

Students who struggle to meet grade-level expectations need more time for instruction to catch up and keep up with their peers. This extra time can be used to pre-teach content, reteach the day’s lesson, fix missed foundational skills, and correct misunderstandings at both the elementary and secondary levels. Many schools have added counselors, social workers, or paraprofessionals to address students’ social, emotional, and behavioral needs to increase demand for these services.

Conclusion

Although law-driven school reform programs have fallen short of their full potential, they have resulted in significant educational gains. Not only does special education tutoring help students change how they handle learning, but it also allows them to gain a better understanding of themselves and how their minds work. Children are more capable of asking for support when they need it and pushing for teaching and testing approaches that will enhance their lifelong learning experiences.

References

Alvarado, J. L., & Rodriguez, C. D. (2018). Education of students with disabilities as a result of equal opportunity legislation. In The Palgrave Handbook of Education Law for Schools (pp. 297-314). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.

Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1954) 347 U.S. 483

Chiamulera, C. (2017). The Court’s Role in Supporting Education for court-involved Children. Retrieved 28 April 2021, from https://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_interest/child_law/resources/child_law_practiceonline/child_law_practice/vol-36/nov-dec-2017/the-court-s-role-in-supporting-education-for-court-involved-chil/

DREDF. (2021). A Comparison of A.D.A., IDEA, and Section 504. Retrieved 28 April 2021, from https://dredf.org/legal-advocacy/laws/a-comparison-of-ada-idea-and-section-504/

Gargiulo, R. M., & Bouck, E. C. (2019). Special education in contemporary society: An introduction to exceptionality. Sage Publications.

Lipkin, P. H., & Okamoto, J. (2015). The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) for children with special educational needs. Pediatrics, 136(6), e1650-e1662.

Mills v. Board of Education of District of Columbia (1971) 348 F. Supp. 866 (D.D.C. 1972)

Mattie T. v. Johnston, 74 F.R.D. 498 (N.D. Miss. 1976)

Paul, C. A. (2016). Elementary and secondary education act of 1965. Social welfare history project.

PARC v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (1971) 334 F. Supp. 1257 (E.D. Pa. 1971)

Powell, J. J. (2015). Barriers to inclusion: Special education in the United States and Germany. Routledge.

Seligmann, T. J. (2017). Flags on the play: The Supreme Court takes the field to enforce the rights of students with disabilities. J.L. & Educ., 46, 479.

Introduction

Human trafficking was selected as the rhetorical analysis subject due to its impact on contemporary society. Human traffickers are preying on poor, weak, and isolated people.  Beth Williams’ article is entitled “Efforts to Stop Human Trafficking.” The article addresses efforts towards stopping human trafficking. In her article, Williams defines human trafficking, describes the victims and the traffickers to give the reader an overview of the problem. Beth Williams recently served as the Assistant Attorney General Office of Legal Policy US Department of Justice until December 2020. William’s purpose for writing this article was to persuade the reader on the impact of human trafficking, call for public support and highlight current achievements so far. Williams Beth’s article was very successful due to her emotional connection to the audience, extrinsic ethos evident by her credentials, intrinsic ethos through her extensive knowledge on the subject, and fact-based evidence she used to support her claims, all of which are necessary to convince a scholarly audience in the field of criminal justice.

Rhetorical Appeal

Emotional Appeal

Williams uses emotional appeal (pathos) to capture the feelings of the reader. In criminal justice writing, voice, tone, and format should be appropriate to purpose and audience (Greene, 1389). Williams uses a conversational tone to build goodwill with the audience. For example, the author uses the background of the victims to create compassion. “Traffickers most often prey on individuals who are poor, vulnerable, in an unsafe or unstable living situation. Trafficking victims are often deceived by false promises of love, a good job, or stable life. They are forced or lured into working in situations where they are forced to work under deplorable conditions with little or no pay” Williams (624). Sentimentality encourages readers to sympathize with human trafficking victims. It is the most persuasive rhetorical strategy since an emotional appeal is the most influential human rights strategy. William’s purpose for writing this article was to persuade the reader on the impact of human trafficking, call for public support and highlight current achievements so far. In the quoted text, Williams uses the victims’ background to create feelings of compassion so that the readers can have sympathetic pity and concern for the victims’ suffering or misfortune.

Ethical Appeal

Ethos relates to ethics and is used to persuade the reader of the integrity of the author. Intrinsic ethos relates to how a writer portrays themselves through text hence building their character. The author uses her professional knowledge in explaining the intricacies relating to human trafficking. For instance, Williams quotes that “Under the federal law, it is a crime to compel another person to provide labor, services, or commercial sex through prohibited means of coercion and to exploit a minor for commercial sex”(623). Extrinsic ethos relates to who the author is, her professional background that gives the information credibility. From her LinkedIn profile, it is evident that she has vast criminal justice experience as she serves in the Department of Justice as an Assistant Attorney General leading the Office of Legal Policy (OLP). She also has a Doctorate in Law from Harvard Law School. Both the intrinsic and extrinsic ethos illustrates that the author is a very ethical, credible, and reliable person who lives by abiding by the law and upholds the highest professional standards in her career; thus, the information she conveys is authentic. Williams uses ethos to convince their position and build moral ground by using her professional credentials to authenticate the information’s credibility. It draws belief from the audience.

Logical Appeal

Williams also uses logical appeal (logos) to convince the reader. In criminal justice professional writing, an accurate and concise discussion is valued as a writing convention (Writing about Criminal Justice n.p.). The logical appeal uses logical reasoning, facts, and data to make readers more conscious of sex trafficking as a prevalent social problem. Rationality makes readers recognize that human trafficking is more widespread than they realize, making the writer’s argument more persuasive and efficient. Williams quotes facts about human trafficking, for instance: “Under the federal law, it is a crime to compel another person to provide labor, services, or commercial sex through prohibited means of coercion and to exploit a minor for commercial sex”(623).  Logical reasoning is evident from her analysis of the number of forms the prohibited coercion can be manifested. Williams explains that “This unlawful coercion can take several forms, not just physical force. It includes force or threats of force, threats of serious harm, which is defined to include any harm, whether physical or non-physical, including psychological, financial, or reputational harm as long as it is sufficiently serious to compel a reasonable person in the victim’s situation”(624). Williams uses logos to appeal to the audience via a clear and logical reasoning line in her argument. The effect on the audience is that it offers something to contemplate.

Williams has used qualitative evidence in her article. It is argued that such techniques should be used more often and highly regarded and seen as unique, often superior approaches to the development of knowledge of criminological and criminal justice due to the unique contributions that qualitative methods can make, with the depth of understanding being primary (Richard 38). For instance, “An experienced sex-trafficking prosecutor from the local US Attorney’s Office here in Boston has joined us here today-Leah Foley. Last year Leah obtained a guilty plea from a defendant who exploited several women-whom he met at a driving instruction class, outside a needle exchange location, and at a detox location center-for commercial sex, using heroin as well as actual and threatened physical violence to coerce them into prostitution for him” (Williams 626). From a personal perspective, qualitative evidence helps the reader understand how coercion plays a role in human trafficking.

Conclusion

The rhetorical analysis helped shed light on the tools that will help me to develop my successful argument through the use of persuasive techniques and also be able to look at an argument objectively without bias. The article by Beth Williams elaborated on victims’ and families’ emotional effects, thereby generating meaningful information to raise awareness of human trafficking. She successfully used voice and tone to create an emotional appeal to the victims’ background to create compassion. Williams has also used her intrinsic and extrinsic ethos to demonstrate her credentials and persuade the reader of the information’s credibility through her professionalism. Similarly, she employed accurate and concise discussion backed up by qualitative evidence through logical appeal to make readers more conscious of sex trafficking as a prevalent social problem.

Works Cited

Beth Williams (2020) LinkedIn Profile linkedin.com/in/beth-williams-12135150

Greene, Jamal. “Pathetic Argument in Constitutional Law.” Colum. L. Rev. 113 (2013): 1389. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23561267

Richard, Tewksbury. “Qualitative versus quantitative methods: Understanding why qualitative methods are superior for criminology and criminal justice.” (2013): 38-56

Williams, Beth A. “Efforts to stop human trafficking.” Harv. JL & Pub. Pol’y 41 (2018): 623-629

“Writing About Criminal Justice.” University Writing Center/ Writing Across the Curriculum. Appalachian State University, 2019, http://wac.appstate.edu/writing-disciplines/writing-about-guidelines