Blog

Executive Summary

Budgeting entails enacting predetermined targets into effect, disclosing substantive performance outcomes, and assessing performance against predetermined objectives. A line-item budget is one in which the specific financial statement elements are classified according to category. Similarly, program budgeting is where budget information and decisions are structured according to government objectives for a specific project or program with all expenses and revenues factored. On the other hand, a performance budget represents the fund input and public services production by the government. As observed, fiscal policy is the adoption of government income acquisition and spending to affect a country’s economy. Each government must regularly determine how much it needs to spend, what it needs to spend on, and how to fund its spending through fiscal policy, with the budget as the key fiscal policy instrument. Markedly, the budgetary process has long been seen by political scientists as the richest source of evidence on topics such as what is responsible for the success or failure of governmental programs? Who makes the decisions on our country’s priorities? Persons, institutions, associations, and groups of citizens who have direct or indirect involvement in the budgeting process at any or all levels of the governance system and activities are referred to as stakeholders. With limited resources and a rising understanding of government corruption and inefficiency, there was a corresponding need to strengthen the government’s fiscal governance domestically. Although each year and each jurisdiction has its own specific political and cultural context, budgeting is fundamentally a universal and essential practice.

Impact of Structural and Procedural Changes of Public Budgeting Reforms

A budget is a financial plan that indicates how resources will be obtained, distributed, and used for a given period in terms of revenue and expenditure (Heinle et al., 2014). Budgeting entails enacting predetermined targets into effect, disclosing substantive performance outcomes, and assessing performance against predetermined objectives.

Impact of Line Item Budgeting on the budgetary process

A line-item budget is when the specific financial statement elements are classified according to category (Ibrahim, 2013). The relation between the financial data for the prior accounting or budgeting cycles and the projected data for the present or future periods is shown. The line-item format allows allocating funds for personnel, equipment, materials, services, and other required items associated with individual accounts and compares budgeted sums to actual expenditures.

The line-item budgeting system is essentially an expenditure-control method (Sandalgaard & Bukh, 2014). Since this technique originated as a response to corruption and not an interest in government effectiveness, the technique is considered to be a device for management control. An allocation of resources is made to a department, office, or subdivisions of a department or office. As mentioned above, this strategy focuses on managing spending and sufficient expenditure of resources, so it only views the organizational system’s input without much interest in the production or work done as funds resources are distributed based on departmental structure lines and spending line-item categories.

Notably, the operations that make up the historical pool or line elements are not only necessary for the entity’s current vision but must be maintained over the forthcoming budget period (Sandalgaard & Bukh, 2014). This strategy also implies that current operations are being carried out economically and optimally and will continue to be cost-effective in the coming fiscal year.

Effect of Program Budgeting on the budgetary process

Program budgeting is where budget information and decisions are structured according to government objectives for a specific project or program with all expenses and revenues factored (Ibrahim, 2013). In practice, the budgeting approach varies from conventional budgeting, emphasizing the program’s successful attainment rather than reducing costs. The program-based budgeting will result from the program’s goals. In a community project, a community initiative or event will measure the program’s services’ productive output. As a consequence, a consistent description of the program goals would be crucial to its assessment.

With regards to the use of the word program budget, there is a great deal of uncertainty. Some writers differentiate between the terms budget and program budget performance since the Hoover Commission first used the term performance budget in 1949. The Hoover Commission Task Force later used the term program budget (Ibrahim, 2013). Budget officials and economists consider program budgeting predominantly as a mechanism that optimizes resource distribution decisions. Simultaneously, public administration or accounting-oriented leaders and scholars view it specifically as a vehicle for making public sector performance management functionality.

Effect of Performance Budgeting on the budgetary process

A performance budget represents the fund input and public services production by the government (Kelly, 2015). The aim is to define and rate relative performance for defined outcomes based on target achievement. Government entities use this form of a budget to display the correlation between taxpayer’s money and the results of services rendered by federal, state, or local governments. It is a budgetary approach focused on the government’s tasks and activities in executing its policies. It was established because the line item budget method contained little details about program priorities or achievements and was ineffective for comparing expenses to public achievements or making resource distribution decisions (Ibrahim, 2013). Reformers believed that by using this budgeting method, program administrators, department leaders, elected officials, and residents would assess government operations costs.

Effect of Economic, Political, and Social Restraints on the Budgetary Process

Impact of the Fiscal Policies

The word public policy may refer to government-created and implemented policies to achieve particular objectives (Natchez & Bupp, 1973). Fiscal policy is the adoption of government income acquisition and spending to affect a country’s economy. To obtain a proper perspective on the various facets of budgeting, an understanding of fiscal policy is essential. Budgeting strategies and processes are being tweaked to meet the changing needs of fiscal policy. To fund its budget, every government levies taxes. Each government must regularly determine how much it needs to spend, what it needs to spend on, and how to fund its spending through fiscal policy, with the budget as the key fiscal policy instrument (Sandalgaard & Bukh, 2014). An expansionary fiscal strategy raises the federal budget deficit or decreases the surplus because it increases government expenditures or reduces revenues (Natchez & Bupp, 1973). A contractionary strategy would lower the deficit or raise the surplus.

Impact of the Political Factors

It can be explained by rational choice theory, which adopts microeconomic theory principles to analyze and explain political behavior (Gibran and Sekwat, 2009). Voters and political parties serve as objective decision-makers who are seeking to optimize their preferences to be achieved. Parties devised proposals that would earn them the most votes, and voters wanted to realize as much of their desires as possible by government intervention. Policymakers are obliged to define all of the current value preferences of a community using cost-benefit analysis. They then give each value a relative weight, resulting in discovering all possible policies for achieving these values (Natchez & Bupp, 1973). They can recognize all the costs and consequences of each alternative policy and choose the best alternative, which is also the most effective in terms of costs and benefits.

As the twentieth century began, American policymakers were shocked to see the federal government’s activities and expenses increase. With limited resources and a rising understanding of government corruption and inefficiency, there was a corresponding need to strengthen its fiscal governance (Ibrahim, 2013). Policymakers agreed that while government finances had to be put on a balanced perspective, there were very few technological resources and government management institutions. These concerns triggered a concerted effort to build public financial management resources on a more solid footing. Based on the normative budgetary theory, practical advice reformers issued budgeting and accounting reforms promoted by a government theory and how budgeting relates to the state.

The empirical and administrative leadership movements influenced the political and ideological powers contributing to the 1921 Budgeting and Accounting Act (Ibrahim, 2013). The method of budgeting that emerged from the Act centered on regulation and was instrumental. The line-item budget divided government spending into individual items, giving the government the best chance of reducing expenses and increasing productivity.

Markedly, the budgetary process has long been seen by political scientists as the richest source of evidence on topics such as what is responsible for the success or failure of governmental programs? Who makes the decisions on our country’s priorities? (Sandalgaard & Bukh, 2014). The presumption has been that the budgetary process represents the priorities and conflicts contributing to specific projects being prioritized over others.

Impact of Major Impacts of Stakeholders

Persons, institutions, associations, and groups of citizens who have direct or indirect involvement in the budgeting process at any or all levels of the governance system and activities are referred to as stakeholders.

Impact of Internal Stakeholders

Internal stakeholders have a vested interest in the organization’s performance. They include employees, associations, suppliers, regulatory authorities, owners, community members, and those who depend on or represent the organization (Heinle et al., 2014).  Approval of the Budget and its execution is needed if the budget is a constraint. At the community level, members will let everyone know about the mechanism involved and what compromises were made in the final budget. It is essential to recognize that people and teams behave disparately in diverse conditions.

The effect stakeholders can have on agency policy, plan of action, and programs rely on their connection to either the agency or the matter of concern. According to Heinle et al. (2014) managers should recognize and earnestly observe all rightful stakeholders’ issues and should treat their concerns suitably into consideration during resolution.

Impact of External Stakeholders

In government organizations, the main external stakeholder is the general public, other stakeholders being suppliers and civil society and interest groups, and other government agencies (Heinle et al., 2014). In several cases, participation in the budget process has been considered one of the fundamental rights at the heart of democratic governance and human development. Policy networks, civic involvement or group engagement projects, and stakeholder engagement efforts are some of the main engagement approaches used by public organizations.

These budgets reflect financial strategies that determine how public resources will be used to achieve policy objectives. To understand the budget process at the regional and local levels, a basic understanding of the processes and timelines for preparing the budget at the federal level is necessary. Similarly, the number of stakeholder participants and the degree to which stakeholders take advantage of opportunities to engage in governance processes influence the budgeting process regarding accountability, transparency, sustainability, and service delivery (Heinle et al., 2014). Accountability mechanisms are necessary to check that governments are meeting their obligations, with one such mechanism being budget transparency.

Analysis of the function of Public Budgeting in Managing Public Sector Organizations Applying Historical and Theoretical Assumptions and Their Impact Domestically and Internationally

Domestically

We need a budgeting hypothesis that will help us clarify government budgeting’s reality to understand how, where, and why governments budget before comprehending what public budgeting is. As the twentieth century began, American policymakers were shocked to see the federal government’s activities and expenses proliferate (Caiden, 1994). With limited resources and a rising understanding of government corruption and inefficiency, there was a corresponding need to strengthen the government’s fiscal governance. Policymakers agreed that while government finances had to be put on a balanced perspective. Based on the normative budgetary theory, practical advice reformers issued budgeting and accounting reforms promoted by a government approach and how budgeting relates to the state.

Over time, perspectives on the need for a public budget have differed. Before the twentieth century, the primary motivation for early budget implementation was regulating government expenditure and taxation (Caiden, 1994). Many economists have regarded the public budget as a statutory governmental tool and as a tool for political, monetary, accounting, and control reasons in the public sector. The budget has since been analyzed from the perspective of a range of disciplines.

Markedly, these concerns triggered a concerted effort to build resources for putting public financial management on a more solid footing. During this era, theorists started to concentrate on administrative rationality to approach the public management task. It resulted in the Budgeting and Accounting Act of 1921, which established a robust and centralized executive management style (Caiden, 1994). As a result, the budgeting system that followed was mainly concerned with regulation and was instrumental. For instance, the line-item budget broke down government spending into individual items that seemed to give the government the best chance of reducing expenses and increasing efficiency. Markedly, centralized, top-down management was required for fiscal discipline, so the line item budget was established as an executive or top-down budgeting tool.

The positivist trend in public administration and budgeting theory contributed to the belief that the administration’s goal should be efficiency (Caiden, 1994). It became clear that the line item budget approach generated no information about program priorities or success. It was insufficient to link expenses to public successes that allowed performance budgeting to be adopted. This budgeting strategy is focused on the roles and tasks that the government conducts to carry out its policies. It was built on the premise that the government needed to keep costs under control to raise operational efficiency.

Performance budgeting maintained the theory’s emphasis on meeting these goals while paying very little attention to the larger framework in which budgeting occurs (Ibrahim, 2013). It also eliminated the habits associated with budgeting from consideration. The national government reinstated program budgeting in place of performance budgeting. The idea that budgetary resolutions should be focused on governmental operations’ priorities or outcomes relative to the contributions to government products’ development was based on this new budgeting approach.

Internationally

Although each year and each jurisdiction has its own specific political and cultural context, budgeting is fundamentally a universal and essential practice (Ibrahim, 2013). Budgeting is part of a broader research agenda as a viable science of human behavior, which essentially allows for predicting outcomes and the comparative study of government policy in various areas of the world. Markedly, theory validation involves research in multiple contexts of hypotheses. Making comparisons, building classifications, and accounting for similarities and variations in drawing a universal hypothesis regarding budgetary actions are all part of understanding the range of budgetary behavior.

Any shortcomings in public budget theory can be traced back to its inability to describe public budgeting theory’s principles and structures in a straightforward and structured way (Rubin, 1990). Through maintaining the conventional concern regarding organizational role and structure, modern structuralists tried to bridge the gulf between structure and behavior. At the same time, they acknowledged that organizations are highly diverse and that structure is not always associated with formal bureaucracy.

In a cross-comparison between the budgeting behaviors between different countries, both the rich and the poor, the generally structured budgeting routines seemed similar to incrementalism. The practice of incrementalism involves basing this year’s budget on the previous years and adding a percentage rise. The numerous economic and social contexts, however, changed how decisions were taken. For instance, developing countries’ budget systems were marked by disjointed budgets generated during the year. Similarly, the budget cycle deteriorated into a vicious circle when one group of participants routinely tried to pass on its vulnerabilities to another to the whole’s disadvantage (Rubin, 1990). The interplay of two factors, poverty and instability, which were sufficiently strong to overwhelm politics and governance issues, seemed to have a critical effect on budgetary decision-making.

The above trends can be supported by the descriptive theory of budgeting, which entails close observations on participation in public sector activities (Gibran and Sekwat, 2009). As a result of this, trends, the sequence of events, and inferences of causes are with local variations and uniformities across cases being paid attention. However, it is essential to note that the connection between budget hypothesis and practice has been diverse depending on the type of theory being reviewed. According to the normative theory, the budget approach has been generally successful than imagined setting attractive goals that guide behavior (Rubin, 1990). However, from a descriptive theory perspective, the budget theory has been weak and unable to theorize phenomena’ meaning.

References

Anyebe, A. A. (2018). An overview of approaches to the study of public policy. e-Bangi, 15(1).

Caiden, N. (1994). Budgeting in Historical and Comparative Perspective. Public Budgeting & Finance, 14(1), 44-57. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5850.00997

Gibran, J.M. and Sekwat, A. (2009), Continuing the Search for A Theory of Public Budgeting.  Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 617-644. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBAFM-21-04-2009-B005

Heinle, M. S., Ross, N., & Saouma, R. E. (2014). A theory of participative budgeting. The Accounting Review, 89(3), 1025-1050.

Ibrahim, M. (2013). Comparative Budgetary Approaches in Public Organizations. Research Journal of Finance and Accounting, 4(15), 88-98.

Kelly, J. M. (2015). Performance budgeting for state and local government. Me Sharpe.

Natchez, P., & Bupp, I. (1973). Policy and Priority in the Budgetary Process. The American Political Science Review, 67(3), 951-963. https://doi.org/10.2307/1958637

Rubin, I. S. (1990). Budget Theory and Budget Practice: How Good the Fit?
Public Administration Review, v50 n2 p179-89

Sandalgaard, N., & Bukh, P. N. (2014). Beyond Budgeting and Change: a case study. Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change.

PART I: Literature Review

This literature review aims to evaluate contemporary literature on Islamophobia in the US to discover whether the Patriot Act has contributed to the rise of Islamophobia culture in the US post 9/11. Notably, modern literature was reviewed through the lens of media representation, law enforcement, and racial profiling.  Several authors have studied the impact of the Patriotic Act on the Islamophobia culture in the US after the 9/11 events.

Postpositivism School of Thought

The aim of the study by Bukhari et al. (2019) was to examine the mechanism by which Western nations, including the US and their non-Muslim partners, propagate Islamophobia. Social constructivism theory was used to describe and process data (Bukhari et al., 2019). The research employed trivial data in written research papers, media articles, discussion papers, and speeches by prominent world leaders to create a case demonstrating how anti-Muslim feelings, bigotry, and hostility against Muslims were propagated in the West following 9/11.

Bukhari et al. (2019) observed that Islamophobia originated during the crusades when Christianity confronted Islam. Following the World Trade Center assault, the West twisted the idea and socialized its citizens about the fear and danger posed by Islam, which does not exist because radical Islam or a small number of non-practicing Muslims are not reflective of entire Muslim states (Bukhari et al. 2019; Aziz, 2011). As a result, America has developed the appearance of a police state, with government surveillance extending into almost every area of life.

Mir and Sarroub (2019) undertook an investigation of Islamophobia in US education. They reviewed news media outlets between 2015 and 2017 regarding Islamophobia and schools and discovered fifty-five documented cases of Islamophobia in the US and sixty-one cases in North America. They observed that media outlets had fueled general hatred, mistrust, and hostility against Muslims.

Similarly, Hamdan (2019) undertook a study to examine public dialogue on Islamic extremism in support of government control, discriminatory immigration protocols, and other deprivations of the US citizens’ statutory rights. The study evaluated culture conflicts, threatened legal protections, and Islamophobia conceptual rhetorical frameworks through the lens of Lakoff, Lyotard, and Said’s postmodern theories. Hamdan (2019) states that in the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, politicians and broadcast experts used Islamophobia as a panic tool to validate public strategy creation. The article’s results indicated that supporters of the USA Patriot Act framed the debate around a Clash of Civilizations, pitting Western democracy advocates against extreme Muslim fanatics in campaigns for social reform.

Bazian (2018) acknowledges that Islamophobia arises from the conceptual forces of the Clash of Civilizations, not simply as a result of media stereotyping, representation, and overemphasis on the Muslim issue. It is perpetrated by the state’s institutions and apparatus, the right-wing, which includes the anti-jihad group, the opinionated movement, the universal Zionism campaign, and various progressive factions such as the left-wing and the new heathen activism.

Beydoun (2017) asserts that the rising Islamophobia is based on politics encouraged by deeply entrenched statutory and governmental frameworks in the US constitutional, media, and governmental structures.  These structures fabricate Islam as un-democratic and Muslims as assumptive national safety risks. Second, it is facilitated by the extension of current legislation and strategy, which labels Islam as an authoritarian belief capable of extremism (Beydoun, 2017). Therefore, Esposito and Kalin (2011) are correct to observe that Islamophobia did not emerge overnight in the aftermath of 9/11. In several cases, 9/11’s trauma aided in bringing the issue to light.

The issue transcends 9/11 and the United States. Following the 9/11 events, US President Bush’s government chose to play the Islam card, focusing subsequent election efforts on a war on terror (Esposito & Kalin, 2011).  Bush was always associating the Muslim world with terrorism and portraying it as a danger to the national safety of the American people.

According to Hassan (2017), Islamophobia is a well-documented characteristic of the Trump Administration. Trump expressed a national security issue through this Islamophobic lens, operationalizing a clash of civilizations rhetoric. Domestically, this manifested itself in ambiguous signs of creating a Muslim registry alongside unequivocal demands for a complete closure of Muslim immigration to the US. Trump sought to actualize these fears while in office by actively securitizing Islam (Hassan, 2017). Under the guise of Statutory Order 13769, safeguarding the country from overseas Terrorist Entry into the US, the Trump government attempted to impose a three-month travel embargo on citizens of seven Muslim-dominated nations.

Notably, digital scrutiny became a policy pillar of the local counterterrorism policy after 9/11 and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) development. The country’s Patriot Act sidestepped the Fourth Amendment in the interest of national security to promote the Bush government’s unparalleled inspection and religious characterization schemes (Beydoun, 2017). It did so by significantly limiting Muslim Americans’ First and Fourth Amendment protections. Surveilling Muslim targets and facilities such as mosques or neighborhood centers was an appropriate ancillary cost for the state to achieve specified national security objectives.

The majority of this group of authors belong to the far-right wing because their work more or less defends the American community from idealistic reforms or projects the idea of getting rid of previous reforms (Claassen et al., 2015).

Transformative School of Thought

Diamond (2007) explores the increasing fear and bigotry directed at Islam and Muslims in the US today. The paper focused primarily on the role that the mass media in the United States has played in either rising or decreasing Islamophobia among the American public in the post-9/11 era. The study drew data from political science publications, dispute resolution, international relations, psychology, anthropology, and personal interviews. Following 9/11, the mass media in the United States has continued to contribute to the growth of Islamophobia (Diamond, 2007). While it is unknown the medium has the most significant influence on the development and dissemination of derogatory perceptions about Muslims, Arabs, and the Islamic faith, it is clear that the mass media has a substantial impact on projecting and covering particular images and stories.

According to Beydoun (2016), nearly bisection of the Muslim US population is trapped amidst deprivation and Islamophobia. It is an intersection that exposes impoverished Muslim Americans to poverty-related struggles, the dangers posed by private and community Islamophobia, and the aggravated damage caused when the two collide. Poverty and Islamophobia do not exist in different rooms but rather coexist to wreak havoc in America’s most impoverished neighborhoods.

In a further analysis of Islamophobia, Istriyani (2016) observes that Islamophobia can be seen from two distinct perspectives: sociological and psychological, concerning the role of media. The media became the focus of analysis due to its dichotomous nature. The media can become the catalyst for the emergence of Islamophobia manifestation (latent duty). Contrary, the media is an information agent that serves as a conduit for education and social change (manifest functions) (Istriyani, 2016). Thus, the media may serve as a tool or tactic for overcoming Islamophobia by bringing together government, Islamic organizations, and higher education institutions.

Moreover, a growing number of Muslim people are displaced and seek refuge in the United States and elsewhere due to ongoing wars and conflicts in the Middle East, Southeast Asia, and North Africa. It is all the more critical to dismantling persistent anti-Muslim sentiment, intervention, practice, and policy to introduce domestic and international solutions (Mir & Sarroub, 2019). Notably, education for all as a policy can keep operating in the United States only if democratic values governing education and human wellbeing are enacted, endorsed, and applied daily and across political and ideological divides.

Choudhury (2015) notes that, while right-wing Islamophobia is more visible and destructive, and progressives often criticize the conservative faction for their excessive discrimination, reformists engage in their forms of anti-Muslim bigotry that share fundamental roots. According to Choudhury (2015), becoming a Muslim in the new millennium means confronting multiple angles of individuality through imperialism, neocolonialism, and ethnicity, gender, and religious dissertation. She noted that Islamophobia portrays all Muslims’ input to the globe as a glorified classical history in sharp divergence to the current state of chaos.

The article by Akbar (2015) discusses the federal administration’s attempts to engage with US Muslim populations as a section of a broader framework for policing militancy and countering violent extremism (CVE). While the federal authority portrays society involvement as a gentler option to policing, the truth is much more coercive (Akbar, 2015). Community participation activities are staged against the backdrop of radicalization dialogue, counter-radicalization efforts, and CVE services.

According to Claassen et al. (2015), this group of authors can be categorized as liberals who want to keep things as they are and be free to change policies as and when due.

Pragmatism School of Thought

According to Samari (2016), Islamophobia’s recent growth necessitates a public health viewpoint that considers the designated nature of US Americans and the wellbeing consequences of Islamophobic prejudice. Samari (2016), using a context of reproach, bigotry, and wellbeing, extends the conversation about the advancement of Islamophobia to include an exchange of how Islamophobia impacts the wellbeing of US Americans.

Islamophobia can have a detrimental effect on wellbeing by disorganizing multiple structures, including particular systems via stress responsiveness and identity cover-up and relational systems via social connectedness and socialization. Similarly, organizational strategies and media consideration impact structural processes (Samari (2016). Islamophobia is deserving of thinking as a cause of adverse health effects and inequalities in health. Future public health studies should examine the multifaceted connections between Islamophobia and population health.

The study by Dauda (2020) discusses the patterns, triggers, consequences, and solutions of Islamophobia and religious bigotry on global peace and peaceful coexistence. It is based on content analysis of secondary data sources. Among the proposed remedies is the immediate need for religious leaders and adherents to change their attitudes (Dauda 2020). Global interfaith dialogue should be considered urgently, in which lingering problems concerning religion and the crises connected with it’ will be thoroughly addressed and significantly resolved.

Additionally, the United Nations and its Human Rights Council must be strengthened (Dauda 2020). Similarly, the media companies must be held accountable for normalizing Islamophobia, encouraging religious bigotry, and spreading false narratives about Islam and Muslims. The government must categorically condemn Islamophobia and religious intolerance.

According to Mir and Sarroub (2019), numerous student groups face prejudice, marginalization, and the genuine fear of being singled out as possible security threats. Young Muslim people in the United States of America who are still in school are often seen as a national security danger.  Esposito and Kalin (2011) view education as vital in our colleges, universities, and seminaries (not just madrasas), as well as in our churches and synagogues, as it trains the next generation of policymakers, religious leaders, educators, and citizens.

In 2011, the Obama Administration launched a Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) initiative to address the root causes of domestic and international terrorism (Aziz, 2017). However, the Trump Administration announced in January 2017 that it would rename the program “Countering Islamic Extremism.” It reflects his administration’s plan to focus solely on massacres perpetrated by persons alleging to be Muslim while ignoring destruction perpetrated by others, such as white chauvinists (Aziz, 2017). Trump’s behavior merely confirmed what program opponents have been claiming all along. These CVE initiatives are inherently flawed for three reasons: ineffective, wasteful, and a waste of public funds.

Gould (2020) considers the unintended implications of current demands in the UK Parliament for a government-backed concept of Islamophobia. She claims that in conjunction with other attempts to control hate speech, the formulation and application of a government-sponsored term would result in unintended consequences for the Muslim community.

This group of authors can be categorized as leftists. They want to reform how power and wealth are distributed in society (Claassen et al., 2015). The majority have socialists and communist ideas of reforms through social economic and democratic means.

Conclusion of the Literature Review

Several significant points emerge from this literature review. The recent years has been a change in the essence of political commentaries in the United States about the Middle East and Islam. The pragmatism school of thought is selected because it details the right track towards solving policy implications of system-based Islamophobia. It ranges from those who avoided the cultural clash description and its Islamophobic ramifications. In the other schools of thought, government officials used fear of the Islamic rebel to garner popular support for their strategic agendas. Such constructs were transmissible in that they were centered on subjectively permeated rhetoric and hollow metaphors rather than on any relation to rational threats or detailed depictions of Islam.

PART II: Research Methodology

This research aims to understand if there is a link between the patriot act and the rise of Islamophobia post 9/11 attack. The study also purposes to link negative media representation, biased law enforcement, and a rise in racial profiling to Islamophobia witnessed post 9/11 attacks. The study will adopt a qualitative approach to evaluate US political rhetoric about Islam and Muslims in the post-9/11 era. Qualitative methods are most effective when the study objective represents the topic in a particular context instead of the universal or abstract generalizations that arise from quantitative statistical analysis.

Research Design

This research will employ a grounded theory research design, a formal methodology in the social sciences for developing theories through systematic data collection and analysis (Creswell, 2014). Unlike the scientific method’s hypothetical-deductive model, this method will employ inductive reasoning. Research using this approach is likely, to begin with, a query or even the collection of qualitative data (Creswell, 2014). As researchers study the concepts, recurring ideas, data collected, or items that have been derived from the data set become apparent and are coded. As more data is collected and analyzed, codes can be grouped into concepts and then classified.

. Notably, the narrative analysis approach will be used as well. This approach entails recreating the information provided by respondents by taking into account the context of each case and the unique circumstances surrounding each respondent (Creswell, 2014). The research will be carried out by using coding, which can be described as the grouping of data. 

Data Collection

This study draws on primary and secondary sources such as interviews, observation, published research documents, news stories, conference papers, and comments by prominent world leaders (Creswell, 2014). Interviews will be conducted in an informal and structured manner. As part of my study, I will use an organized Skype interview with a political analyst. The interview will be taped and then transcribed, allowing the researcher to take notes while the interview continues uninterrupted. Moreover, it makes all data available for later study.

Data Analysis

This study will employ discourse analysis as it will aid in examining all forms of written text. Discourse examination is a type of study that concentrates on the connection between written or oral language and its social connotation (Creswell, 2014). It aims to gain an awareness of how language is used in everyday situations. A researcher’s investigative and critical thinking skills are essential in the analysis of information.

                                                                     References

Akbar, A. (2015). National Security’s Broken Windows. UCLA L. Rev., 62, 833 http://www.uclalawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Akbar-final-article-5.29.15.pdf

Akbar, A. (2013). Policing Radicalization. UC Irvine L. Rev., 3, 809. https://www.ispu.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Policing_Radicalization.pdf

Aziz, S. F. (2017). Losing the War of Ideas: A Critique of Countering Violent Extremism Programs. Tex. Int’l LJ, 52, 255.https://scholarship.libraries.rutgers.edu/discovery/delivery?vid=01RUT_INST:ResearchRepository&repId=12643404870004646#13643520480004646

Aziz, S. F. (2011). Caught in a preventive dragnet: Selective counterterrorism in a post 9/11 America. Gonz. L. Rev., 47, 429

https://scholarship.libraries.rutgers.edu/discovery/delivery?vid=01RUT_INST:ResearchRepository&repId=12643394960004646#13643493140004646

Bazian, H. (2018). Islamophobia, “Clash of Civilizations”, and Forging a Post-Cold War Order!. Religions, 9(9), 282.https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/d4e1/99b6fd27fef1532bb576c2e354fcb512d93c.pdf

Beydoun, K. A. (2017). Muslim Bans and the Re-Making of Political Islamophobia. Immigr. & Nat’lity L. Rev., 38, 37.

https://www.illinoislawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Beydoun.pdf

Beydoun, K. A. (2016). Between Indigence, Islamophobia, and Erasure: Poor and Muslim in War on Terror America. Calif. L. Rev., 104, 1463. http://www.californialawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/3-Beydoun.pdf

Bukhari, S. A. U. Z. H., Khan, H., Ali, T., & Ali, H. (2019). Islamophobia in the West and Post 9/11 Era. International Affairs and Global Strategy, 78, 23-32. https://core.ac.uk/reader/276531566

Claassen, C., Tucker, P., & Smith, S. S. (2015). Ideological labels in America. Political Behavior, 37(2), 253-278.

Creswell, J. W. (2014). A concise introduction to mixed methods research. SAGE publications.

Choudhury, C. A. (2015). Ideology, identity, and law in the production of Islamophobia. Dialectical Anthropology, 39(1), 47-61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10624-014-9357-y

Diamond, M. M. N. (2007). Islamophobia and the US Media.

https://core.ac.uk/reader/45598220

Dauda, K. O. (2020). Islamophobia and Religious Intolerance: Threats to Global Peace and Harmonious Coexistence. QIJIS (Qudus International Journal of Islamic Studies), 8(2), 257-292. https://journal.iainkudus.ac.id/index.php/QIJIS/article/view/6811/pdf

Esposito, J. L., & Kalin, I. (Eds.). (2011). Islamophobia: The challenge of pluralism in the 21st century. OUP USA.

https://dlscrib.com/queue/islam-phobia-john-espostiso_58c9fa60ee34352a7768e338_pdf?queue_id=5a2237b7e2b6f5fc358c3dad

Gould, R. R. (2020). The limits of liberal inclusivity: how defining Islamophobia normalizes anti-muslim racism. Journal of Law and Religion, 35(2), 250-269.

https://sci-hub.se/https://doi.org/10.1017/jlr.2020.20

Hassan, O. (2017). Trump, Islamophobia and US–Middle East relations. Critical Studies on Security, 5(2), 187-191.https://core.ac.uk/reader/84340814

Hamdan, L. (2019). Framing Islamophobia and Civil Liberties: American Political Discourse Post 9/11. https://core.ac.uk/reader/217235887

Istriyani, R. (2016). Media: Causes and strategies to overcome Islamophobia (psychological and sociological study). QIJIS (Qudus International Journal of Islamic Studies), 4(2), 201-217.

https://core.ac.uk/reader/295525965

Mir, S., & Sarroub, L. K. (2019). Islamophobia in US education. https://core.ac.uk/reader/220153027

Samari, G. (2016). Islamophobia and public health in the United States. American journal of public health, 106(11), 1920-1925 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5055770/

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.