skip to main content
10.1145/1653662.1653666acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesccsConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

False data injection attacks against state estimation in electric power grids

Authors Info & Claims
Published:09 November 2009Publication History

ABSTRACT

A power grid is a complex system connecting electric power generators to consumers through power transmission and distribution networks across a large geographical area. System monitoring is necessary to ensure the reliable operation of power grids, and state estimation is used in system monitoring to best estimate the power grid state through analysis of meter measurements and power system models. Various techniques have been developed to detect and identify bad measurements, including the interacting bad measurements introduced by arbitrary, non-random causes. At first glance, it seems that these techniques can also defeat malicious measurements injected by attackers.

In this paper, we present a new class of attacks, called false data injection attacks, against state estimation in electric power grids. We show that an attacker can exploit the configuration of a power system to launch such attacks to successfully introduce arbitrary errors into certain state variables while bypassing existing techniques for bad measurement detection. Moreover, we look at two realistic attack scenarios, in which the attacker is either constrained to some specific meters (due to the physical protection of the meters), or limited in the resources required to compromise meters. We show that the attacker can systematically and efficiently construct attack vectors in both scenarios, which can not only change the results of state estimation, but also modify the results in arbitrary ways. We demonstrate the success of these attacks through simulation using IEEE test systems. Our results indicate that security protection of the electric power grid must be revisited when there are potentially malicious attacks.

References

  1. Box Plot: Display of Distribution. http://www.physics.csbsju.edu/stats/box2.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Electric Power Risk Assessment. http://www.solarstorms.org/ElectricAssessment.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. E. Amaldi and V. Kann. On the approximability of minimizing nonzero variables or unsatisfied relations in linear systems. Theoretical Computer Science, 209(1-2):237--260, December 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. E. N. Asada, A. V. Garcia, and R. Romero. Identifying multiple interacting bad data in power system state estimation. In IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting, pages 571--577, June 2005.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. T. Blumensath and M. Davies. Gradient pursuits. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 56(6):2370--2382, June 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. J. Chen and A. Abur. Improved bad data processing via strategic placement of PMUs. In IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting, pages 509--513, June 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. J. Chen and A. Abur. Placement of PMUs to enable bad data detection in state estimation. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 21(4):1608--1615, November 2006.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. S. S. Chen. PhD thesis: Basis Pursuit. Department of Statistics, Stanford University, 1995.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. E.Handschin, F. C. Schweppe, J. Kohlas, and A. Fiechter. Bad data analysis for power system state estimation. IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, 94(2):329--337, April 1975.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. A. Garcia, A. Monticelli, and P. Abreu. Fast decoupled state estimation and bad data processing. IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, 98(5):1645--1652, September 1979.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. M. R. Garey and D. S. Johnson. Computer and Intractability: a guide to the theory of NP-Completeness. W.H.Freeman and Company, 1979. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. S. Gastoni, G. P. Granelli, and M. Montagna. Multiple bad data processing by genetic algorithms. In IEEE Power Tech Conference, pages 1--6, June 2003.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. P. Georgiev and A. Cichoki. Sparse component analysis of overcomplete mixtures by improved basis pursuit method. In the 2004 IEEE International Symposium on Circuits and Systems (ISCAS 2004), pages 5:37--40, May 2004.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. D. V. Hertem, J. Verboomen, K. Purchala, R. Belmans, and W. L. Kling. Usefulness of DC power flow for active power flow analysis with flow controlling devices. In The 8th IEE International Conference on AC and DC Power Transmission, pages 58--62, March 2006.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. P. S. Huggins and S. W. Zucker. Greedy basis pursuit. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 55(7):3760--3772, July 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. J. Lin and H. Pan. A static state estimation approach including bad data detection and identification in power systems. In IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting, pages 1--7, June 2007.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. R. Kinney, P. Crucitti, R. Albert, and V. Latora. Modeling cascading failures in the north American power grid. European Physical Journal B - Condensed Matter and Complex Systems, 46:101--107, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. M. Li, Q. Zhao, and P. B. Luh. DC power flow in systems with dynamic topology. In Power and Energy Society General Meeting-Conversion and Delivery of Electrical Energy in the 21st Century, pages 1--8, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. L. Lovisolo, E. A. B. da Silva, M. A. M. Rodrigues, and P. S. R. Diniz. Efficient coherent adaptive representations of monitored electric signals in power systems using damped sinusoids. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 53(10):3831--3846, October 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. C. Meyer. Matrix Analysis and Applied Linear Algebra. SIAM, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. L. Mili, T. V. Cutsem, and M. Ribbens-Pavella. Hypothesis testing identification: A new method for bad data analysis in power system state estimation. 103(11):3239--3252, November 1984.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. L. Milli, T. V. Cutsem, and M. R. Pavella. Bad data identification methods in power system state estimation, a comparative study. IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, 103(11):3037--3049, November 1985.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. A. Monticelli. State Estimation in Electric Power Systems, A Generalized Approach. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1999.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. A. Monticelli and A. Garcia. Reliable bad data processing for real-time state estimation. IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, 102(5):1126--1139, May 1983.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. A. Monticelli, F. F. Wu, and M. Y. Multiple. Bad data identification for state estimation by combinatorial optimization. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, 1(3):361--369, July 1986.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. B. K. Natarajan. Sparse approximate solutions to linear system. SIAM Journal on Computing, 24(2):227--234, April 1995. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Y. C. Pati, R. Rezaiifar, and P. S. Krishnaprasad. Orthogonal matching pursuit: Recursive function approximation with applications to wavelet decomposition. In the 27th Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems and Computers, 1993.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. V. H. Quintana, A. Simoes-Costa, and M. Mier. Bad data detection and identification techniques using estimation orthogonal methods. IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, 101(9):3356--3364, September 1982.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. F. C. Schweppe, J. Wildes, and D. B. Rom. Power system static state estimation. parts 1, 2, 3. IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, 89(1):120--135, January 1970.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. U.S.-Canada Power System Outage Task Force. Final report on the August 14, 2003 blackout in the United States and Canada. https://reports.energy.gov/B-F-Web-Part1.pdf, April 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. A. Wood and B. Wollenberg. Power generation, operation, and control. John Wiley and Sons, 2nd edition, 1996.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. N. Xiang and S. Wang. Estimation and identification of multiple bad data in power system state estimation. In the 7th Power Systems Computation Conference, PSCC, pages 1061--1065, July 1981.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. N. Xiang, S. Wang, and E. Yu. A new approach for detection and identification of multiple bad data in power system state estimation. IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, 101(2):454--462, Febuary 1982.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. N. Xiang, S. Wang, and E. Yu. An application of estimation-identification approach of multiple bad data in power system state estimation. In IEEE Power Engineering Society Summber Meeting, July 1983.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. L. Zhao and A. Abur. Multi area state estimation using synchronized phasor measurements. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 20(2):611--617, May 2005.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. J. Zhu and A. Abur. Bad data identification when using phasor measurements. In IEEE Power Tech Conference, pages 1676--1681, July 2007.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. R. D. Zimmerman and C. E. Murillo-Sánchez. MATPOWER, A MATLAB Power System Simulation Package. http://www.pserc.cornell.edu/matpower/manual.pdf, September 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. False data injection attacks against state estimation in electric power grids

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        CCS '09: Proceedings of the 16th ACM conference on Computer and communications security
        November 2009
        664 pages
        ISBN:9781605588940
        DOI:10.1145/1653662

        Copyright © 2009 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 9 November 2009

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate1,261of6,999submissions,18%

        Upcoming Conference

        CCS '24
        ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security
        October 14 - 18, 2024
        Salt Lake City , UT , USA

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader