Spatial modeling of information leakage risks in office networks: construction of a controlled zone

Authors

  • I.O. Kozliuk
  • D.I. Prokopovych-Tkachenko

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.34185/1562-9945-5-161-2025-11

Keywords:

radio leakage, Hata model, controlled zone, office network, information security, electromagnetic emission, signal penetration, spatial modeling, secured premises, leak detectors, absorption in buildings

Abstract

The relevance of this study is determined by the growing risks of confidential information leakage in office networks caused by electromagnetic emissions from technical devices. Modern office environments are heavily saturated with wireless services, including Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, LoRa, mobile terminals, and IoT devices, and even low-power signals extending beyond building boundaries can create technical channels for unauthorized interception. This situation highlights the need for scientifically justified models capable of predicting spatial vulnerability zones and supporting the design of protective measures. The core problem lies in the absence of universal methods for quantitative evaluation of spatial risks that would simultaneously account for diverse building materials, architectural layouts, and internal environmental conditions. Existing empirical approaches either lack accuracy or are excessively resource-intensive for practical integration into information security management systems. The purpose of the article is to develop a spatial-mathematical model for the identification and optimization of a “controlled zone” within office premises, in which the signal level is reliably reduced below the detection threshold of unauthorized receivers. 
The methodology builds on a modified Hata model adapted for indoor environments by incorporating absorption coefficients of typical building materials such as concrete, brick, glass, and gypsum board, as well as the exponential attenuation law. The approach includes the construction of a binary coverage matrix to generate vulnerability maps and applies an optimization algorithm for sensor placement based on the maximum coverage criterion subject to budgetary constraints. The proposed method was validated through an experimental case study of a typical office. The results show that at a frequency of 96.1 MHz and transmission power of 2.3 mW, the attenuation boundary occurs at distances beyond 10 m, while the recommended controlled zone encompasses approximately 24 × 8.5 m. The model ensures precise forecasting of radio leakage zones and supports optimization of the required number of sensors. The key findings demonstrate that combining the adapted Hata model with matrix-based coverage representation provides an effective means of identifying spatial information leakage risks. Furthermore, the results can be integrated into information security management systems in line with ISO/IEC 27005 standards and national regulations in the field of technical information protection.
The practical significance of the study lies in its applicability to governmental bodies, business centers, and critical infrastructure facilities where reliable planning of controlled zones is essential to minimize the probability of technical leakage channels and optimize monitoring costs.

References

MacCartney, G.R., Rappaport, T.S., Sun, S., & Deng, S. (2015). Indoor office wideband millimeter wave propagation measurements and channel models at 28 and 73 GHz for ultra-dense 5G wireless networks. IEEE Access, 3, 2388–2424.

https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2015.2486778

Ju, S., Xing, Y., Kanhere, O., & Rappaport, T. S. (2021). Millimeter wave and sub-terahertz spatial statistical channel model for an indoor office building. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 39(6), 1561–1575.

https://doi.org/10.1109/JSAC.2021.3071844

Obeidat, H. A., et al. (2018). An indoor path loss prediction model using wall correction factors. Radio Science, 53(4), 544–558. https://doi.org/10.1002/2018RS006536

Lee, J., Kim, K.-W., Kim, M.-D., & Park, J.-J. (2019). Measurement-based millimeter wave angular and delay dispersion characteristics of outdoor to indoor propagation for 5G millimeter wave systems. IEEE Access, 7, 150492–150504.

https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2947704

Oladimeji, T. T., Kumar, P., & Elmezughi, M. K. (2022). Path loss measurements and model analysis in an indoor corridor environment at 28 GHz and 38 GHz. Sensors, 22(19), 7642. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22197642

Jun, S. Y., Caudill, D., Chuang, J., et al. (2020). Penetration loss at 60 GHz for indoor-to-indoor and outdoor-to-indoor mobile scenarios. Proceedings of the IEEE EuCAP. https://doi.org/10.23919/EuCAP48036.2020.9135581

Carneiro de Souza, L., de Souza Lopes, C. H., dos Santos, R. C. C., Cerqueira Sodré Junior, A., & Mendes, L. L. (2022). A study on propagation models for 60 GHz signals in indoor environments. Frontiers in Communications and Networks, 2, 757842. https://doi.org/10.3389/frcmn.2021.757842

Koppel, T., Shishkin, A., Haldre, H., Toropovs, N., Vilcane, I., & Tint, P. (2017). Reflection and transmission properties of common construction materials at 2.4 GHz frequency. Energy Procedia, 113, 158–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2017.04.045

García Sánchez, M., Iglesias, C., Cuiñas, I., & Expósito, I. (2022). Building penetration losses at 3.5 GHz: Dependence on polarization and incidence angle. Electronics, 12(1), 106. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics12010106

Rappaport, T. S., MacCartney, G. R., Samimi, M. K., & Sun, S. (2015). Wideband millimeter wave propagation measurements and channel models for future wireless communication system design. IEEE Communications Magazine, 52(9), 116–122. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCOM.2015.7374064

Al Samman, A. M., Rahman, T. A., Chebil, J., Mohamad, H., & Islam, M. R. (2019). Comparative study of indoor propagation model below and above 6 GHz. Electronics, 8(1), 44. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics8010044

Bullmann, M., Fetzer, T., Ebner, F., Deinzer, F., & Grzegorzek, M. (2020). Comparison of 2.4 GHz WiFi FTM and RSSI-based indoor positioning methods in realistic scenarios. Sensors, 20(16), 4515. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20164515

Bellalta, B., & Kosek Szott, K. (2019). AP-initiated multi-user transmissions in IEEE 802.11ax WLANs. Ad Hoc Networks, 85, 145–159.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adhoc.2018.10.021

Fukuda, Y., et al. (2022). Characterizing the basic performance of IEEE 802.11ax WLANs in a campus environment. Proceedings of the IEEE/IFIP NOMS. https://doi.org/10.1109/NOMS54207.2022.9789895

Tutelian, S., Ferragut, J., Cerdà, L., & Barceló, J. (2021). IEEE 802.11ax OFDMA resource allocation with trigger-based uplink scheduling. Sensors, 21(18), 6099. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21186099

Oughton, E. J., & Frias, Z. (2021). Revisiting wireless internet connectivity: 5G vs Wi-Fi 6. Telecommunications Policy, 45(5), 102095.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2021.102095

Kuhn, M. G. (2013). Compromising emanations of LCD TV sets. IEEE Transactions on Electromagnetic Compatibility, 55(3), 564–570.

https://doi.org/10.1109/TEMC.2013.2252353

Antić, V., Dakić, O., Glišović, V., et al. (2024). Protecting data at risk of unintentional electromagnetic emanations. Applied Sciences, 14(11), 4830.

https://doi.org/10.3390/app14114830

Gifuni, A., Migliaccio, M., Testa, O., et al. (2020). Latest developments on the shielding effectiveness measurement with reverberation chambers. IET Science, Measurement & Technology, 14(9), 828–838. https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-smt.2019.0242

Jakoby, B., Beigelbeck, R., & Voglhuber-Brunnmaier, T. (2023). Understanding the shielding efficiency of a Faraday grid cage: A spectral domain approach. IEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine, 65(2), 2–11. https://doi.org/10.1109/MAP.2022.3229287

Hamidi, A., Djafri, K., & Ait Si Ali, S. (2024). Stochastic approach to evaluate the shielding effectiveness of a composite material slab. Electronics Letters, 60(2), e70016. https://doi.org/10.1049/ell2.70016

Song, R., et al. (2024). Graphene assembled films for radio frequency and electromagnetic interference shielding. Accounts of Materials Research, 5(9), 2211–2224. https://doi.org/10.1021/accountsmr.4c00023

Ali, U., De Felice, M., Lissandrin, N., et al. (2022). Data-driven analysis of outdoor-to-indoor propagation for deployed 5G networks at 3.5 GHz. Future Internet, 14(8), 239. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi14080239

Al Khero, S. K., & Abbosh, Y. M. (2021). Path loss and channel modeling at 3.5 GHz for 5G cellular system. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 1152, 012006. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/1152/1/012006

Horn, B. K. P. (2020). Doubling the accuracy of indoor positioning: Frequency diversity. Sensors, 20(5), 1489. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20051489

Yu, Y., Chen, R., Chen, L., Guo, G., Ye, F., & Liu, Z. (2019). A robust dead reckoning algorithm based on Wi-Fi FTM and multiple sensors. Remote Sensing, 11(5), 504. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11050504

Banin, L., Bar Shalom, O., Dvorecki, N., & Amizur, Y. (2018). Scalable Wi-Fi client self-positioning using cooperative FTM sensors. IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement, 68(10), 3686–3698. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIM.2018.2880887

Au, E. (2016). The latest progress on IEEE 802.11mc and IEEE 802.11ai. IEEE Vehicular Technology Magazine, 11(3), 19–21.

https://doi.org/10.1109/MVT.2016.2586398

He, S., & Chan, S. H. G. (2016). Wi-Fi fingerprint-based indoor positioning: Recent advances and comparisons. IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, 18(1), 466–490. https://doi.org/10.1109/COMST.2015.2464084

De Beelde, B., Peter, R., et al. (2022). Outdoor mmWave channel modeling for fixed wireless access at 60 GHz (with indoor coverage implications). Radio Science, 57(6), e2022RS007519. https://doi.org/10.1029/2022RS007519

Published

2025-12-05