Table 2.

Comparison of current Sybil prevention methods.

Author	Method	Advantages	Limitations
Ruj et al. [37]	MDS	Resistant to massive attacks in which the attacker gains numerical advantages.	Privacy and security problems.
Xu et al. [40]	Pluck Incorrect Information	Effective in detecting false information.	Requires fast processing to avoid time-barring events.
Sedjelmaci et al. [50]	GPS analysis	Does not require the use of additional hardware.	GPS inaccuracy might violate the results.
Liang et al. [45]	Motion Trajectories Similarity	Allows to detect each Sybil node separately.	Requires the approved infrastructure.
Benkirane et al. [46]	RSUs cooperation	Basis of a trilateration provides reliable results.	Require at least three RSUs at a particular crossing.
Xu et al. [47]	Lightweight Protection Regime	Hard to omit the rules by the attacker.	Can be problematic in case of signal power loss.
Zhou et al. [49]	DMV	Does not require cars to reveal their information on the infrastructure.	It does not encourage a misbehaving node to behaving in a proper way and does not punish malicious nodes.
Hao et al. [43]	Rationalizing Positioning Of Vehicles	In case it is confirmed that data delivered do not provide false positives.	GPS inaccuracy might violate the results.