The use of oligarchic faith models with several trust-anchor certification authorities (e.g., one per sub-domain or per controller instance) is a possibility. An- other is securing communication with entry cryptography across controller replicas (where the switch will need at smallest amount n shares to get a suitable controller message). Additionally, the use of lively, automated and assured machine association mechanisms may be considered, in order to guarantee hope between the control plane and data plane devices. Threat Vector 4 Attacks on and vulnerabilities in controllers, which are almost certainly the most severe threats to SDNs. A faulty or malicious controller could compromise a Downloaded 4/15/2022 9:44:49 AM Nova Southeastern University IP Address: 137.52.76.29 SDN Controller whole network. The use of a common intrusion detection organization may not be sufficient, as it may be tough to find the correct grouping of events that trigger a exacting behavior and, more importantly, to tag it as malicious. Likewise, a malicious application can potentially do anything it pleases in the network, as controllers simply offer abstractions that translate into issuing configuration commands to the fundamental communications. Possible Solutions Several techniques can be used, such as reproduction (to detect, remove or mask irregular behavior), employing diversity (of controllers, protocols, programming languages, software images, etc.), and recovery (periodically refreshing the system to a clean and reliable state). It is also important to secure all the sensitive elements inside the controller (e.g., crypto keys/secrets). Furthermore, security policies enforcing correct behavior might be mapped onto those techniques, restricting which interfaces an application can use and what kind of rules it can generate to program the network (along the lines of security-based prioritization). Threat Vector 5 Be short of mechanisms to make sure trust between the controller and organization applications, whereby equally to threa