See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/366716818

Internet of Things: Protocols, Applications and Security Issues

Article in Procedia Computer Science · December 2022

DOI: 10.1016/j.procs.2022.12.030

CITATIONS READS

6 254

2 authors:

Sarika Choudhary Gaurav Meena

Central University of Rajasthan Central University of Rajasthan
15 PUBLICATIONS 291 CITATIONS 41 PUBLICATIONS 450 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Gaurav Meena on 02 January 2023.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect
Procedia Computer Science 00 (2023) 000–000
Procedia
Procedia Computer
Computer Science
Science 21500 (2023)
(2022) 000–000
274–288 www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

4th International Conference on Innovative Data Communication Technology and Application

4th International Conference on Innovative Data Communication Technology and Application
Internet
Internet of
of Things:
Things: Protocols,
Protocols, Applications
Applications and
and Security
Security Issues
Issues
Dr. Sarika Choudharya,∗, Gaurav Meenab,∗
Dr. Sarika Choudharya,∗, Gaurav Meenab,∗
a Department of Computer Science & Engineering, PDM University, Haryana, India-124507
a Department of Computer Science & Engineering, PDM University, Haryana, India-124507
b Department of Computer Science, Central University of Rajasthan, Ajmer, Rajasthan, India- 305817
b Department of Computer Science, Central University of Rajasthan, Ajmer, Rajasthan, India- 305817

Abstract
Abstract
The Internet of Things is poised to become an important crossroads for several technologies. As a result, it will be possible to
The Internet
connect smartofphysical
Things goods
is poised
andtoenable
become an important
smart crossroads
decision-making acrossforaseveral technologies.
wide range As a result,
of applications. it will
Various be possible
devices, to
including
connect
computers,smart physicaland
actuators, goods and enable
sensors, may link smart
to onedecision-making across a data
another and exchange wideinrange of applications.
a networked Various
environment devices,
known as theincluding
Internet
computers, actuators,
of Things (IoT). Smartandrefers
sensors, mayhumans
to how link to one another andwith
communicate exchange data inwhereas
technology, a networked
”smartenvironment known asthethemachines
objects” describes Internet
of Things (IoT). Smart refers to how humans communicate with technology, whereas ”smart objects” describes
themselves. As the market’s supply of gadgets grows, ensuring their safety becomes more critical than ever. The availability of the machines
themselves.
cutting-edgeAs the market’s
methods supply
and tools of gadgets
has been grows,inensuring
instrumental their
the current safety
surge becomesin more
of interest critical studies.
IoT security than ever.
To The availability
guarantee of
success,
cutting-edge
these methods
applications needand
thetools has been instrumental
characteristics in the current
of the environment surge
provided by of
theinterest in IoT security
IoT framework. studies.
This essay To deep
dives guarantee success,
into the IoT’s
these applications
layered need
architecture, the characteristics
layer-by-layer of the
protocols, environment
cutting-edge useprovided
cases, andby pervasive
the IoT framework. This essay
security concerns. dives deep
In addition to into the IoT’s
analysing the
layered architecture, layer-by-layer protocols, cutting-edge use cases, and pervasive security concerns. In addition
current security structure, this paper provides a research taxonomy for IoT. Our study is more comprehensive than many that have to analysing the
currentbefore
come security structure,
it on the topicthis paper
of the provides
Internet a research
of Things; we taxonomy for IoT. from
look at everything Our study is more
sensors comprehensive
to real-world than many that have
applications.
come before it on the topic of the Internet of Things; we look at everything from sensors to real-world applications.
c 2023

© 2023 The
The Authors.
Authors. Published
Published by
by Elsevier
Elsevier B.V.
B.V.
c 2023

This is The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
This is an
an open
open access
access article
article under
under the
the CC
CC BY-NC-ND
BY-NC-ND license
license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0)
This is an open
Peer-review access
under article under
responsibility thescientific
of the CC BY-NC-ND license
committee (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
of the 4th International
International Conference on Innovative Data
Data Communication
Communication
Peer-review under
Technologies and responsibility of the scientific committee of the 4th International Conference on Innovative Data Communication
and Application
Application.
Technologies and Application.
Keywords: Internet of Things (IoT); Smart Homes; Applications; Healthcare; Smart Agriculture; Smart Things; RPL; CoAP.
Keywords: Internet of Things (IoT); Smart Homes; Applications; Healthcare; Smart Agriculture; Smart Things; RPL; CoAP.

1. Introduction
1. Introduction
The number of people using the Internet has increased at a rate that has never been seen before in recent years. It
canThe numberpractically
be found of peopleeverywhere
using the Internet
on the has increased
earth and has at a rate
had that has impact
a profound never been seen before
on people’s livesinacross
recenttheyears.
boardIt
can be found practically everywhere on the earth and has had a profound impact on people’s lives
wherever it is found. Despite this, we now live in a society in which an extremely diverse array of electronic gadgets across the board
wherever it is found.
may be linked Despite this,
to the internet. we now
We are now living
live inin a society in which
the era of an extremely
the Internet of Thingsdiverse
(IoT),array
which ofiselectronic gadgets
distinguished by
may be linked to the internet. We are now living in the era of the Internet of Things (IoT), which
the connectedness of ”things” to the ”Internet.” This connectivity is a hallmark of the IoT. In the year 1999, it wasis distinguished by
the connectedness of ”things” to the ”Internet.” This connectivity is a hallmark of the IoT. In the
Kevin Ashton who is credited with being the first person to use the word [4]. The traditional concept of the Internet ofyear 1999, it was
Kevin
ThingsAshton
(IoT) haswhobeen
is credited
definedwith
in a being
number theoffirst personways
different to usebythe word [4].
several The traditional
different concept
publications. First,of thetake
let’s Internet of
a look
Things (IoT) has been defined in a number of different ways by several different publications. First,
at a general definition. Objects are defined by Penã-Lòpez et al. [33] as having the networking and computational ca- let’s take a look
at a general definition. Objects are defined by Penã-Lòpez et al. [33] as having the networking and computational ca-

∗ Corresponding author: Dr. Sarika Choudhary, and Gaurav Meena

∗ Corresponding
E-mail address:author: Dr. Sarika Choudhary,
[email protected], and Gaurav Meena
[email protected]
E-mail address: [email protected], [email protected]
1877-0509  c 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
1877-0509
1877-0509 © 2023 The
c 2023
 Authors.
Thearticle
Authors. Published
Published by
by Elsevier B.V.
Elsevier B.V.
This is an open access under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
This
This isan
is anopen
openaccess
access article
article under
under the the BY-NC-ND
CC CC BY-NC-ND licenselicense (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0)
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Peer-review under
Peer-review underresponsibility of the
responsibility scientific
of the committee
scientific of the
committee 4ththe
of International Conference
4th International on Innovative
Conference Data Communication
on Innovative Technologies
Data Communication
Peer-review
and under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 4th International Conference on Innovative Data Communication Technologies
Application.
Technologies and Application
and Application.
10.1016/j.procs.2022.12.030
 Dr. Sarika Choudhary et al. / Procedia Computer Science 215 (2022) 274–288 275
2 Dr. Sarika Choudhary / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2023) 000–000

pabilities necessary to do the tasks that have been given to them. Because of this, the Internet of Things, often known
as IoT, is a network that consists of every device in the physical world being linked to the internet. Figure 1 presents
the global scenario for the Internet of Things. The future will bring an increase in complexity, which will need a high
level of cognition to handle effectively.
Components such as actuators, sensors, transducers, transceivers, and central processing units are often found in Inter-
net of Things devices. The Internet of Things (IoT) is an umbrella term for a collection of interoperable technologies.
Actuators and sensors are the components of the Internet of Things system with the highest significance. They find
applications in many situations that occur in the real world. The term ”sensor” refers to any device that is able to both
receive and send signals. There are a variety of possible manifestations of the signal, including energy, light, motion,
and others. Transducers are electronic devices that take one input energy and convert it to another form of output
energy. Actuators are defined as devices that move objects by turning energy into motion, and there are a wide variety
of different types of actuators.
As a consequence of this, an actuator may be thought of as a specific kind of transducer. These components are part
of the physical layer. Once we have the data, we can go on to the different levels of processing and storage. The
information is then sent to a server after that process is complete. However, due to the devices’ limitations in energy,
power, storage, and processing, things that are part of the Internet of Things have very little capacity for data storage.
The most challenging part of the process is determining which device will be used for data collection, processing,
handling, and transmission. The Internet of Things relies on using wireless connectivity among its many components.
Wireless channels are notorious for their high distortion rates and lack dependability.

Fig. 1: Internet of Things architecture scenarios. (a) Past IoT Scenario (b) Present IoT Scenario (c) Future IoT Scenario

After the data has been processed, the appropriate action should be carried out according to the kind of application.
The nature of the activities may vary; for instance, some apps link with one another rather than with people; this
kind of interaction is referred to as M2M interaction, which stands for ”machine to machine.” There are several
apps that are handled entirely by a human being. They can broadcast as well as receive messages, depending on the
circumstances. IoT networks use a wide range of technologies, protocols, and standards to facilitate communication
with many disparate types of devices. Figure 1 illustrates the basic architectures that make up the Internet of Things.
At the moment, everything is linked to the cloud by means of a server. In the future, the devices are not directly linked
to the Internet; nevertheless, they are connected to other Internet of Things devices. A new concept that is referred to
as the social Internet of Things (IoT) develops [1] when electronic devices are linked to the Internet. The Internet of
Things allows users of social networking sites to share their equipment online.
Concerns around users’ personal information and their right to privacy have emerged in tandem with the expansion of
the Internet of Things [12]. In the past, there have been a variety of security breaches that affected IoT app use. The
cyberattack known as Mirai was the first to occur in 2016. It involved around three million devices connected to the
Internet Flashpoint [16]. Mirai carried out an assault known as a distributed denial of service (DDoS). Two further
botnet assaults that significantly affect Internet of Things devices have emerged in the wake of Mirai, Hajime, and
Reaper [24].
This article provides a comprehensive review of IoT’s framework, protocols, security issues, and proposed remedies
(IoT). The remainder of the paper is structured as follows: In this Section 2, We present an overview of the basics of
IoT design and protocol. Section 3 describes the development of IoT-based and real-world applications. In the Section
4, IoT security issues, of which there are many, are discussed at length. Possibilities for future study in the realm of
276 Dr. Sarika Choudhary et al. / Procedia Computer Science 215 (2022) 274–288
Dr. Sarika Choudhary / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2023) 000–000 3

Application Layer Application Layer

Cloud Middleware Layer

Network Layer Network Layer

Perception Layer Perception Layer

Fig. 2: IoT three-layer and four-layer architecture.

the Internet of Things (IoT) are broken down and addressed in Section 5, Section brings this collection of work to a
satisfactory conclusion in this Section 6.

2. IoT Architecture and Protocols

Various researchers have proposed different IoT standard architectures. There isn’t a standard universal architecture
on which everyone agrees.

2.1. Three-layer and four-layer architecture

As illustrated in Figure 2, the most basic and widely accepted architecture is a three-layer architecture [36, 29]. It
was first used when the research was only getting started. In recent studies, a new layer has been added [20].It is often
referred to as architecture with four layers. The four levels are the perception layer, the network layer, the middleware
layer, and the application layer.

2.1.1. Perception layer

The lowest layer is concerned with the actual physical Internet of Things devices, including sensors, actuators,
and other components. Because it mainly interacts with sensors, some researchers also refer to it as a sensing layer
[10]. Smoke detectors, temperature sensors, humidity sensors, light sensors, chemical and gas sensors, and other types
of sensors can collect data specific to their respective types. The primary responsibility of this layer is to sense the
surrounding environment to gather data about it. Eavesdropping, side-channel attacks, node capture attacks, bogus
data injection attacks, and various other types of assaults are all possibilities. [26] The objective of these attacks is to
cause the sensor to malfunction, increase the amount of power it consumes, and steal information in the process.
The physical IoT devices with sensors, actuators, and other components are dealt with in the lowest layer. Certain
researchers also know it as a sensing layer because it mostly interacts with sensors [10]. Sensors such as smoke
detectors, temperature sensors, humidity sensors, light sensors, chemical and gas sensors, and others collect data
pertaining to their type. This layer’s principal role is to collect data from the environment via sensing it. Side-channel
attacks, node capture attacks, eavesdropping [26], fake data injection attacks, and other assaults are all possible. The
purpose of these assaults is to leak information, increase power consumption, and cause the sensor to fail.

2.1.2. Network layer

The establishment of communications between Internet endpoints and servers falls within the purview of this
second tier of the protocol stack. When information is delivered to it from the perception layer, it may perform an
analysis on the data. Phishing, denial-of-service attacks, distributed denial-of-service attacks, routing attacks, access
assaults, and other typical attacks may all succeed against this layer [10, 11, 9].
 Dr. Sarika Choudhary et al. / Procedia Computer Science 215 (2022) 274–288 277
4 Dr. Sarika Choudhary / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2023) 000–000

2.1.3. Middleware layer

You may think of this as the next layer in the network stack. The purpose of this layer is to facilitate communication
between the network layer and the application layer. This is the ”processing layer,” another name for it. It’s helpful as
both a storage facility for information and a computing environment. In addition, APIs are provided to accommodate
all of the needs of the application layer. The middleware layer includes components such as brokers, data storage
determination, queuing systems, and machine learning. While this layer is crucial to the development of a safe and
reliable IoT application, it is also susceptible to a wide range of attacks. Once in place, the malicious middleware may
exert control over the IoT infrastructure and issue harmful orders. SQL injection, signature attacks, man-in-the-middle
attacks, and many more are only a few examples of the many different forms of assault. Database and cloud security
have now reached the pinnacle of importance.

2.1.4. Application layer

You’ve reached the last stage of the process. With tailored applications, it’s easy for the user and meets their specific
needs. A large number of IoT use cases, such as ”smart cities,” ”smart homes,” ”smart grids,” ”healthcare,” and many
more, are defined at the application layer. The themes of data theft, privacy invasion, and security are discussed here.
In these other systems, the application would sit on top of yet another business layer. This would function as a buffer
between the software and the end user. The business layer manages the IoT architecture and is therefore accountable
for things like user data security, financial management, and app management. The major goal of this layer is to foil
any attempts at data theft.

2.2. Protocols

As shown in Figure 3, there are numerous protocols at each tier of the IoT system. Some protocols are similar to
traditional IT systems, but others are unique to the IoT communication system. The protocols in question are IEEE
802.15.4, NFC, ZigBee, BLE, RPL, 6LoWPAN, and CoAP.

XMPP DDS CoAP

Application Layer
MQTT SMQTT AMQP

6LoWPAN 6Lo 6TiSCH

Network Layer
RPL CORPL CARP IPv6

WirelessHART Z-wave LoRaWAN LTE-A

Perception Layer
IEEE 802.15.4 ZigBee NFC BLE

Fig. 3: IoT protocols at each layer.

2.2.1. IEEE 802.15.4

For the physical and link (MAC) levels of a typical IP stack and the perception layer of an IoT stack, the most
popular standard used in Internet of Things architecture is IEEE 802.15.4. It enables communication over small
distances while using little power and having a low overall cost. Because resource-constrained devices need minimal
power, small frame sizes, and low bandwidth, it is best suited for using these devices. The coding method used in
IEEE 802.15.4 has built-in redundancy, which improves the reliability of the connection, enables us to identify data
loss, and permits the retransmission of packets that have been lost. Short 16-bit link addresses are also supported by
278 Dr. Sarika Choudhary et al. / Procedia Computer Science 215 (2022) 274–288
Dr. Sarika Choudhary / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2023) 000–000 5

the protocol, which helps reduce the overall size of the header as well as the communication overheads and memory
requirements [21].

2.2.2. NFC
Mobile devices can communicate a small distance of just a few millimeters using near-field communication (NFC),
a kind of wireless communication with a minimal range. Simply coming together two devices outfitted with NFC and
putting them into proximity allows for the instant transmission of any and all forms of data. RFID is the foundation for
this technology. The data transmission between two NFC-enabled devices is accomplished by utilizing fluctuations in
the magnetic field. High-frequency RFID and Near Field Communication use the 13.56 MHz frequency spectrum as
their operating bandwidth. Active and passive are the two modes of operation that may be used. When operating in
the active mode, both of the devices are responsible for the generation of magnetic fields; however, when operating
in the passive mode, only one of the devices is responsible for the era of the area, and the other device relies on load
modulation to transmit data [14]. To make the most efficient use of energy, battery-powered devices might benefit
from using the passive mode. One advantage of the necessity of proximity between devices is that it is helpful for
secure transactions such as payments. This is because the devices must be in close contact to one another. Note, last,
that in contrast to RFID, NFC may be utilized for communication in both directions. Consequently, the vast majority
of cellphones available on the market today support NFC.

2.2.3. ZigBee
PANs, which are ”personal area networks,” use it since it adheres to the communication protocol standard defined
by IEEE 802.15.4 [5]. In the past, the low-power MAC and physical layers of the IEEE 802.15.4 standard have been
dissected and investigated. Zigbee was developed by the Zigbee alliance, whose primary objective is to facilitate the
production of communication solutions that are trustworthy, economical, and low in their overall energy consumption.
Communication between Zigbee devices can only take place over a distance of a few metres at most (10–100 meters).
Additionally, the Zigbee standard offers a set of requirements regarding the component elements and functionalities
of the network and application layers. In contrast to Bluetooth Low Energy, this network layer provides support for
the multihop routing protocol. In addition to a single Zigbee coordinator, a Zigbee network contains one of each
of the following types of devices: a Fully Functional Device (abbreviated as FFD), a Reduced Functional Device
(abbreviated as RFD), and a Fully Functional Device (RFD). It is possible for a node in the FFD to additionally
perform the duties of a router. Zigbee may function in a star, tree, or mesh topology depending on the situation. The
topology determines the implementation of the routing mechanism that should be used. Zigbee also has additional
properties, like the ability to identify and maintain routes, support for nodes joining and exiting the network, short
addresses that only need 16 bits, and multihop routing.

2.2.4. BLE
The Bluetooth Special Interest Group was the organisation that was in charge of the development of Bluetooth Low
Energy, which is more generally known as ”Bluetooth Smart.” It requires a far lesser amount of energy to operate and
has a much shorter range than other technologies, which are the alternatives. The protocol stack that BLE makes use
of is analogous to the one that conventional Bluetooth technology makes use of. The controller and the host are the
two parts that make up the whole thing. The implementation of both the physical layer and the link layer falls within
the purview of the controller.
With conventional Bluetooth, the connection remains established even if no data is being sent or received. Further-
more, it allows for 79 data channels, each having a bandwidth of 1 MHz and a symbol rate of 1,000,000 Hz. However,
Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) only allows for 40 tracks, has a channel bandwidth of 2 MHz (twice that of standard
Bluetooth), and a transmission throughput of 1 million symbols per second. Due to the tiny packet size and quick
transmission time of BLE, the protocol may function with minimal duty cycle needs. Furthermore, the BLE protocol
stack facilitates IP-based communication. When comparing BLE to Zigbee, its energy efficiency is around 2.5 times
better.
 Dr. Sarika Choudhary et al. / Procedia Computer Science 215 (2022) 274–288 279
6 Dr. Sarika Choudhary / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2023) 000–000

2.2.5. Routing Protocol for Low power and Lossy Network (RPL)
The RPL protocol is a novel kind of routing technology developed specifically for IoT gadgets. This protocol
is used in 6LoWPAN networks and has a small footprint. Using the nodes already present in the network and the
Objective Function (OF) as a linking mechanism, RPL generates a Destination-Oriented Directed Acyclic Graph
(DODAG). It makes use of an Internet Protocol version 6 address as its means of self-description. A further feature
of this list is that each node remembers its neighbouring DODAG nodes. Nodes, excluding the root node, may have
0-1 or 2-4 parents. Starting with the root node and moving outwards to the child nodes, the network’s topology is
ranked from lowest to highest. RPL’s ICMPv6 control messages are known by their acronyms: DODAG Information
Object (DIO), DODAG Information Solicitation (DIS), and Destination Advertisement Object (DAO)/Destination
Advertisement Object Acknowledgement (DAO-ACK). DIO messages are used to store and update information about
routing paths. DAO messages, when read from the top down, publish the routing data sent between the child node and
the sink node. Existing nodes provide DAO messages in the form of DIO messages to assist with the addition of a new
node to the network. There is a special message type called DAO-ACK that may be used to confirm receipt of a DAO
message.

2.2.6. CoAP
If you’re looking for an alternative to HTTP, consider switching to CoAP. It’s the standard for most Internet of
Things applications [39]. It’s not just another HTTP variant; it also has enhancements for limited application contexts
[50]. The EXI (Efficient XML Interchanges) data format utilises binary, making it far more space-efficient than the
HTML/XML standard that uses plain text. A few more capabilities include built-in header compression, resource
discovery, auto-configuration, asynchronous message exchange, congestion control, and support for multicasting. All
of these functions are standard. The four different types of messages that may be sent using CoAP are non confirmable
messages, confirmable messages, reset (nack) messages, and acknowledgement messages. Confirmable messages
guarantee that data delivered over UDP will reach its destination uncorrupted. You are welcome to put your response
directly inside the acknowledgement that you sent. In addition, the Datagram Transport Layer Security protocol, often
known as DTLS, is used for further protection.

3. IoT Applications

The Internet of Things encompasses various domains, and intelligent application developments have been in each
of these domains. These applications are developed to make one’s life simpler. Although preliminary study indicates
that Internet of Things (IoT) devices improve people’s quality of life, exercising care when using these technologies
is important. The Internet of Things sees a daily rise in the number of applications. IoT applications have been
implemented in many different industries, including home automation, smart cities, the healthcare sector, track fitness,
environmental protection, the industrial sector, and smart metering. These are just some of the examples of what can
be done with IoT. Before integrating smart technology into everyday life, there are important safety considerations to
consider. This section will also discuss the security concerns associated with the Internet of Things applications.

4. Application Security Challenges and Possible Solutions for IoT

A wide variety of devices are linked together through an IoT. It makes everything accessible at any time and place,
considerably streamlining daily living. As a consequence, everything is interrelated, which results in the formation
of vulnerabilities. For the Internet of Things to become part of everyday life, students must major in security and
privacy [18]. Consequently, it has to have an architecture that can manage security and other difficulties, such as
illegal access, a flood of requests, and the loss of data. As was said before, many assaults are capable of taking place
at any one moment inside the devices.
Unauthorized access is the most severe issue that Internet of Things devices must deal with. Because there are billions
of Internet of Things devices already available, connecting them presents a substantial security risk and adds a layer
of complexity. It is necessary to formalize many linked devices on a single platform. Authentication and identification
of Internet of Things-based connected devices depending on the system architecture [9, 11, 13].. When a customer
uses a product, the manufacturer is required to evaluate any potential safety risks. The vast majority of IoT devices do
280 Dr. Sarika Choudhary et al. / Procedia Computer Science 215 (2022) 274–288
Dr. Sarika Choudhary / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2023) 000–000 7

not have their security updated. As time passes, the devices need to obtain updated versions of their security software.
If it is not acquired, the devices are secure when purchased; nevertheless, as time passes, they become less safe and
more susceptible to attacks. As a direct consequence, there must be continuous enhancements to security.
Another problem is the use of default passwords. When a customer purchases an Internet of Things device, the product
can already have the login and password ”admin” pre-set. Because they have weak credentials and login data, almost
all IoT devices are susceptible to having their passwords hacked. Mirai was the first piece of malware to target Internet
of Things devices; it emerged in late 2016 and infected over 600,000 devices across the world [3]. The success of the
Mirai botnet may be attributed to the fact that it used attacks with default usernames and passwords. The WannaCry
ransomware attack, which affected millions of devices in 2017, is a further illustration of an Internet of Things botnet
[8, 31].

Table 1: Survey on Security mechanisms used for IoT applications.

Paper Title IoT applica- Attack specific / Security mechanism Experimental

tion Privacy preserv- used / Simulation
ing
[23] SmartEdge: A frame- Smart city No attack iden- At the network edge Experimental
work that encrypts data tification, privacy and cloud data cen-
from beginning to fin- preserving model tres, they carried out
ish, designed specifi- the computationally
cally for use in edge- demanding jobs. Ad-
enabled smart city ap- ditionally, a secure
plications link was established
between the smart
core devices for mul-
timedia streaming
using a lightweight
symmetric encryption
approach.
[6] SEAL: SDN based Smart city Distributed Denial Estimated-weighted Mininet Emu-
secure and agile frame- of Service (DDoS) moving average lator
work for protecting (EWMA) filters have
smart city applications been developed using
from DDoS attacks a modified version of
the Secure and AgiLe
model. Proactive,
Active, and Passive
filters have all been
suggested and put into
practise to calculate
the dynamic threshold
in real time for diverse
purposes.
 Dr. Sarika Choudhary et al. / Procedia Computer Science 215 (2022) 274–288 281
8 Dr. Sarika Choudhary / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2023) 000–000

Table 1 continued..

[40] Blockchain and Fog Smart city No attack iden- Authors proposed iFogSim sim-
Based Architecture for tification, privacy the Blockchain and ulator
Internet of Everything preserving model Fog based security
in Smart Cities Architecture Network
(BFAN) for sensitive
data and used encryp-
tion, authentication. It
is a two layer architec-
ture i.e., fog node and
Internet of Everything
(IoE) layer.
[28] PrivySharing: A Smart city No attack Iden- By segmenting the Simulation
blockchain-based in- tification, privacy blockchain network
frastructure enabling preserving model into several channels,
safe data exchange each of which is
in smart cities while made up of a limited
protecting privacy. number of approved
businesses, the data
privacy is maintained.
The REST API offers
two layers of security
in the form of an
API Key and OAuth
2.0, allowing users to
communicate with the
blockchain network.
[34] Models of anomaly de- Smart home DDoS attack de- Hidden Markov Experiment
tection for use in in- tection Model (HMM) is used
telligent home security in smart homes to
systems identify anomalies. A
testbed with several
sensors and devices is
used to generate the
network sensor data
on which the HMM is
trained.
282 Dr. Sarika Choudhary et al. / Procedia Computer Science 215 (2022) 274–288
Dr. Sarika Choudhary / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2023) 000–000 9

Table 1 continued..

[30] IoT security and pri- Smart home No attack iden- The ELIB architec- Network Sim-
vacy using an effective tification, privacy ture creates a layer ulator 3 (NS3)
Lightweight Integrated preserving model network that allows
Blockchain (ELIB) highly equipped
paradigm resources to blend to-
gether to form a public
blockchain that vali-
dates both privacy and
security. A lightweight
consensus algorithm,
certificateless cryp-
tography (CC), and a
Distributed Through-
put Management
(DTM) scheme are the
three optimizations
that make up the set of
three that are included
with the ELIB model.
[38] Shsec: architecture for Smart home DDoS attack de- In order to develop and Simulation
the internet of things tection implement protection,
that is built on a se- including threat pre-
cure smart home net- vention, and to miti-
work using SDN. gate network security
assaults, secure smart
house (SHSec) archi-
tecture works as a con-
troller with KNOT in
smart homes.
[2] A Supervised Intrusion Smart home DoS/DDoS, Man- They proposed a three Experiment
Detection System for in-the-middle layer supervised learn-
Internet of Things De- (MITM), Recon- ing based intrusion de-
vices Installed in Smart naissance, Replay, tection system (IDS)
Homes Spoofing attack to detect the cyber-
detection attacks. Their model
classify the normal be-
havior, identifies the
malicious packets, and
classify the type of at-
tack happened.
 Dr. Sarika Choudhary et al. / Procedia Computer Science 215 (2022) 274–288 283
10 Dr. Sarika Choudhary / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2023) 000–000

Table 1 continued..

[42] SybilWatch: a novel Smart Sybil attack detec- They proposed En- NS3 simula-
approach to detect Healthcare tion hanced Privacy-Aware tor
Sybil attack in IoT Smart Health (E-
based smart health care PASH) which uses
a lightweight en-
cryption algorithm
i.e., used to transfer
health record from
using prime order
grouping in encrypted
form. They also used
Bluetits detection
algorithm at detection
phase to detect sybil
attack by using node
traceability.
[25] IC-MADS: IoT En- Smart Man-in-the- Their approach con- NS2 simula-
abled Cross Layer Healthcare middle (MITM) sists energy-efficient tor
Man-in-Middle Attack attack detection clustering and cross
Detection System layer attack detection
for Smart Healthcare and evaluation. They
Application used probability com-
putation for selecting
cluster head (CH).
Cross-layer trust
evaluation approach
used to evaluate nodes
to detect the MIMA
attack.
[17] BSN-Care: A secure Smart Replay and They proposed secure Simulation
IoT-based modern Healthcare Forgery attack BSN-care architecture
healthcare system to achieve the data
using body sensor security as well as
network network security. To
achieve the secu-
rity they proposed
lightweight anony-
mous authentication
protocol for network
security and authen-
ticated encryption
scheme offset code-
book (OCB) mode for
data security.
284 Dr. Sarika Choudhary et al. / Procedia Computer Science 215 (2022) 274–288
Dr. Sarika Choudhary / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2023) 000–000 11

Table 1 continued..

[43] Secure healthcare Smart Eavesdropping, They combined IoT Simulation

monitoring framework Healthcare spoofing, and with edge cloud
integrating NDN-based false data re- (IE) and named data
IoT with edge cloud sponse networking (NDN)
to achieve IE-based
medical data retrieval
and also secure the
services with cipher-
text and signature
to enhance security.
They reduced the data
retrieval latency and
cost.
[27] Blockchain and IoT Smart agri- Security architec- They proposed a theoretical ap-
based food traceability culture ture model to make proach
for smart agriculture open, secure, trusted,
decentralized and
temper-proof sys-
tem for LoRaWAN
using blockchain
technology. They
integrated LoRaWAN
IoT and blockchain
technology.
[19] An Application to Smart agri- Data privacy They used smart NS2 simula-
Smart Agriculture culture preservation agriculture sensors tor
Based on an Energy- to capture the rele-
Efficient and Secure vant data and used
Internet of Things- multi-criteria decision
Based Wireless Sensor function to form clus-
Network Framework ter heads (CH). Data
transmission security
is provided by using
the recurrence of the
linear congruential
generator.
 Dr. Sarika Choudhary et al. / Procedia Computer Science 215 (2022) 274–288 285
12 Dr. Sarika Choudhary / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2023) 000–000

Table 1 continued..

[32] A smart irrigation Smart agri- Security architec- They suggested a Experimental
system that is both culture ture smart watering sys-
intelligent and safe, tem, often known as
based on fuzzy logic a SWS, for use in
and blockchain tech- intelligent agriculture.
nology Sensors are used to
gather data, and then
the sensed data is pro-
cessed on the server
by SWS in order to
provide a prediction of
the watering schedule
utilising blockchain
technology and fuzzy
logic. SWS is de-
signed in Android for
the purpose of intelli-
gent consumption in
gardens or fields of a
small or medium size.
Remotely monitoring
and interacting with
the programme is
possible for many
users and devices.

A considerable danger of flooding the open cryptocurrency market is posed by the breach of blockchains, Internet
of Things botnet miners, and manipulation of data integrity. Applications, frameworks, and platforms for the Internet
of Things built on blockchain technology must be managed and monitored regularly. It is possible that in the future,
it may need an upgrade to prevent new cryptocurrency abuses. IoT devices will become increasingly commonplace
in our day-to-day lives, which means that organizations will have to deal with hundreds of thousands, if not millions,
of IoT devices. The problems may be divided into two categories: preventing attacks on IoT devices and preventing
theft of user data. Implementing robust legal and regulatory frameworks is one way these problems might be resolved
[44]. The significance of authenticating information is not lost on any of us. Although symmetric-key cryptography’s
processing cost is higher, public-key cryptography is generally considered the more secure method. Consequently, the
primary challenge faced by the Internet of Things (IoT) systems is reducing the computational resources required for
public-key cryptography and other security protocols [47]. Table 1 presents the results of an investigation of the kinds
of safety precautions used for different Internet of Things applications.

5. Research Opportunities

The first layer is the perception layer, which uses sensors to collect data. Sensors such as movement, camera, light,
global positioning sensor (GPS) sensors, temperature sensors, and others are utilized in IoT devices. These sensors
are used in IoT-based devices to detect motion, forecast the distance between nearby devices, detect smoke, and detect
fire. Actuators are employed at this stratum as well. The actuator is a device that converts electrical energy into a
different form of energy to change the environment. Speakers, motors, heating elements, and cooling components are
examples of actuators. Actuators come in three different categories, depending on the operation: electrical, hydraulic,
and pneumatic. A smart home system is the most excellent example of using sensors and actuators. Many sensors
286 Dr. Sarika Choudhary et al. / Procedia Computer Science 215 (2022) 274–288
Dr. Sarika Choudhary / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2023) 000–000 13

Energy saver
Chemical sensors Low power technologies Semantic based applications

Bluetooth low energy Supply chain

Health sensors Service based management
Social websites and
Environment sensors WSN Low power Wi-Fi entertainment

Perception (sensors) Networking Middleware Applications

Application specific
Routing protocols Smart agriculture
Cell phone sensors Smart healthcare and
Zigbee fitness
Internet protocols for
low power objects Home automation
Database specific
Neural Sensors

NFC Smart transport

Event oriented
RFID

Fig. 4: Research taxonomy of Internet of Things technologies (layered wise).

and actuators are used in the home to lock and unlock doors, turn on and off lights, turn on and off other electrical
appliances, and control the alert system, thermostat, and digital finger. Researchers can work in this approach to
improve the accuracy of real-time data detection with sensors. Another consideration at this layer is the preservation
of privacy. Figure 4 depicts the various research options available.
Next comes the networking layer, which facilitates communication and comprises various network infrastructure
and protocols. Different networks use different protocols to make connections (see Figure 3 for more information)
[45]. Common forms of low-power, short-range communication nowadays include Radio Frequency Identification
(RFID) and Near Field Communication (NFC) (NFC). It supports Bluetooth, Zigbee, and Wireless Fidelity (Wi-Fi)
for low to moderate speeds. Because of the distributed nature of IoT devices, your specialized protocols have been
included in the architecture at all levels. It is possible to adapt protocols to the specific requirements of IoT gadgets.
Attack detection and prevention fall within this layer’s purview. Thus, it’s crucial that any authentication system used
there be both lightweight and efficient to accommodate the restricted resources of IoT devices. To achieve this goal,
researchers need establish an essential means of communication among themselves.

The middleware and application layers are combined into a single layer in the IoT architecture with three levels.
An abstraction is made available to the programmer via the middleware layer. By supplying various services, this
layer also helps promote the interoperability of smart devices. Just a few examples of open source and commercial
middleware services are OpenIoT [41], FiWare [46], Hydra [15]. Applications that use the Internet of Things have
been put to use in several different contexts [35].. Automation of the home, tracking of fitness and health, monitoring of
either, intelligent transportation systems, protection of the environment, intelligent cities, social life and entertainment,
and industrial settings are only some of the applications of the internet of things. Constrained Application Protocol
(CoAP) [7], Message Queuing Telemetry Transport (MQTT) [22], and Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol
(XMPP) [37] are some of the alternative protocols that may be used for the Internet of Things applications on the
application layer. Each protocol has to be expanded in order to maintain its level of security. As a consequence,
researchers could think of working in this manner.

6. Conclusion

The IoT, or Internet of Things, is a widely deployed network that connects everyday objects and services. There
is a trade-off between the convenience and security that intelligent Internet of Things devices provide: increased
vulnerability to attackers. The absence of standards in the Internet of Things allows any device to be connected to
it. As a result, it’s open to attack. In this study, we introduced the protocols and layered architecture of the IoT and
provided an overview of their utilisation (IoT). Each IoT application’s security flaws were detailed. We have also
shown the IoT architecture that is becoming the norm and analysed the security issues at each level ( i.e., perception
layer, network layer, and application layer). The number of devices connected to the Internet (IoT) continues to grow.
Wise yet vulnerable, IoT gadgets make people’s lives easier while also posing risks to their privacy and security. Due
 Dr. Sarika Choudhary et al. / Procedia Computer Science 215 (2022) 274–288 287
14 Dr. Sarika Choudhary / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2023) 000–000

to the lack of standards, the IoT is susceptible to attack since any device may join. This talk provided an introduction
to the protocols and layered architecture of the IoT. Every IoT application we looked at had serious security flaws, and
we pointed them out. Furthermore, we have investigated the vulnerabilities in the IoT’s architecture at every level.

References

[1] Afzal, B., Umair, M., Shah, G.A., Ahmed, E., 2019. Enabling IoT platforms for social IoT applications: vision, feature mapping, and challenges.
Future Generation Computer Systems 92, 718–731.
[2] Anthi, E., Williams, L., Słowińska, M., Theodorakopoulos, G., Burnap, P., 2019. A supervised intrusion detection system for smart home iot
devices. IEEE Internet of Things Journal 6, 9042–9053. doi:10.1109/JIOT.2019.2926365.
[3] Antonakakis, M., April, T., Bailey, M., Bernhard, M., Bursztein, E., Cochran, J., Durumeric, Z., Halderman, J.A., Invernizzi, L., Kallitsis, M.,
et al., 2017. Understanding the mirai botnet, in: 26th {USENIX} security symposium ({USENIX} Security 17), pp. 1093–1110.
[4] Ashton, K., et al., 2009. That ‘internet of things’ thing. RFID journal 22, 97–114.
[5] Baronti, P., Pillai, P., Chook, V.W., Chessa, S., Gotta, A., Hu, Y.F., 2007. Wireless sensor networks: A survey on the state of the art and the
802.15. 4 and zigbee standards. Computer communications 30, 1655–1695.
[6] Bawany, N.Z., Shamsi, J.A., 2019. Seal: Sdn based secure and agile framework for protecting smart city applications from ddos attacks.
Journal of Network and Computer Applications 145, 102381.
[7] Bormann, C., Castellani, A.P., Shelby, Z., 2012. Coap: An application protocol for billions of tiny internet nodes. IEEE Internet Computing
16, 62–67.
[8] Brewer, R., 2016. Ransomware attacks: detection, prevention and cure. Network Security 2016, 5–9.
[9] Choudhary, S., Kesswani, N., 2018. Detection and prevention of routing attacks in internet of things, in: 2018 17th IEEE International
Conference On Trust, Security And Privacy In Computing And Communications/ 12th IEEE International Conference On Big Data Science
And Engineering (TrustCom/BigDataSE), pp. 1537–1540.
[10] Choudhary, S., Kesswani, N., 2019. A Survey: Intrusion Detection Techniques for Internet of Things. International Journal of Information
Security and Privacy (IJISP) 13, 86–105.
[11] Choudhary, S., Kesswani, N., 2019. Cluster-based intrusion detection method for internet of things, in: 2019 IEEE/ACS 16th International
Conference on Computer Systems and Applications (AICCSA), pp. 1–8.
[12] Choudhary, S., Kesswani, N., Majhi, S., 2021a. An ensemble intrusion detection model for internet of things network .
[13] Choudhary, S., Kesswani, N., et al., 2021b. A hybrid classification approach for intrusion detection in iot network. Journal of Scientific and
Industrial Research (JSIR) 80, 809–816.
[14] Coskun, V., Ozdenizci, B., Ok, K., 2013. A survey on near field communication (nfc) technology. Wireless personal communications 71,
2259–2294.
[15] Eisenhauer, M., Rosengren, P., Antolin, P., 2009. A development platform for integrating wireless devices and sensors into ambient intelligence
systems, in: 2009 6th IEEE Annual Communications Society Conference on Sensor, Mesh and Ad Hoc Communications and Networks
Workshops, IEEE. pp. 1–3.
[16] Flashpoint, . Mirao Botnet Linked to Dyn DNS DDoS Attacks. Accessed: April 21, 2020. URL: https://www.flashpoint-intel.com/
blog/cybercrime/mirai-botnet-linked-dyn-dns-ddos-attacks/.
[17] Gope, P., Hwang, T., 2015. Bsn-care: A secure iot-based modern healthcare system using body sensor network. IEEE sensors journal 16,
1368–1376.
[18] Gubbi, J., Buyya, R., Marusic, S., Palaniswami, M., 2013. Internet of things (iot): A vision, architectural elements, and future directions.
Future generation computer systems 29, 1645–1660.
[19] Haseeb, K., Ud Din, I., Almogren, A., Islam, N., 2020. An energy efficient and secure iot-based wsn framework: An application to smart
agriculture. Sensors 20, 2081.
[20] Hassija, V., Chamola, V., Saxena, V., Jain, D., Goyal, P., Sikdar, B., 2019. A survey on IoT security: application areas, security threats, and
solution architectures. IEEE Access 7, 82721–82743.
[21] Hui, J.W., Culler, D.E., 2008. Extending ip to low-power, wireless personal area networks. IEEE Internet Computing 12, 37–45.
[22] Hunkeler, U., Truong, H.L., Stanford-Clark, A., 2008. Mqtt-s—a publish/subscribe protocol for wireless sensor networks, in: 2008 3rd Inter-
national Conference on Communication Systems Software and Middleware and Workshops (COMSWARE’08), IEEE. pp. 791–798.
[23] Jan, M.A., Zhang, W., Usman, M., Tan, Z., Khan, F., Luo, E., 2019. Smartedge: An end-to-end encryption framework for an edge-enabled
smart city application. Journal of Network and Computer Applications 137, 1–10.
[24] Kolias, C., Kambourakis, G., Stavrou, A., Voas, J., 2017. DDoS in the IoT: Mirai and other botnets. Computer 50, 80–84.
[25] Kore, A., Patil, S., 2020. Ic-mads: Iot enabled cross layer man-in-middle attack detection system for smart healthcare application. Wireless
Personal Communications , 1–20.
[26] Liao, C.H., Shuai, H.H., Wang, L.C., 2018. Eavesdropping prevention for heterogeneous Internet of Things systems, in: 2018 15th IEEE
Annual Consumer Communications & Networking Conference (CCNC), IEEE. pp. 1–2.
[27] Lin, J., Shen, Z., Zhang, A., Chai, Y., 2018. Blockchain and iot based food traceability for smart agriculture, in: Proceedings of the 3rd
International Conference on Crowd Science and Engineering, pp. 1–6.
[28] Makhdoom, I., Zhou, I., Abolhasan, M., Lipman, J., Ni, W., 2020. Privysharing: A blockchain-based framework for privacy-preserving and
secure data sharing in smart cities. Computers & Security 88, 101653.
 288 Dr. Sarika Choudhary et al. / Procedia Computer Science 215 (2022) 274–288
Dr. Sarika Choudhary / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2023) 000–000 15

[29] Mashal, I., Alsaryrah, O., Chung, T.Y., Yang, C.Z., Kuo, W.H., Agrawal, D.P., 2015. Choices for interaction with things on Internet and
underlying issues. Ad Hoc Networks 28, 68–90.
[30] Mohanty, S.N., Ramya, K., Rani, S.S., Gupta, D., Shankar, K., Lakshmanaprabu, S., Khanna, A., 2020. An efficient lightweight integrated
blockchain (elib) model for iot security and privacy. Future Generation Computer Systems 102, 1027–1037.
[31] Mohurle, S., Patil, M., 2017. A brief study of wannacry threat: Ransomware attack 2017. International Journal of Advanced Research in
Computer Science 8.
[32] Munir, M.S., Bajwa, I.S., Cheema, S.M., 2019. An intelligent and secure smart watering system using fuzzy logic and blockchain. Computers
& Electrical Engineering 77, 109–119.
[33] Peña-López, I., et al., 2005. ITU Internet report 2005: the internet of things .
[34] Ramapatruni, S., Narayanan, S.N., Mittal, S., Joshi, A., Joshi, K., 2019. Anomaly detection models for smart home security, in: 2019 IEEE 5th
Intl Conference on Big Data Security on Cloud (BigDataSecurity), IEEE Intl Conference on High Performance and Smart Computing,(HPSC)
and IEEE Intl Conference on Intelligent Data and Security (IDS), IEEE. pp. 19–24.
[35] Ranganathan, A., Al-Muhtadi, J., Chetan, S., Campbell, R., Mickunas, M.D., 2004. Middlewhere: a middleware for location awareness in
ubiquitous computing applications, in: ACM/IFIP/USENIX International Conference on Distributed Systems Platforms and Open Distributed
Processing, Springer. pp. 397–416.
[36] Said, O., Masud, M., 2013. Towards internet of things: Survey and future vision. International Journal of Computer Networks 5, 1–17.
[37] Saint-Andre, P., et al., 2004. Extensible messaging and presence protocol (xmpp): Core .
[38] Sharma, P.K., Park, J.H., Jeong, Y.S., Park, J.H., 2019. Shsec: sdn based secure smart home network architecture for internet of things. Mobile
Networks and Applications 24, 913–924.
[39] Shelby, Z., Hartke, K., Bormann, C., 2014. The constrained application protocol (coap) .
[40] Singh, P., Nayyar, A., Kaur, A., Ghosh, U., 2020. Blockchain and fog based architecture for internet of everything in smart cities. Future
Internet 12, 61.
[41] Soldatos, J., Kefalakis, N., Hauswirth, M., Serrano, M., Calbimonte, J.P., Riahi, M., Aberer, K., Jayaraman, P.P., Zaslavsky, A., Žarko, I.P.,
et al., 2015. Openiot: Open source internet-of-things in the cloud, in: Interoperability and open-source solutions for the internet of things.
Springer, pp. 13–25.
[42] Vaishnavi, S., Sethukarasi, T., 2020. Sybilwatch: a novel approach to detect sybil attack in iot based smart health care. Journal of Ambient
Intelligence and Humanized Computing , 1–15.
[43] Wang, X., Cai, S., 2020. Secure healthcare monitoring framework integrating ndn-based iot with edge cloud. Future Generation Computer
Systems .
[44] Weber, R.H., Studer, E., 2016. Cybersecurity in the internet of things: Legal aspects. Computer Law & Security Review 32, 715–728.
[45] Whitmore, A., Agarwal, A., Da Xu, L., 2015. The internet of things—a survey of topics and trends. Information systems frontiers 17, 261–274.
[46] Zahariadis, T., Papadakis, A., Alvarez, F., Gonzalez, J., Lopez, F., Facca, F., Al-Hazmi, Y., 2014. Fiware lab: managing resources and services in
a cloud federation supporting future internet applications, in: 2014 IEEE/ACM 7th International Conference on Utility and Cloud Computing,
IEEE. pp. 792–799.
[47] Zhang, Z., Cho, M.C.Y., Wang, C., Hsu, C., Chen, C., Shieh, S., 2014. Iot security: Ongoing challenges and research opportunities, in: 2014
IEEE 7th International Conference on Service-Oriented Computing and Applications, pp. 230–234.

View publication stats