What is the loT and why is it important?

What is internet of things (IoT)?

The internet of things, or IoT, is a system of interrelated computing devices, mechanical and digital
machines, objects, animals or people that are provided with unique identifiers (UIDs) and the
ability to transfer data over a network without requiring human-to-human or human-to-computer
interaction.

A thing in the internet of things can be a person with a heart monitor implant, a farm animal with a
biochip transponder, an automobile that has built-in sensors to alert the driver when tire pressure
is low or any other natural or man-made object that can be assigned an Internet Protocol (IP)
address and is able to transfer data over a network.

Increasingly, organizations in a variety of industries are using IoT to operate more efficiently, better
understand customers to deliver enhanced customer service, improve decision -making and
increase the value of the business.

How does IoT work?

An IoT ecosystem consists of web-enabled smart devices that use embedded systems, such as
processors, sensors and communication hardware, to collect, send and act on data they acquire
from their environments. IoT devices share the sensor data they collect by connecting to an IoT
gateway or other edge device where data is either sent to the cloud to be analyzed or analyzed
locally. Sometimes, these devices communicate with other related devices and act on the
information they get from one another. The devices do most of the work without human
intervention, although people can interact with the devices -- for instance, to set them up, give them
instructions or access the data.

he connectivity, networking and communication protocols used with these web -enabled devices
largely depend on the specific IoT applications deployed.

IoT can also make use of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine le arning to aid in making data
collecting processes easier and more dynamic.
Why is IoT important?

The internet of things helps people live and work smarter, as well as gain complete control over
their lives. In addition to offering smart devices to automate homes, IoT is essential to business. IoT
provides businesses with a real-time look into how their systems really work, delivering insights
into everything from the performance of machines to supply chain and logistics operations.

IoT enables companies to automate processes and reduce labor costs. It also cuts down on waste
and improves service delivery, making it less expensive to manufacture and deliver goods, as well
as offering transparency into customer transactions.

As such, IoT is one of the most important technologies of everyday life, and it will continue to pick
up steam as more businesses realize the potential of connected devices to keep them competitive.

What are the benefits of IoT to organizations?

The internet of things offers several benefits to organizations. Some benefits are industry -specific,
and some are applicable across multiple industries. Some of the common benefits of IoT enable
businesses to:

• monitor their overall business processes;

• improve the customer experience (CX);
• save time and money;
• enhance employee productivity;
• integrate and adapt business models;
• make better business decisions; and
• generate more revenue.

IoT encourages companies to rethink the ways they approach their businesses and gives them the
tools to improve their business strategies.

Generally, IoT is most abundant in manufacturing, transportation and utility organizations, making
use of sensors and other IoT devices; however, it has also found use cases for organizations within
the agriculture, infrastructure and home automation industries, leading some organizations toward
digital transformation.

IoT can benefit farmers in agriculture by making their job easier. Sensors can collect data on
rainfall, humidity, temperature and soil content, as well as other factors, that would help automate
farming techniques.

The ability to monitor operations surrounding infrastructure is also a factor that IoT can help with.
Sensors, for example, could be used to monitor events or changes within structural buildings,
bridges and other infrastructure. This brings benefits with it, such as cost sa ving, saved time,
quality-of-life workflow changes and paperless workflow.

A home automation business can utilize IoT to monitor and manipulate mechanical and electrical
systems in a building. On a broader scale, smart cities can help citizens reduce waste and energy
consumption.
IoT touches every industry, including businesses within healthcare, finance, retail and
manufacturing.

Pros and cons of IoT

Some of the advantages of IoT include the following:

• ability to access information from anywhere at any time on any device;

• improved communication between connected electronic devices;
• transferring data packets over a connected network saving time and mon ey; and
• automating tasks helping to improve the quality of a business's services and reducing the
need for human intervention.

Some disadvantages of IoT include the following:

• As the number of connected devices increases and more information is shared between
devices, the potential that a hacker could steal confidential information also increases.
• Enterprises may eventually have to deal with massive numbers -- maybe even millions -- of
IoT devices, and collecting and managing the data from all those device s will be challenging.
• If there's a bug in the system, it's likely that every connected device will become corrupted.
• Since there's no international standard of compatibility for IoT, it's difficult for devices from
different manufacturers to communicate with each other.
 IoT Ecosystem
Introduction to IoT Ecosystem

An IoT Ecosystem is a combination of various IoT layers beginning from the user layer to
the connectivity layer. Industry grade IoT ecosystems consist of various architectural
components like hardware components, software, and analytical components conne ctivity
layers, etc. In practice, it is not easy to define the generic architecture of an IoT ecosystem
as it varies from business to business. Here we will try to generalize the components for an
IoT infrastructure based on which an ecosystem is built upo n.

Components of an IoT Ecosystem

In a typical IoT ecosystem, end-user components like smart devices, sensors, third party
components are connected to the compute engines or cloud instances through the internet
or intranet. Let us look at the various modules of it.

1. Sensing and embedding components

We incorporate temperature, gyroscope, pressure, light sensors, GPS, Electrochemical,

Gyroscope, RFID, etc. to acquire data based on a particular use case. For example, for
automotive use cases, we use Light detection sensors along with pressu re, velocity and
imagery sensors. Choosing the right sensing components is a key step for a successful use
case.

2. Connectivity Layer

An important aspect of the IoT environment is connectivity. Without seamless connectivity

between IoT sensors, end devices, and analytics or computing components, we cannot
execute a use case. Let us list down the various modules of connectivity layers

Protocols: IoT applications can be based on both the internet and intranets. For internet
applications TCP/IP, based architecture is generally followed. For Intranet IoT use cases,
devices are connected using LAN, RF, Wi-Fi, and Li-Fi, etc.

Gateway: Gateways are an important component to manage the internet traffic between
IoT devices and connected networks. For any end-to-end IoT use case it is very important
to maintain the security. Level Five Gateways are useful to maintain and monitor the traffic.
It can block the particular IP addresses, protocols, even application layers components.

3. Analytics Layer

In almost every IoT use case, the data is used to derive important business insights and
drive business decisions. We use predictive learning/ deep lear ning-based models on this
huge data to obtain insights. The raw analog signals are preprocessed and converted to a
format on which machine-learning models are developed. We choose a big data
infrastructure based on the use case.
4. Data Management Layer
Industry grade IIoT solutions require acquiring, managing and manipulating large
scale raw and processed data. Generally, cloud-based architectures are used to serve the
purpose based on business needs. Very large-scale organizations, capable of handling la rge
scale data (as huge as petabytes per second) often set up their own data centers to manage
this.

5. Edge IT

Edge IT is the consolidated architecture of software and hardware gateways to preprocess

raw data. Edge IT solutions are used to collect the raw data from sensors, RFID,
electromechanical components and do the necessary transformation before sending it to
the cloud servers. They also come with local storages, which is used as a buffer for the data
pipeline before the transformation.

6. End Components

Smart devices like smartphones, tablets, PDA, etc. serve as the end components of an IoT
ecosystem. These devices are connected to the IoT computational engine through cloud
applications and remote connectivity is established on demand. In some cases, the
computational engine is integrated into third-party UI components, services or served as a
component of the parent ecosystem.

Diagrammatically we can provide a high-level design of the IoT ecosystem as follow

End to End IoT Solution providers

In the era of cheap computation and early increments of IoT, a large number of technology
organizations and startups are involving into the end-to-end IoT solutions.

Let us list down some of the top IoT solution providers and their businesses

VATES: It deals with end-to-end multi-platform, fully integrated IoT applications and
integration.

Augury: It provides mechanical diagnostics IoT solutions

Bastille: It provides IoT based security and surveillance ecosystems

FogHorn: foghorn provides Industry grade Edge IT solutions

Hologram: It offers cloud-based end to end cellular connectivity and device management
solutions

Conclusion

In this article, we have discussed the high-level architecture of an IoT ecosystem and the
global providers of end-to-end IoT ecosystems. In the industry landscape, the definition of
the IoT ecosystem and standards are still an evolving field of study. Based on the target
industry, type of use case, budget the ecosystem differs a lot. One of the main aspects of the
Industrial IoT solution is the balance between expectation and engagement scale.
 Technology Drivers of IoT
Expanded Internet Connectivity

A larger number of connections between devices, machines, and appliances is a crucial

factor in the innovation and growth of IoT. But the sensors that are embedded and
integrated into these devices are what allow companies to find actionable insights hence
finding new opportunities.

3GPP Standards

3GPP developed the standards for the IoT with Release 10. The cost-effective cellular
devices enabling M2M communications are GPRS modem which is getting obsolete. HSPA is
also used for M2M communications but LTE has been optimized to efficiently communicate
small pieces of information, making it well suited for M2M.

From 3GPP Release 10 through 13, it provides options for low-cost GSM and LTE modem to
reduce cost, improve communications range, and extend battery life.

Release 13 is where 3GPP addressed study items for the IoT due to increasing demand
from service providers as the competition got fierce. It led to the creation of LTE-M and NB-
IoT.

In Release 14, 3GPP specified the vehicle communication, such as V2V, V 2I, etc., leveraging
LTE to 5G. Release 14 also provided LTE Highly Reliable Low Latency Communications
(HRLLC) for Critical IoT.

In Release 15, 3GPP includes further IoT enhancements in LTE, like TDD support, higher
spectral efficiency, and wake-up radio for 5G URLLC. 3GPP continued the work through
Release 16 to provide future-proof, secure, and flexible technology for the IoT.

Building on the foundation of the most pervasive mobile wireless technology – LTE – the
new IoT standards are gaining momentum worldwide. NB-IoT and Cat-M1 will continue to
coexist with the introduction of 5G networks. As new enabling IoT technologies are
deployed, the number of connections and the traffic per connection over cellular networks
will drive increasing traffic volumes, as network speeds continue to get faster.

Telenor | Expanded Connectivity

Telenor, the Norwegian telecom, provides IoT connectivity and cloud services to big
corporations, with a large number of devices, such as Volvo, Scania, Hitachi, Verisure
Securitas Direct, and Husqvarna. As per the company, it manages more than 10 million
connected devices in over 200 countries for big enterprises.
Service Providers | IoT Networks

As of November 2020, Service providers have announced the deployment of 149 IoT
networks worldwide 48 using LTE Cat-M 101 using NB-IoT 21 operators with both IoT
LTE-M and NB-IoT standards.

T-Mobile | NB-IoT

On July 19, 2018, with the launch of the Narrowband Internet of Things (NB-IoT) service in
the US, T-Mobile became the first company to provide the service and also the first in the
world to launch NB-IoT in the guard bands for optimal efficiency.

It further announced its new program, T-Mobile CONNECT, to help IoT solution providers
to bring their products and services to T-Mobile’s network.

Built on the 3GPP standard, NB-IoT is a low-power, wide area network (LPWAN) LTE-
Advanced technology that provides a pathway to 5G IoT and offers many comparable
benefits like low power usage, long battery life, and low device cost.

T-Mobile worked with Ericsson, Nokia, and Qualcomm Technologies to deploy nationwide
NB-IoT.

Security Assurance

Where there is data, there is also a need for security and with IoT getting big data, the need
for security assurance is optimum.

As per risk managers, Cyber risk now considers the biggest threat to their businesses, that’s
why Security assurance becomes an essential motivator for companies as well as
consumers.

75% of experts consider cybersecurity to be a top priority, as per a McKinsey survey. New
technologies such as AI, Big Data Analytics, and IoT are helping companies to grow better
by providing decision-making information, but it also opens the doors for new kinds of
cyber risks.

By 2020, almost 50% of all internet connections will be M2M and the number will keep
growing. And of course, billions of chips are shown to be vulnerable to Meltdown and
Specter attacks, weaknesses that must be addressed.

In short, cybersecurity is a big concern, but not a barrier to IoT adoption in most cases.
Companies doing IoT at scale view it as a strategic imperative, and while they may change
policy and invest more in cybersecurity, they are not ratcheting back IoT activities.

Infineon | Security of IoT

With its OPTIGA™ family, Infineon offers easy-to-integrate, scalable, and customizable
turnkey solutions to meet IoT security challenges.
OPTIGA™’s portfolio achieves this by following three key security-critical functions:

Authentication: authenticate people and devices so information is exchanged between

authorized individuals and devices

Encryption: protect sensitive information by encrypting it and securely storing the secret
keys

Integrity: check platform, machine, and device integrity to identify manipulation and
detecting unauthorized changes

Armis | Security of IoT

Armis enables companies to adopt new connected devices without fea r of compromise by a
cyber attack. With a successful track record of innovating its platform and Armis’ unique
quickness to turn concepts into products are well-regarded in the industry.

It is capable of discovering devices on and off the network, analyzing endpoint behavior to
identify risks and attacks, and protects crucial information by identifying suspicious and
malicious devices.

Its Risk Engine can analyze device behavior to identify threats or attacks and protect
essential business information. They’re known for in-depth expertise in asset inventory,
risk management, detection & response, and assisting customers in creating Zero Trust
frameworks to protect all devices relied on.

IPV6

IPv6 is an extension for IoT connectivity. The IPv6 environment is making progress as its
capabilities are increasing and operators are implementing it in their networks too. In the
coming years, a large portion of Internet traffic will likely be generated over IPv6 networks.
That’s why network operators, content providers, and end-users seek to gain the benefits
held by IPv6.

Simple Calculation | IPv6

There are in total 4,294,967,296 IPv4 addresses (32 bits), including reserved addresses.
The total of public IP addresses is a bit lower: 3,706,452,992. We are with 7.8 billion people
on this planet. When everyone has 2 and more devices, we would need 15.6 billion IP
addresses if we want to give every device a unique address. IPv6 is a 128 -bit address, so
doing the math 2*128 gives us a gigantic number of addresses.

Open Source

As 5G will power IoT with its ability to connect billions of sensors by the next decade. This
level of scale could be supported by open-source frameworks and platforms as they
support rapid innovation through several advantageous characteristics.
Typically, free and generally easy to download, install, and launch allowing easy
experimentation with new technologies. It also allows ‘permissionless’ innovation, easing
concerns over Intellectual Property Rights. It also permits innovation by in tegration,
meaning developers create new systems by combining freely available open -source
components. Open-source software tends to promote innovation faster than proprietary
solutions because they draw contributions from a large community of developers.

OCP | Open Source

The Open Compute Project Foundation is a rapidly growing global community whose
mission is to design, use, and enable mainstream delivery of the most efficient designs for
scalable computing. The Open Compute Project Foundation provides a structure in which
individuals and organizations can share their intellectual property with others and
encourage the IT industry to evolve.

Business Drivers of IoT

Cost Reduction

Organizations have already started exploring more options to realize the potential of IoT by
accessing untapped data and using analytics that can help operators make informed
decisions in real-time. With this increased efficiency, opportunities are created to reduce
operational costs.

Revenue Growth

Using data from interconnected systems, a customized offering can be created for end
consumers, leading to a potential revenue boost. Data can be used to improve sales
performance, reduce customer attrition, etc. This eventually leads to revenue growth
opportunities.

Security and Safety

Remote monitoring and control of critical assets support operators in determining trends
and patterns and report any abnormality. With the help of IoT, organizations can realize
their efforts to focus on ensuring a safe working environment and their employees’
wellbeing.

Quality Control

Assessing historical data from sensors or edge devices helps operators manage the
product’s quality. Processing data at each stage has helped organizations control quality
and enabled operators to take corrective actions in real-time (rather than checking quality
after batch production).

Low-Cost Sensors

Sensors are becoming prolific; the larger the scale, the lower the cost. The cost of se nsors,
actuators, transducer systems, and declining hardware costs overall are resulting in a
lower cost of entry for vertical markets, enterprises, consumer devices, and others to the
IoT. And it is not only the lower costs of sensors and similar bits and pieces of the IoT
device that has led to a greater proliferation of connected things. Other areas with an
impact on the cost of deployment for IoT included:

Decrease in the cost per CPU memory and storage makes possible the collection of big data,
and its subsequent analytics

Decreasing the cost of megabytes increases the available investment dollars for large
processing systems

Green IC | Low-Cost Sensors

Researchers from the Green IC research group at the National University of Singapore
(NUS) have invented a low-cost, no-battery wake-up timer in the form of an on-chip circuit
that significantly reduces the power consumption of silicon chips for the Internet of Things
(IoT) sensor nodes. The team’s wake-up timer can achieve slow and infrequent wake-up
using a very small on-chip capacitor (half a picoFarad). This helps to significantly reduce
silicon manufacturing costs due to the small area (40 micrometers on each side) required.
The research was conducted in collaboration with Associate Professor Pao lo Crovetti from
Politecnico di Torino in Italy.

Large IoT Investments

The continued growth of the IoT industry is going to be a transformative force across all
organizations. Industry 4.0 or the Industrial Internet continues to drive the Internet of
Things spending in the next few years. IoT spending will grow at double -digit numbers
until at least 2020.

Corporates are now beginning to adopt IoT solutions at scale, with increasing confidence in
ROI from their technology investments. The ecosystem to support IoT innovators through
start-up and early-stage growth is also improving, with incubators and accelerators on the
up and with government grants becoming available as well as a growing appetite for VC
investment. Finally, we can see that all of these factors are beginning to drive significant
M&A activity in the sector with building valuations and returns at exit.

All of these indicators bode well for IoT and for the innovators, investors, and adopters
who are connecting to make the IoT revolution a reality.

Samsara | IoT Fundraising

Samsara is an IoT platform that combines hardware, software, and the cloud to bring real -
time visibility, analytics, and AI to operations. Samsara has raised a total of $930M in
funding over 7 rounds. Samsara has a post-money valuation in the range of $1B to $10B as
of May 21, 2020, according to PrivCo.
Cisco | Current Portfolio

Cisco Investments has 80 active investments and has committed upwards of $300 million
over the next few years to expand its portfolio. Cisco’s venture capital arm has been
investing actively since 1993. Current areas of focus are what Cisco calls “disruptive ideas
that align with Cisco’s business today,” including cloud, data virtualization, software -as-a-
service, and the “Internet of Everything,” Cisco’s term for the Internet of Things.

Intel Capital | Current Portfolio

In 2013, Intel had over $300 million invested in 146 companies globally. They also
experienced 33 exits that year, including six IPOs in Japan, Taiwan, and the U.S. Since 1991,
Intel Capital has invested $11 billion collectively in more than 1,300 companies, 41 percent
of which have gone public, been acquired, or merged. Intel Capital is currently focusing on
consumer devices, open-source services, and IoT.
 Trends of IoT
Trend No. 1: A wider choice of connectivity.

Organizations will really have to think about what use cases they will pursue and what connectivity
option makes the most sense for them, as 5G won’t be the only option available to them. Satellite
and other low-power networking technologies will increase by 20% in 2021.

Trend No. 2: Healthcare investment

The advent of COVID-19 brought digital and remote health care to the fore. New technologies at the
edge, such as 5G and smarter hardware, will enable richer data-driven health experiences.

Trend No. 3: Smart building technology drive employee transformation.

Smart building technology will center more on core priorities, such as worker health and safety
rather than as energy efficiency and worker productivity.

Trend No. 4: The near ubiquity of connected machines.

Manufacturers, distributors, utilities, and pharma firms began connecting previously disconnected
assets, which will increase reliance on remote experts to address repairs without protracted
downtime and expensive travel. Field service firms and industrial OEMs will have to keep up with
customer demand for more connected assets and machines.

Trend No. 5: Consumer and employee location data have become core to convenience.

Brands must utilize location to generate convenience for consumers or employees with virtual
queues, curbside pickup, and checking in for reservations. They will depend on technology partners
to help use location data, as well as a third-party source of location trusted and controlled by
consumers.

Trend No. 6: IoT adoption is paving the way for smart cities.

We can expect a huge surge of resources deployed for Smart Cities in order to tackle the challenges
of a changing society. IoT technology will allow authorities and businesses to understand patterns
of usage to more efficiently planned safety measures, and emergency response strategies.

Trend No. 7: Big Data, Data Analytics and Machine Learning

IoT partnered with AI and ML technologies will help processing vast amounts of data more quickly,
synthesizing it to make smart and informed recommendations and decisions. Cloud platforms will
help reducing the time needed for design, installation, commissioning, inspection, maintenance, and
reporting of systems.

Trend No. 8: IoT and Edge Computing

With the confluence of 5G networks, an increase in IoT and IIoT devices, and a dramatic increase in
the amount of data we are collecting, Edge computing is expected to boom. It allows for very large
savings in bandwidth usage, therefore reducing energy consumption, cost, an d carbon footprint. It
also offers advantages to privacy and data stewardship and thus, can prove to be a key player in
privacy maintenance and help IoT to progress according to the needs of society.
Trend No. 9: Focus on security

The IoT tech market will see a renewed focus on security as complex safety challenges crop up.
Highlighting the security measures, they have in place will help End-to-end IoT solution vendors
improve shellability.

Trend No. 10: Small tech contributor groups will lead to IoT innovation.

Small groups of tech contributors will foster IoT innovations in the long -run. Technicians,
developers, and other like-minded individuals will put more value on technology. IoT platform
development will be a major focus.

Implications of IoT
The Internet of Things (IoT) is a remarkable concept: In one way it is still very theoretical and, in
another way, it is already a network that is used every single day. The physical world is being re-
invented and the Internet of Things is changing the world, as we currently know it, by encouraging
and supporting new opportunities that we almost cannot imagine. This means that the objects that
are connected to each other through the Internet are sending alerts to our phones, and thereby
becoming specialized, personalized and intelligent, while adapting to our unique needs and
demands. But we are still in the very beginning of this journey. Read further to discover five ways
IoT impact our everyday lives – or very soon will impact almost everything we do.

Health care

Especially within the health and hospital industry IoT will develop in to solutions where wearable
technologies can help reduce cost and improve security and quality in patient care. Based on data -
capturing sensors and RFID chips, IoT solutions will enable advanced control of hospital resources,
process optimization in patient care and smart asset management. Also outside the hospital, IoT in
health care will increase significantly. For example, when a prescription is running low, an
appointment will be made with your physician through automatic notification. In this way, doctors
will also be kept informed with when and how often their patients are taking their medicine.
Additionally, with the help of IoT, patients with ongoing health issues will be able to have things
such as their sugar levels and blood pressure monitored remotely.

Driving and traffic

The IoT is set to fundamentally change the way we drive, meaning driving will get a lot safer and
less stressful. Traffic lights will be able to adjust to real-time traffic conditions such as when an
ambulance or another emergency vehicle is approaching. Furthermore, sensors in the road will be
able to make changes to the speed limit based on weather conditions and previous accidents while
communicating directly to the car dashboard about unsafe conditions. Other car sensors can
monitor engine performance, find parking places, diagnose problems and even call for help in case
of an emergency. Smart cars will become more and more connected, meaning that we soon will see
driverless cars that will change the daily commute forever.
Groceries

Today, you can get smart refrigerators with build-in cameras, so you can check its content while
you are out shopping. In the future, we will see smart refrigerators that will sense when you are
running low on groceries such as milk, eggs or butter and automatically send a grocery list to your
smartphone. Stores can then push reminders to add groceries and other items when it predicts that
you are about to run out – based on previous purchasing behavior and average buying trends.
When you are walking through the grocery store, reminders will be pushed to your phone to make
sure you never have to make that annoying second trip back to the store.

Energy consumption

Anything that can help us reduce strain on the environment has to be embraced. High-energy
consumption household appliances will adjust based on dynamic price signals to lower your
electric bill. The lighting and thermostats in your house will be able to learn your personal habits in
order to create the optimal setting – based on your daily lifestyle. For example, making sure your
house is the ideal temperature before you return home. Additionally, these smart devices will also
sense when no one is home and thereby turn off appliances automatically to reduce costs and
wastes.

Wearable technology

Wearable technologies have probably gotten the most attention in the Internet of Things discussion
to date. Many wearable products are today in their second or third generation, offerin g better
designs and more integrations with other different types of systems. From monitoring sleeping
patterns and hearing aids, to tracking activity and progress during workouts, the devices we wear
are becoming a lot more sophisticated. They can connect to our social media accounts and track
data that can be used to analyze various behaviors and help us improve our lives.
Overview of IoT Governance, Privacy
and Security Issues

IERC - EUROPEAN RESEARCH CLUSTER ON THE INTERNET OF THINGS

Related work
Governance, security and privacy are probably the most challenging issues in
the Internet of Things and they have been extensively discussed in many
papers. In this section we will try to summarize the capital points of these
three aspects of the IoT according to the main contributions proposed in
literature. The concepts of IoT Governance, Security and Privacy are also not
fully defined and various definitions have been proposed by different
government industry and research organizations.

Within the EU, ‘Governance’ refers to the rules, processes and behaviour that
affect the way in which powers are exercised, particularly as regards openness,
participation, accountability, effectiveness and coherence. These five
"principles of good governance" reinforce those of subsidiarity and
proportionality. The concept of Governance have been already applied to the
Internet for specific aspects and there are already organizations like IETF,
ICANN, RIRs, ISOC, IEEE, IGF, W3C, which are each responsible and dealing
with a specific area.

While these organizations work on Internet governance, a logical step is to

extend these concepts to IoT governance. The difficulty is that the high
number and heterogeneity of technologies and devices in the IoT require even
more specific Governance solutions and approaches that are more complex.

Size and heterogeneity in fact, are the two main components that affect the
governance of IoT: in [1], governance is considered as a double-edged sword,
because it can offer stability and support for decisions but it can also become
excessive and result in an over-controlled environment. The conclusions of
[2], underline the difficulty to find a common definition of IoT governance
together with the different positions of many stakeholders: it seems to be
premature to start a policy development and there is no agreement on finding
special rules for IoT governance issues which are separated from other general
rules. Nevertheless, since there are no legal frameworks for IoT governance
[3], even if the differences between the IoT and the Internet have been
overestimated at the beginning, an analysis of the major IoT governance issues
(legitimacy, transparency, accountability, anti-competitive behaviour) seems
to be worthwhile to conduct. Apart from policy or ethical aspects that
influence governance itself the activities conducted in this cluster provide
technical solutions that can be implemented now.

Heterogeneity requires security to overcome the impossibility of implementing

efficient protocols and algorithms on all the devices involved across the many
IoT application areas. Without guarantees in security, stakeholders are
unlikely to adopt IoT solutions on a large scale [4] [5]. For this reason, the
development of enforcement techniques to support scalability and
heterogeneity, to anonymize users’ data and to allow context aware data
protection are key factors.
••• 13 / 128
In the IoT context, it is difficult to separate the concepts of Governance,
Security and Privacy, because addressing privacy and security aspects to
IERC
achieve trust in IoT would probably need governance mechanisms as well. As
pointed out before, at the higher level of the interaction of IoT with users,
ethical aspects cannot be disjointed from the governance, security and privacy
aspects as well. In this position paper, we adopt the definitions of security and

IERC - EUROPEAN RESEARCH CLUSTER ON THE INTERNET OF THINGS

privacy already presented in [6] where privacy, data protection and
information security are complementary requirements for IoT services. In
particular information security has the objective to preserve the
confidentiality, integrity and availability (CIA) of information.

In Europe, regarding privacy aspects, some initial work has already been
performed in reference to Regulation 611/2013, Article 4 (3) in respect of
creating an indicative list of appropriate technological protection measures.
One major source of this preliminary work has been the reports on
recommended cryptographic measures to secure persona data released by
ENISA (i.e., [7], [8]).

At international level, in October 2014, at the International Conference of Data

Protection and Privacy Commissioners in Mauritius, representatives of the
private sector and academia joined together to discuss the changes or risks
that the internet of things and big data may bring to daily life. The
observations and conclusions of the discussions regarding IoT are available in
Declaration on the Internet of Things 2 and a Resolution on Big Data 3. The
document is not, of course, binding. But, the fact that the Declaration and
Resolution drew the consensus of a large gathering of international data
protection regulators renders them relevant indicators of direction of data
privacy policies and trends.

The Mauritius Declaration on the Internet of Things and the Resolution on Big
Data set out principles and recommendations designed to reduce the risks
associated with the collection and use of data for players in the connected
devices and big data ecosystems. The Declaration and Resolution both begin
by acknowledging that connected devices and big data have the capacity to
make our lives easier, including by providing benefits such as predicting the
spread of epidemics and combatting pollution. But, the documents also
acknowledge that the internet of things and big data raise “important concerns
with regard to the privacy of the individuals and civil rights, protections
against discriminatory outcomes and infringements of the right to equal
treatment.”.

The concerns discussed at the Mauritius Conference echo those of the USA
White House’s May 2014 Big Data Report [9], which similarly focused on the
potential use of big data to discriminate against certain groups. Among other
things, the Report cautioned that increased personalization allows for
“discrimination in pricing, services, and opportunities,” that “serving up
different kinds of information to different groups, ha[s] the potential to cause
real harm to individuals,” and that categorization “effectively prevent[s]
[people] from encountering information that challenges their biases or
assumptions,” thereby cementing and potentially exacerbating existing
ideological or cultural segregation.

2
http://www.privacyconference2014.org/media/16421/Mauritius-Declaration.pdf
3 ••• 14 / 128
http://www.privacyconference2014.org/media/16427/Resolution-Big-Data.pdf

IERC
In addition, according to [10], the proliferation of wireless devices with
ubiquitous presence is expected to worsen the issue of privacy due to the
current design of the link-layer and lower layer protocols, which usually

IERC - EUROPEAN RESEARCH CLUSTER ON THE INTERNET OF THINGS

expose information like implicit names and identifiers that can reveal users
identity. As a consequence, these layers should be redesigned in order to
minimize the collection of such data, conceal important information from the
un-trusted parties and, to reveal proper information to the authorized or
trusted parties. The management of heterogeneous devices, applications and
protocols can be also addressed using the principles of service-oriented
computing [11], like loose coupling and heterogeneity, achieving a significant
flexibility in different levels of the IoT architecture.

Another important issue, pointed out in [1], is the implementation of IoT in a

distributed way: the authors provide a detailed analysis of each aspect that
show, in general, the higher level of complexity introduced by the distributed
approach in the deployment of governance, security and privacy solutions.
However, they also show some benefits achieved using the distributed
approach, especially in terms of scalability and flexibility of governance and
privacy. Also traditional access controls methods based on Role Based Access
Control (RBAC) and Attribute Based Access Control (ABAC) frameworks show
their scalability problems in distributed environments [12] like the ones
present in IoT; the adoption of access control systems based on capability can
allow users to manage their access to the resources and even delegate their
own rights.

Regarding scalability, another significant challenge is to provide reliable

solutions, which are scalable for the billions of objects (‘things’) linked to
many different local, regional or global networks. Additionally, lots of them
are nomadic or mobile objects and finding the location of and verifying the
correct identity of a specific item will be a major problem for the IoT
infrastructure [1][4].

This is just a sample of the IoT challenges for Governance, Security and
Privacy identified in literature. The next section describes the challenges
identified by the partners of the AC05 cluster projects.

Identification of challenges for Governance Security and

Privacy in IoT
The objective of this section is to identify the main challenges for the
Governance, Security and Privacy in IoT identified by the AC05 cluster
projects and during discussions in IERC. Ethical aspects are also considered. A
more extensive discussion on ethical aspects in IoT is presented in section
Ethics and Internet of Things and some challenges are derived from the
analysis in that section.

Context based security and privacy

••• 15 / 128
This section describes the challenge of designing a security and privacy
framework, which is able to address changes in the context (e.g., emergency
IERC
crisis) or context which do not support the collection and processing of data
from sensors. For example, in a surveillance scenario, bad quality images may
induce false results of the “smart” functions implemented in IoT framework
and hamper the overall decision process in the algorithms used to ensure the

IERC - EUROPEAN RESEARCH CLUSTER ON THE INTERNET OF THINGS

security and trust of the system (e.g., level of reputation).

The security and privacy framework has to provide features to dynamically

adapt access rules and information granularity to the context (e.g., embedding
Conditions in access rules or access capability tokens evaluated at access time,
see [12]). IoT envisages an enhanced relevance of the context awareness [13]
higher needs to support the orchestration and integration of different services,
as, for example, envisaged by the DiY (Do it Yourself) sociocultural practice
[14] and scalability, manageability and usability [15].

An additional problem is that the automatics of security and privacy

technologies defined for a specific context may behave in an incorrect way in a
different (or unplanned) context with the consequence of generating
vulnerabilities.

Cyber-Physical systems and IoT

In recent years, the development and deployment of systems and technologies

that present a tight coupling between computing devices and the physical
environment has grown considerably. Some examples are sensors for
monitoring the health of the persons or to increase safety or ergonomics in
workplaces, smart grids for energy distribution and intelligent transport
systems, which have been also addressed in the iCore project in the use cases
described in this deliverable. In many cases, these systems provide services
that impact the safety of the citizens. In many case, these systems or services
are not reliable 4 (e.g., susceptible to a security attack) the safety of the persons
can be put at risk. One example in the Smart Transportation scenario is
related to Intelligent Transport Systems where a security attack on the
automatic car system for driving can produce car accidents and consequent
casualties or harm to citizens. In another scenario an automatic system to
provide medicine to a patient can become compromised and deliver the wrong
medicine to a patient. In all these systems, the physical environment provides
information necessary for achieving many of the important functionalities of
the ICT systems through sensors. In turn, systems that use the information
from the physical environment can affect the physical environment and the
persons living in this environment through actuators. These systems are also
called cyber–physical systems (CPSs).

Another aspect to be addressed in the evolution of IoT regarding critical

services is related to the pervasiveness of digital devices [16] [17], which have
increasingly processing power and re-configurability and therefore they are
vulnerable to similar malware of traditional computers. The main issue is that
these devices are more and more embedded in our everyday life but they may

4
Reliability: Comprised of multiple risk factors of which security attack is only one. Others include:
Failure modes incorporating for example device or system design oversights Diminished access, speed, ••• 16 / 128
interoperability etc. due to indirect external factors.

IERC
not have the computing capacity to implement sophisticated security
protection solutions like Trusted Computing, or Cryptography. As pointed out
in [16] and [17], this context presents challenges of scalability (billions of
devices to protect), harmonization and homogeneity (different protocols and

IERC - EUROPEAN RESEARCH CLUSTER ON THE INTERNET OF THINGS

technologies).

Identification in a distributed environment

Identification is closely tied to IoT governance, security and privacy. Different

forms of identification are key components of multiple layers of IoT, from
those embedded in the end device through to those enabling message routing
and discovery. Each form of identification (numbering, addressing and
naming) has a set of influencing factors which create divergence and it is
important to appreciate that these differences are often necessary and
sometimes advantageous. As IoT exploits established elements and
applications there is a legacy environment which cannot be ignored and which
must be addressed in some part or its totality. There are various ways to
achieve this but each has ultimately an impact upon IoT’s scope of appeal.
Distributed environments are challenging, even those which are closed,
bounded by similar functional and interoperable technologies and supported
by a clear governance structure. IoT faces a greater test due to: a) the breadth
of legacy applications, b) the variety of technologies and their associated
characteristics, c) the multitude of established governance structures, d) a
wide variety of edge and near-edge domain functionalities and e) opaque
stakeholder value propositions.

Much consideration is provided to edge device identification as a means to

foster future IoT interoperability. There are a number of established
identification hierarchies which provide interoperability and most of these
ignore embedded identifiers (often referred to as ‘numbering’), with a
preference for user assigned identifiers i.e. ‘naming’. The importance of
addressing as an identifier should not be overlooked nor, confused with
numbering and naming. There are also potential future opportunities
considering the increasing performance of algorithms which are able to derive
value from unstructured data.

The number of devices (real and virtual) potentially involved within IoT is
somewhat misleading. WWRF’s estimation is for 7 trillion of devices serving 7
billion of people until 2017 [18].

These estimates may be related to active devices but it may ignore those that
are dormant, retired and all those identifier provisions for future devices.
There are many ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ factors which determine the required
characteristics of an identifier structure, including governance, security and
privacy. What is clear today is that the majority of arguments presented
reference legacy which encompasses a broad diversity of objectives with only
some overlap. There are few propositions which focus upon the future of IoT.
Many of the existing naming, numbering and addressing schemes have been
created to address specific objectives at one point in time and therefore there
is no one universal answer to identification which can provide for all of IoT’s
requirements without limiting IoT’s scope or diminishing IoT’s applicability. ••• 17 / 128

IERC
The success of IoT, the ultimate goal requires a clear reference supported by a
number of established governance bodies and key stakeholders in the absence
of a central coordinating authority. Until these criteria are defined sufficiently
discussions over identification schemes and governance models are likely to be

IERC - EUROPEAN RESEARCH CLUSTER ON THE INTERNET OF THINGS

drawn-out, subjective, risky and potentially inconclusive.

Device authentication

Most systems which bind IoT sensors and actuators rely on some proxy
concept, i.e. sensors communicate to some more powerful entity (e.g, from the
processing and storage point of view) which then authenticates the sensors on
their behalf. However, the last mile effectively remains unprotected which is a
barrier to guaranteeing important security properties such as non-repudiation.
‘Lightweight’ solutions are still an open issue for many devices. The long
history of research in sensor networks domain has not produced secure and
low-cost solutions feasible for most devices. Thus, new types of security
primitives or mechanisms which do not only focus on the higher layers in
communication protocols would be worthwhile to investigate.

Data Correlation and Information Retrieval

The Internet of Things generates data in various contexts. Combining this data
may support new types of security mechanisms which allow for the
enforcement of more complex security policies. However, the ability to access
this large variety of data also allows the generatation of more complex and
detailed user profiles. Currently, it is unclear whether the security mechanisms
based on this data variety outweigh their privacy risks or whether there are
security mechanisms which mitigate the disadvantages.

Anonymization of users’ data in a distributed and mobile

environment

There are two main challenges for anonymization in IoT. One is related to the
difficulty to anonymize the data during data collection processes (e.g., from
sensors) because this would require additional technology (with increased
device cost). Another is the risk of (re-)identification of the individual from the
aggregation of anonymized data (see [19]).

This challenge is also related to the current debate on storing users data on
remote platforms in the Internet where the provider of the platforms (e.g.,
Cloud provider) is mostly considered trusted. There are existing solutions
which could be applied to this domain, such as multi-party computation or
homomorphic functions [20] but their feasibility is unclear.

Anonymization of protocol metadata in a distributed and

mobile environment

Considering aforementioned user data as the input to communication ••• 18 / 128

protocols, the data produced by the communication protocol and thus
observable by communicating parties and outsiders must be minimized as
IERC
well. This is usually termed “unobservability of communication”. Of course as
long as anonymization of user data itself is not offering protection from ‘prying
eyes’, this element is not critical. However hoping that encryption and
anonymization of user data will be guaranteed, the communication meta-data

IERC - EUROPEAN RESEARCH CLUSTER ON THE INTERNET OF THINGS

becomes the next issue. Solving this would mean things like replacing long-
term hardware identifiers with software generated ones, like the T-IMSI in
UMTS was introduced to minimize tracking (see [21]).

Scalability for the billions of devices in IoT

The IoT has to master not only a wider heterogeneity of connected systems,
communication technologies and resource constraints, but has also to face
challenges related to the potential unbounded number of interacting entities
and substantial differences in the interaction patterns [22][23].
Role Based Access Control (RBAC) and Attribute Based Access Control
(ABAC) systems, as well as PKIs, are not yet able to fully address these
challenges providing scalable, manageable, effective, and efficient access
control mechanisms.
Additionally, RBAC, ABAC and ACL systems make hard to enforce the least
privilege principle [24] [25].
IoT therefore would benefit from additional solutions, such as capabilities-
based access control mechanisms, able to address the above challenges (see
[12]).

Secure Setup and Configuration

Solving the challenge of scalability is closely related, but not equal, to having a
secure setup and configuration method for the IoT. Self-X IoT properties
present a potential attack surface to the Hardware Objects and the
applications depending on them. Therefore securing the IoT requires a
security architecture with the appropriate mechanisms. These typically require
cryptographic credentials that can be symmetric and/or asymmetric,
depending on the scenario and the requirements. The bootstrapping process to
install them efficiently presents a significant challenge, especially for the large
number of devices in an IoT deployment.

Physical availability of devices

The Internet of Things paradigm auspicates the availability of small-sized

connected sensor/actuator devices to be embedded pervasively in the
environment. By definition, these devices will thus be physically available to
malicious users who could use them in different ways in order to compromise
the integrity or reliability of an IoT system. The number of devices itself and
their reduced capabilities make it very difficult to detect tampering and to
check that they are actually operating properly.

This challenge is related to the difficulty of knowing with certainty if the device
operates in the right context (for example it was not moved or the
environmental conditions were not altered locally), if it was subject to
firmware replacement, impersonated and so on. ••• 19 / 128

IERC
Critical infrastructures and IoT
In this section, we describe the security and privacy aspects related to the use
of IoT in Critical infrastructures (energy, telecom, utilities) and how the
evolution of IoT may impact the deployment and management of critical

IERC - EUROPEAN RESEARCH CLUSTER ON THE INTERNET OF THINGS

infrastructures.

This challenge is related to the relationship between IoT and Critical

Infrastructure (CI). IoT devices and technologies may be increasingly used in
critical infrastructure like Telecom, Utilities, Energy and so on. An example of
the deployment of IoT concepts to the industrial world (and therefore critical
infrastructures) is the Machine to Machine (M2M) standardization activity.
The challenge is to assess the new risks related to the deployment of IoT
technologies and devices in the critical infrastructures and the transfer of IoT
vulnerabilities for security and privacy to critical infrastructures. In the case,
of CI, the IoT vulnerabilities may be more critical because they can impact the
safety (e.g., industrial accidents) or the provision of essential services to the
community (e.g., electrical power to hospitals). In some cases, the deployment
of new technologies and devices in the home of the citizen or in the proximity
may lead to new security or privacy issues (e.g., smart-meters). On the other
side of coin, some of the IoT vulnerabilities may not be directly applicable to
Critical Infrastructures or they may be mostly due to deployment issues. This
means that protection and mitigation techniques for security and privacy are
well known but lack of funding, non-conformance to best practices or human
errors in deployment may not see the enforcement of these solutions. Even if
some solutions to protect sensor nodes and pervasive devices in critical
environments have been proposed [26] and could be extended and adapted to
IoT needs, this latter aspect will not be addressed in this position paper.

Conflicting market interest

One of the appealing features of IoT from a business point of view is the
possibility to collect and correlate data from different sources to increase the
market competitiveness of the market producers. The idea is to correlate
different sets of data to increase the efficiency of the product advertisements
to the customer and to better satisfy his/her needs. This correlation and
aggregation of the data can create a tension with the approaches or
techniques, which have the objective to protect the data of a person (e.g.,
privacy). As described in [1] and [27], this tension could also be the reason for
the low deployment of privacy enabling technologies, which is one of the main
challenges this paper tries to address.

Considering IoT in an evolving Internet

While IoT cannot expect today to influence the Internet’s evolution it is surely
affected itself by the evolution of the Internet. There are two principal aspects
of evolution to be considered: how the Internet is used and, elements of the
configuration of the technical platform. Undoubtedly, media attention upon
surveillance means that data security and privacy is playing a role in shaping
both use and the configuration of the Internet. Initiatives to embed ‘Dark’
Internet style security (e.g. Tor) and privacy protection as a default through
standardization will create challenges for ‘Big Data’, law enforcement (e.g. LI), ••• 20 / 128
surveillance, etc. If such an Internet environment becomes the defacto
‘trusted’ Internet would it be socially acceptable for IoT to remain outside?
IERC
Can such an evolution indeed benefit IoT security and privacy? What are the
implications for IoT governance?

Delegation of human autonomy in IoT

IERC - EUROPEAN RESEARCH CLUSTER ON THE INTERNET OF THINGS

IoT opens towards futures of seamless hybridized interactions between human
beings, their extended ICT-mediated capabilities, and smart and dynamic
objects displaying emerging unplanned behaviours. Agents and actors join
towards unintended, unforeseen and unexpected outcomes. In this context,
“artefacts” like wearable sensors, connected medical devices and other
implantable devices are incorporated by users, becoming extensions of the
human body or mind enhancing the interface between humans and the
environment; in this type of relations the artefacts may not be strongly
perceived by users. Voluntarily or not, the user may need to rely on models
and technology to achieve the chores that technology is meant to help her/him
with. Hence, the strong mediation inherent to IoT developments, will lead
eventually to shifting or delegation of human autonomy and agency to the
objects of the IoT with potential risk to the privacy or even security of the
users. If noticed, artefacts will act on the user’s behalf; if not noticed artefacts
will act on their developers’ worldviews, intentionality and interests. This
strong mediation poses challenges to human agency. This challenge is similar
to Cyber-Physical systems and IoT which is more focused on safety aspects.

Human IoT Trust relationship

Linked to the previous challenge Delegation of human autonomy in IoT, there

is also the concept of evaluation of the level of trust a human has in IoT
systems, services or devices. In information and communication technology
(ICT) trust has been considered as a crucial component of digital interactions,
and has been dissected in a variety of potential meanings and dimensions and,
through the merging of trust in humans and trust in machines. Trust and
confidence have different shades of meanings. However, Trust can also be
defined as the level of confidence, which an entity can ensure to another entity
or entities for specific services and in given context [28]. Even if trust has been
often used with reference to human beings, trust can also be associated to a
machine or digital system (e.g., web site), which points out at the importance
of analyzing and measuring the level of trust in a digital society.

Here we have to make a distinction between trust and trustworthiness and

how these two terms are adopted in the IoT domain. Usually, trust is the belief
of a user that the system is functioning normally and will deliver what it has
promised and what the user requires. Contrary to trust (that is mostly
subjective to each user’s belief), trustworthiness is mostly objective and can be
considered as a metric of how much a system deserves the trust of its users.
Trustworthiness can be defined according to some criteria, i.e. by evidence of
current and past behaviour, by the system availability, if it provides accurate
and reliable information, if it avoids information leaks, etc. Furthermore, in
cases of M2M communications in an IoT domain, the devices that are
exchanging information with each other have to know which devices are
trustworthy so that sensitive information is only sent to those devices. Thus,
••• 21 / 128
trust can be considered not only as a metric of how much a user trusts a
system, but also how much a device trusts another device and how much a
IERC
device trusts the user that has requested sensitive data from that device. As a
result, trust in the IoT domain is included in three layers: (i) from users to
devices, (ii) between devices and (iii) from devices to users.

IERC - EUROPEAN RESEARCH CLUSTER ON THE INTERNET OF THINGS

In ICT, knowledge production has entered the debate as a possible path to
trust as a vehicle for valued and respected relationships. Collaboration in
knowledge processes has been at the core of the most traditional scientific
community ethics, namely the so-called “ethos” of science. Today, knowledge
co-production can contribute to trusted ICT digital interactions [29], [30].
European citizens’ values and fundamental rights provide a specific
framework that needs to be explored, together with its opportunities and
challenges.

Risks of isolation and confinement

On the one hand, ICT technologies can play a great role to minimize the risk of
isolation not only by facilitating social contact but also increasing citizen’s
access to work. Mobility and security solutions support people’s participation
in community, and leisure and social activities. Telehealth and other
communication and online services enable a lifestyle where one does not need
to leave their home to satisfy their needs, hence reducing the opportunity for
human contact and potentially contributing to a voluntary confinement. In the
closer future, the use of companion robots in isolated and sparsely populated
areas can also help to alleviate some of the social isolation effects.
To ensure that these benefits are realized it is necessary to consider potential
risks and negative impacts arising from the application of these technologies,
because an inadequate use of them may lead to further social isolation and
confinement when not meeting certain requirements.
It is not a real fact already proven but an envisioned concern that should not
be skipped out. Some people may be already isolated, and embracing ICT
technology may not be so much harmful; even the contrary. But the risk of
social isolation exists for all of us, at least at a certain extent. The level of
human contact needs to be addressed not only at the design stage of
technology and services associated with it, but even more importantly so, in its
implementation.
The role of human contact cannot be underestimated both in terms of
emotional impact on the person and ‘physical’ link to the community, to the
world, strongly needed in elders. Tele health and tele care technologies are the
main affected. The Social Care Institute for Excellence (European
Commission, 2006) recommends that tele care must not be seen as an
alternative to direct social care or informal support, but rather a way to meet
low-level needs. One danger relates to people becoming over-dependent on
health monitoring devices at home giving them a feeling of safety, which may
lead to a reluctance to go out and leave the safety of their home behind.
Besides, a growing culture of fear to leave one’s home due to perceived
dangers in society may be further encouraged.
In order to make positive impact on people’s lives the technology and its
application need to be trusted, accepted, wanted, accessible and usable. IoT
must be prepared to avoid,

• the citizen failing to use the services (there are many potential causes
for it, technology-related but also user-related) ••• 22 / 128
• the citizen substituting completely face-to-face services (or moving
significantly to virtual environments and unreal worlds),
IERC
 • the citizen misunderstanding technology, especially its usefulness and
impact on the main user, and
• the citizen mistrusting in the technology-based systems and services.

IERC - EUROPEAN RESEARCH CLUSTER ON THE INTERNET OF THINGS

Gaining trust, acceptance, willingness and good understanding of accessibility
and usability of such technology is very important for all the ICT users
involved. Ultimately, ICT needs to be seen as a tool that connects people,
provides alternatives or supports existing relations and not a technology that
replaces personal relations. Therefore, any policy promoting the use of ICT for
ageing should be underlined by this principle

Ethics and Internet of Things

Ethics and science & technology
Ethical inquiry, broadly understood, has always dealt with identifying the right
guidance for human actions towards other and themselves [31]; therefore
ethics has been concerned with the criteria to find out what is right and wrong,
good and bad. In general, while pre-modern moral (and legal) philosophies
have mostly found and founded these criteria in an objective natural order of
things to which human beings (or even non-human beings and all entities) had
to conform [32] the main (and still widely applied) modern philosophical
systems have rooted ethical judgment in the human abilities related to rational
reasoning and self-reflection. Some major modern philosophical systems
(such as, though in different ways, the Kantian and the Benthamite) have
directly justified the connection amongst rational, moral, and civic life by
constructing humans as rational subjects, as moral subjects, and as members
of a(n explicitly or implicitly assumed) “social contract”, namely as entitled to
interests and/or rights in a social life. Concepts flowing from these approaches
such as human autonomy and dignity, or respect for human well-being are
essential elements of contemporary democratic societies, and lie at the core of
some fundamental human rights.

Common to these traditions is the assumption that human beings can access
the knowledge necessary to augment their ability to make their judgments
about good and bad course of actions in an autonomous way (namely free
from all authorities, mundane or divine).

Even though several philosophical traditions have argued for other

foundations of morality e.g. based on religious or ontological discourses, or on
the non-rational but emotional character of morality, the term ethics (and
ethics as an academic discipline), as different from morality, has been mostly
characterized as the “rational inquiry” about values and reasons underlying
human actions. This is especially true when the ethical discourse concerns
science and technology as knowledge-based endeavours and their social
developments.

In fact, the emergence of ethics as a public (and a publicly relevant) discourse

and as a form of normativity at the interface between the private and the social
dimension started at the end of World War II, when the failures of the
scientific community’s ethos in respecting individuals in research became ••• 23 / 128
tragically evident. Ethics has played an important role in dealing with
IERC
 Unit -2

Machine to Machine (M2M):

The process of exchanging information or messages between two or more machines or

devices is known as Machine to Machine (M2M) communication.
It is the communication among the physical things which do not need human intervention.
M2M communication is also named as Machine Type communication in 3GPP(3rd
Generation Partnership Project).

In this the interaction or communication takes place between machines by automating

data/programs.

In this machine level instructions are required for communication. Here communication
takes place without human interaction.

The machines may be either connected through wires or by wireless connection.

An M2M connection is a point-to-point connection between two network devices that helps
in transmitting information using public networking technologies like Ethernet and cellular
networks.

M2M communication

How M2M works

The main purpose of machine-to-machine technology is to tap into sensor data and transmit it
to a network.

Unlike SCADA or other remote monitoring tools, M2M systems often use public networks
and access methods .

For example, cellular or Ethernet -- to make it more cost-effective.

The main components of an M2M system include sensors, RFID, a Wi-Fi or cellular
communications link.

M2M applications

Smart home systems have also incorporated M2M technology. The use of M2M in
this embedded system enables home appliances and other technologies to have real time
control of operations as well as the ability to remotely communicate.

M2M is also an important aspect of remote-control software, robotics, traffic control,

security, logistics and fleet management and automotive.

Key features of M2M

Key features of M2M technology include:

 Low power consumption, in an effort to improve the system's ability to effectively

service M2M applications.

 A Network operator that provides packet-switched service

 Monitoring abilities that provide functionality to detect events.

 Time tolerance, meaning data transfers can be delayed.
Advantages

 This M2M can operate over cellular networks and is simple to manage.
 It can be used both indoors and outdoors and aids in the communication of smart
objects without the need for human interaction.
 The M2M contact facility is used to address security and privacy problems in IoT
networks.
 Large-scale data collection, processing, and security are all feasible.

Disadvantages

 However, in M2M, use of cloud computing restricts versatility and creativity.

 Data security and ownership are major concerns here.
 The challenge of achieving interoperability between cloud/M2M IoT systems is
daunting. M2M connectivity necessitates the existence of a reliable internet
connection.
Examples:

 Smart Washing machine sends alerts to the owners’ smart devices after completion of
washing or drying of clothes.
 Smart meters tracks amount of energy used in household or in companies and
automatically alert the owner.

Wireless Sensor Network (WSN):

Wireless Sensor Network (WSN) is an infrastructure-less wireless network that is deployed in

a large number of wireless sensors in an ad-hoc manner that is used to monitor the system,
physical or environmental conditions.

Sensor nodes are used in WSN with the onboard processor that manages and monitors the
environment in a particular area. They are connected to the Base Station which acts as a
processing unit in the WSN System.

Base Station in a WSN System is connected through the Internet to share data.
WSN can be used for processing, analysis, storage, and mining of the data.

Applications of WSN:

1. Internet of Things (IoT)

2. Surveillance and Monitoring for security, threat detection
3. Environmental temperature, humidity, and air pressure
4. Noise Level of the surrounding
5. Medical applications like patient monitoring
6. Agriculture
7. Landslide Detection

Challenges of WSN:

1. Quality of Service
2. Security Issue
3. Energy Efficiency
4. Network Throughput
5. Performance
6. Ability to cope with node failure
7. Cross layer optimisation
8. Scalability to large scale of deployment

A modern Wireless Sensor Network (WSN) faces several challenges, including:

 Limited power and energy: WSNs are typically composed of battery-powered sensors
that have limited energy resources. This makes it challenging to ensure that the network
can function for
long periods of time without the need for frequent battery replacements.
 Limited processing and storage capabilities: Sensor nodes in a WSN are typically
small and have limited processing and storage capabilities. This makes it difficult to
perform complex tasks or store large amounts of data.
 Heterogeneity: WSNs often consist of a variety of different sensor types and nodes
with different capabilities. This makes it challenging to ensure that the network can
function effectively and
efficiently.
 Security: WSNs are vulnerable to various types of attacks, such as eavesdropping,
jamming, and spoofing. Ensuring the security of the network and the data it collects is a
major challenge.
 Scalability: WSNs often need to be able to support a large number of sensor nodes and
handle large amounts of data. Ensuring that the network can scale to meet these
demands is a significant
challenge.
 Interference: WSNs are often deployed in environments where there is a lot of
interference from other wireless devices. This can make it difficult to ensure reliable
communication between sensor nodes.
 Reliability: WSNs are often used in critical applications, such as monitoring the
environment or controlling industrial processes. Ensuring that the network is reliable
and able to function correctly
in all conditions is a major challenge.

Components of WSN:

1. Sensors:
Sensors in WSN are used to capture the environmental variables and which is used for
data acquisition. Sensor signals are converted into electrical signals.
2. Radio Nodes:
It is used to receive the data produced by the Sensors and sends it to the WLAN access
point. It consists of a microcontroller, transceiver, external memory, and power source.
3. WLAN Access Point:
It receives the data which is sent by the Radio nodes wirelessly, generally through the
internet.
4. Evaluation Software:
The data received by the WLAN Access Point is processed by a software called as
Evaluation Software for presenting the report to the users for further processing of the
data which can be used for processing, analysis, storage, and mining of the data.

Advantages of Wireless Sensor Networks (WSN):

Low cost: WSNs consist of small, low-cost sensors that are easy to deploy, making them a
cost-effective solution for many applications.

Wireless communication: WSNs eliminate the need for wired connections, which can be
costly and difficult to install. Wireless communication also enables flexible deployment and
reconfiguration of the network.

Energy efficiency: WSNs use low-power devices and protocols to conserve energy,
enabling long-term operation without the need for frequent battery replacements.

Scalability: WSNs can be scaled up or down easily by adding or removing sensors, making
them suitable for a range of applications and environments.

Real-time monitoring: WSNs enable real-time monitoring of physical phenomena in the

environment, providing timely information for decision making and control.

Disadvantages of Wireless Sensor Networks (WSN):

Limited range: The range of wireless communication in WSNs is limited, which can be a
challenge for large-scale deployments or in environments with obstacles that obstruct radio
signals.
Limited processing power: WSNs use low-power devices, which may have limited
processing power and memory, making it difficult to perform complex computations or
support advanced applications.

Data security: WSNs are vulnerable to security threats, such as eavesdropping, tampering,
and denial of service attacks, which can compromise the confidentiality, integrity, and
availability of data.

Interference: Wireless communication in WSNs can be susceptible to interference from

other wireless devices or radio signals, which can degrade the quality of data transmission.

Deployment challenges: Deploying WSNs can be challenging due to the need for proper
sensor placement, power management, and network configuration, which can require
significant time and resources.

SCADA:
Supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) is a control system architecture
comprising computers, networked data communications and graphical user
interfaces for high-level supervision of machines and processes.

It also covers sensors and other devices, such as programmable logic controllers, which
interface with process plant or machinery.

Explanation
The operator interfaces which enable monitoring and the issuing of process commands, like
controller set point changes, are handled through the SCADA computer system.

The subordinated operations, e.g. the real-time control logic or controller calculations, are
performed by networked modules connected to the field sensors and actuators.

Control operations

 Level 0 contains the field devices such as flow and temperature sensors, and final control
elements, such as control valves.
 Level 1 contains the industrialised input/output (I/O) modules, and their associated
distributed electronic processors.
 Level 2 contains the supervisory computers, which collate information from processor
nodes on the system, and provide the operator control screens.
 Level 3 is the production control level, which does not directly control the process, but is
concerned with monitoring production and targets.
 Level 4 is the production scheduling level.
 Functional levels of a manufacturing control operation

SCADA Architecture:

The block diagram of SCADA system shown in the figure represents the basic
SCADA architecture. The SCADA (supervisory control and data acquisition) systems are
different from distributed control systems that are commonly found in plant sites. When
distributed control systems cover the plant site, SCADA system cover much larger
geographic areas

Advantages of SCADA

1. A large amount of data can be stored by using SCADA systems.

2. The data can be displayed in various formats as per user requirements.
3. It is an interface connecting thousands of sensors across a wide region for various
monitoring and controlling operations.
4. Improved operation of the plant or process resulting in savings due to optimization of the
system.
 Disadvantages of SCADA

1. The system increases unemployment rates.

2. The system supports the use of restricted software and hardware equipment.
3. Controlling remote sites via a web browser can create security concerns. SCADA systems
are a network presence and face significant threats and vulnerabilities.

Applications of SCADA

There are numerous applications of SCADA systems, but a few most frequently used
SCADA applications include:

1. Manufacturing Industries
2. Waste Water Treatment and Distribution Plants
3. SCADA in Power System

RFID or Radio Frequency Identification:

RFID or Radio Frequency Identification is an automatic identification method that uses

wireless non-contact radio frequency waves in which data is digitally encoded in RFID tags
or smart labels which can be read by reader through radio waves.

1. RFID Reader – It is a device used to communicate with RFID Tag which consists of
one or more antennas, used to emit radio waves & receive signals back, from RFID Tag.
The RFID reader is also called as interrogator as it used to interrogate RFID Tag.

2. RFID Tags – RFID Tags consists of 2 parts:

 Integrated Circuit : It is used for storing & processing data.
 Antenna : It is used for transmitting receiving signal.
 Active Tag : These have their own power supply and allows a read range of about
100 feet.
 Passive Tag : A reader inductively gives power to Passive Tags as they don’t have
their own power supply. Passive Tags are most widely used Tag and their read range
is approximately 30 feet.

Classification of RFID System:

RFID System is classified into 2 Fields, Near Field RFID and Far Field RFID.
1. Near Field RFID – Near Field RFID has small, Omni-directional reader antenna & tag
read range between 5mm to 10cm depending on frequency & antenna.
 Passive
2. Far Field RFID – Far Field RFID has resonant, directional antenna & tag range that
can reach up to 22.1m.
 Passive
 Active

Components of RFID system:

An RFID (Radio-Frequency Identification) system typically consists of the following

components:

 RFID Tag: Also known as a transponder, this is a small wireless device that contains a
microchip
and an antenna. The tag stores information about the item it is attached to, such as its
unique identification number and other relevant data.
 RFID Reader: Also known as an interrogator, this is a device that emits radio waves
and can read
the information stored on an RFID tag. It is connected to a computer or other device
that processes the data received from the tag.
 Antenna: This is a device that transmits and receives radio waves between the RFID
tag and reader. It can be integrated into the RFID tag or reader, or it can be a separate
component.
 Middleware: This is software that sits between the RFID reader and the back-end
computer system. It helps to manage and process the data received from the RFID tags,
and can also provide additional functionality such as filtering and error checking.
 Back-end System: This is the computer system that stores and processes the data
received from the RFID tags. It can be a simple database or a more complex system,
depending on the application.
 Power supply: Some RFID systems require an external power supply to function, while
others use batteries or are powered by the reader through a process known as
backscatter.
 Accessories: Depending on the application, additional accessories such as mounts,
cases, and antennas may be required to optimize the performance of the RFID system.

Applications of RFID :
 Document tracking.
 Controlling access to restricted areas
 Asset tracking
 Personnel tracking
 Inventory management
 ID badging
 Supply chain management
 Manufacturing
 Healthcare

RFID FEATURE’S:
1. Applicability: RFID innovation depends on electromagnetic waves and doesn’t need
actual contact between the two gatherings.
2. This permits it to lay out associations paying little mind to clean, haze, plastic, paper,
wood, and different deterrents, and impart straightforwardly.

Unified Identification of Objects

One of the key issues of unified data format for IoT is the unique identification of objects.
When the IoT application is within the intranet or extranet of an organization, which is the
case most often currently, the identification is not an issue.
● Object identification can essentially encompass the naming, addressing, or both of an
asset or device.
● In IoT, similar to the Internet and the web, objects need to have common naming
and addressing schemes and also discovery services to enable global reference
andaccess to them.
● uID or ucode is the identification number assigned to individual objects. The ucode is
a 128-bit fixed- length identifier system.
The field of RFIDs, EPC global has promoted the adoption and standardization of electronic
product code (EPC), which has been used to uniquely identify RFID tags.

In the mobile telecoms domain, the international mobile equipment identity (IMEI) provides
a means for unique identification of mobile phones. IMEI is formed through a set of digits
that represent the manufacturer, the unit itself, and the software installed on it.

The following unique ID schemes refer to addresses and names of electronic

objects at various levels of the OSI stack along with their related protocols:

MAC address, IP address on the Internet, e- mail address, uniform resource name (URN),
URI, URL, and others. IP address is certainly a straightforward unique ID scheme. If millions
to hundreds of millions of new devices are going to be networked in an Internet of Things in
the coming years, shortage of IPv4 addresses poses a challenge, particularly for countries
outside of North America that were allocated comparatively fewer IPv4 addresses to begin
with.

The long- term solution is IPv6, which enables orders of magnitude larger numbers of
available IP addresses. Most mobile network operators (MNOs) are in the planning stages for
this transition to IPv6 or have already made the transition.
UUIDs are widely used in distributed middleware such as Tuxedo, CORBA, and JavaEE.
UUID was also used in the Bluetooth standard. One widespread use of this standard is in
Microsoft’s globally unique identifiers.
Many standards define certain objects for which unambiguous identification is required. This
is achieved by assigning OID to an object in a way that makes the assignment available to
interested parties.
It is carried out by a registration authority. The naming structure of OID is a tree structure
that allows the identification of objects in a local or international context, without being
limited by the registration authority or by the number of objects they can register (Figure
6.17)
 .

OID is a good identification candidate for IoT objects considering it’s a mature scheme and
supported by both ISO and ITU. However, it’s a bit complex to use compared with other
schemes such as UUID, EPC, or uID. EPC, uID, UUID, and so forth are basically fixed-
length IDs, while OID and others are variable- length IDs. OID is more flexible in intranet
and extranet IoT applications.

Protocals
IEEE 802.15.4

IEEE 802.15.4 is a low-cost, low-data-rate wireless access technology for devices that are
operated or work on batteries. This describes how low-rate wireless personal area networks
(LR-WPANs) function

The 802.15.4e improves the old standard by introducing mechanisms such as time slotted
access, multichannel communication and channel hopping. IEEE 802.15.4e introduces the
following general functional enhancements

1. Low Energy (LE): This mechanism is intended for applications that can trade latency for
energy efficiency. It allows a node to operate with a very low duty cycle.

2. Information Elements (IE) It is an extensible mechanism to exchange information at the

MAC sublayer.

3. Enhanced Beacons (EB): Enhanced Beacons are an extension of the 802.15.4 beacon
frames and provide a greater flexibility. They allow to create application-specific frames.
4. Multipurpose Frame: This mechanism provides a flexible frame format that can address a
number of MAC operations. It is based on IEs.
5. MAC Performance Metric: It is a mechanism to provide appropriate feedback on the
channel quality to the networking and upper layers, so that appropriate decision can be taken.
6. Fast Association (FastA) The 802.15.4 association procedure introduces a significant delay
in order to save energy. For time-critical application latency has priority over energy
efficiency.

Properties:

1. Standardization and alliances: It specifies low-data-rate PHY and MAC layer

requirements for wireless personal area networks (WPAN).
IEEE 802.15. Protocol Stacks include:

● ZigBee: ZigBee is a Personal Area Network task group with a low rate task group
4. It is a technology of home networking. ZigBee is a technological standard
created for controlling and sensing the network. As we know that ZigBee is the
Personal Area network of task group 4 so it is based on IEEE 802.15.4 and is
created by Zigbee Alliance.
● 6LoWPAN: The 6LoWPAN system is used for a variety of applications including
wireless sensor networks. This form of wireless sensor network sends data as
packets and uses IPv6 – providing the basis for the name – IPv6 over Low power
Wireless Personal Area Networks.
● ZigBee IP: Zigbee is a standards-based wireless technology that was developed
for low-cost and low-power wireless machine-to-machine (M2M) and internet of
things (IoT) networks.
● ISA100.11a: It is a mesh network that provides secure wireless communication to
process control.
● Wireless HART: It is also a wireless sensor network technology, that makes use
of time-synchronized and self-organizing architecture.
● Thread: Thread is an IPv6-based networking protocol for low-power Internet of
Things devices in IEEE 802.15. 4-2006 wireless mesh network. Thread is
independent.

2. Physical Layer: This standard enables a wide range of PHY options in ISM bands,
ranging from 2.4 GHz to sub-GHz frequencies. IEEE 802.15.4 enables data transmission
speeds of 20 kilobits per second, 40 kilobits per second, 100 kilobits per second, and 250
kilobits per second. The fundamental structure assumes a 10-meter range and a data rate of
250 kilobits per second. To further reduce power usage, even lower data rates are possible.
IEEE 802.15.4 regulates the RF transceiver and channel selection, and even some energy and
signal management features, at the physical layer. Based on the frequency range and data
performance needed, there are now six PHYs specified. Four of them employ frequency
hopping techniques known as Direct Sequence Spread Spectrum (DSSS). Both PHY data
service and management service share a single packet structure so that they can maintain a
common simple interface with MAC.

3. MAC layer: The MAC layer provides links to the PHY channel by determining that
devices in the same region will share the assigned frequencies. The scheduling and routing of
data packets are also managed at this layer. The 802.15.4 MAC layer is responsible for a
number of functions like:

● Beaconing for devices that operate as controllers in a network.

● used to associate and dissociate PANs with the help of devices.
● The safety of the device.
● Consistent communication between two MAC devices that are in a peer-to-peer
relationship.

Several established frame types are used by the MAC layer to accomplish these functions. In
802.15.4, there are four different types of MAC frames:

● frame of data
● Frame for a beacon
● Frame of acknowledgement
● Frame for MAC commands

4. Topology: Networks based on IEEE 802.15.4 can be developed in a star, peer-to-peer, or

mesh topology. Mesh networks connect a large number of nodes. This enables nodes that
would otherwise be out of range to interact with each other to use intermediate nodes to relay
data.

5. Security: For data security, the IEEE 802.15.4 standard employs the Advanced Encryption
Standard (AES) with a 128-bit key length as the basic encryption technique. Activating such
security measures for 802.15.4 significantly alters the frame format and uses a few of the
payloads. The very first phase in activating AES encryption is to use the Security Enabled
field in the Frame Control part of the 802.15.4 header. For safety, this field is a single bit
which is assigned to 1. When this bit is set, by taking certain bytes from its Payload field, a
field known as the Auxiliary Security Header is formed following the Source Address field.
6. Competitive Technologies: The IEEE 802.15.4 PHY and MAC layers serve as a basis for
a variety of networking profiles that operate in different IoT access scenarios. DASH7 is a
competing radio technology with distinct PHY and MAC layers.
The architecture of LR-WPAN Device:

Advantages of IEEE 802.15.4:

IEEE 802.15.4 has the following advantages:

● cheap cost
● long battery life,
● Quick installation
● simple
● extensible protocol stack

Disadvantages of IEEE 802.15.4:

IEEE 802.15.4’s drawbacks include:

● IEEE 802.15.4 causes interference and multipath fading.

● doesn’t employ a frequency-hopping approach.
● unbounded latency
● interference susceptibility

Applications of IEEE 802.15.4:

IEEE 802.15.4 Applications:

● Wireless sensor networks in the industry

● Building and home automation
● Remote controllers and interacting toys
● Automotive networks.
BACnet Protocol
A data communication protocol that is used to build an automated control network, is known
as BACnet or Building Automation Control Network. This data communication protocol is
both an ISO & ANSI standard used for interoperability between cooperating building
automation devices. Bacnet Protocol includes a set of rules for governing the data exchange
on a computer network that simply covers all from what type of cable to utilize, to form a
particular command or request in a normal way.

Bacnet Protocol Architecture

BACnet Physical Layer

The upper layers of BACnet do not depend on the physical layer. So the Physical layer of

BACnet makes it feasible for BACnet to be executed on different networks. The physical

layers of BACnet have been specified with ARCNET, Ethernet, IP tunnels, BACnet/IP, RS-

232, RS485, and Lonworks/LonTalk. RS232 is for point-to-point communication. RS485

supports up to 32 nodes with a distance of 1200 m at 76Kbps.

BACnet Protocol Link Layer

BACnet protocol is implemented directly with LonTalk or IEEE802.2 link layers. So it

specifies Point to Point (PTP) data link layer for RS232 connections. It specifies MS/TP data

link layer intended for RS-485 connections. The standard simply specifies BVLL (BACnet

Virtual Link Layer) which states all the services required through the BACnet device at this

link layer.
BACnet Network Layer

This layer simply specifies the required addresses of the network for routing. BACnet
network includes a minimum of one or above segments that are connected with bridges once
they utilize similar LAN technologies. If they utilize various LAN protocols then they are
connected through routers.

Application Layer

BACnet does not separate presentation as well as application layers. So it takes care of
reliability & sequencing or segmentation mechanisms generally connected with both the
session & transport layers. BACnet includes devices like objects to exchange service
primitives which are described with ASN.1 syntax & serialized with ASN.1 BER.

BACnet Security Layer

The concept of BACnet security can be understood easily with an example say when BACnet
device-A requests a session key from the key server for establishing secure communication
through device-B, then this key is transmitted to both the device-A & device-B through the
key server which is known as ‘SKab’. BACnet protocol uses 56-bit DES encryption.

BACnet Object

Types

● BACnet/IP
● BACnet MS/TP
● BACnet ISO 8802-3 (Ethernet)
● BACnet over ARCNET
● BACnet Point-to-Point
● BACnet over LonTalk Foreign Frames
● BACnet over ZigBee
● Bacnet to Modbus Converter
Advantages

● BACnet protocol is particularly designed for building automation as well as

control networks.

● It doesn’t depend on present LAN or WAN technologies.

● It is an American National Standard & a European pre-standard.

Disadvantages

The problems or net-worthy attacks which are widely found in this protocol are; Lack of
spoofing & authentication, DoS attacks, immobilized network connections, and lack of
encryption & write access over devices.

Applications

● The BACnet is used in HVAC applications, fire control lighting control, security,
alarm & interfacing to utility companies.

● This protocol was particularly designed for building automation as well as control
applications.

● This protocol is used to provide mechanisms, especially for automation devices for
exchanging data irrespective of the specific building service they perform.

● This protocol can be used by digital controllers, computers & application-specific

otherwise unitary controllers with equivalent effect.

KNX
KNX is a uniform, manufacturer-independent communication protocol for intelligently
networking state-of-the-art home and building system technologies. KNX is used to plan and
control energy-efficient solutions for more functionality and convenience while
simultaneously reducing energy costs.

Architecture

KNX devices are commonly connected by a twisted pair bus and can be modified from a
controller. The bus is routed in parallel to the electrical power supply to all devices and
systems on the network linking:

 Sensors (e.g. push buttons, thermostats, anemometers, movement) gather information

and send it on the bus as a data telegram.

 Actuators (dimming units, heating valves, displays) receive data telegrams which are
then converted into actions; and
  Controllers and other logic functions (room temperature controllers, shutter
controllers and other).

 System devices and components (e.g. line couplers, backbone couplers).

The key features of the KNX architecture are:

 Interworking and distributed application models for the building automation various
tasks.

 Schemes for configuration and management of resources on the network, and to

permit the binding of parts of a distributed application in different nodes.

 A communication system with a message protocol and models for the communication
stack in each node (capable of hosting distributed applications (KNX Common
Kernel).

 Models for the realization of these elements when developing actual devices to be
mounted and linked in an installation.

KNX Model
Kernel and message protocol:
The common kernel sits on top of the physical layers and the medium-specific data link layer
and is shared by all the devices on the KNX Network. It is OSI 7-layer model compliant:
A general data link layer, which sits above the specific data link layers for each medium,
provides access control and the logical link control;
A network layer (for nodes with routing functionality) provides a segment-wise
acknowledged telegram (frame) and controls the hop count of a frame;
A transport layer enables four types of communication: one-to-many connectionless
(multicast), one-to-all connectionless (broadcast), one-to-one connectionless, one-to-one
connection-oriented;
(OSI session and presentation layers are empty); and
An application layer offers a toolkit of services to the application process.
Configuration modes:
There are three categories of KNX devices:

 A-mode or "Automatic mode" devices which can configure themselves, and are
able to be installed by the end user.

 E-mode or "Easy mode" devices that require basic training to install: their
behaviour is pre-programmed, but configuration parameters need to be tailored to the
user's requirements.

 S-mode or "System mode" devices that can be used to create sophisticated building
automation systems: they have no default behaviour, and must be programmed and
installed by specialists.

Frame format:
Ignoring any preamble for medium-specific access and collision control, a frame format is
generally:

KNX Applications:

 Lighting Control.

 Facade Automation – blinds, solar control, windows, natural ventilation.

 Energy Metering and Management.

 Security and Monitoring.

 Audio-Visual Control and Interfacing.

 Touch Screen and Visualisation Interfaces.

 IP Connectivity and Remote Access.

ZIGBEE
ZigBee is an open, global, packet-based protocol designed to provide an easy-to-use
architecture for secure, reliable, low power wireless networks. Flow or process control
equipment can be place anywhere and still communicate with the rest of the system.

Types of ZigBee Devices:

Zigbee Coordinator Device: It communicates with routers. This device is used for
connecting the devices.
Zigbee Router: It is used for passing the data between devices.
Zigbee End Device: It is the device that is going to be controlled.

General Characteristics of Zigbee Standard:

 Low Power Consumption.

 Low Data Rate (20- 250 kbps).

 Short-Range (75-100 meters).

 Network Join Time (~ 30 msec).

 Support Small and Large Networks (up to 65000 devices (Theory); 240 devices
(Practically)).

 Low Cost of Products and Cheap Implementation (Open Source Protocol).

 Extremely low-duty cycle.

 3 frequency bands with 27 channels.

Operating Frequency Bands (Only one channel will be selected for use in a network):

 Channel 0: 868 MHz (Europe)

 Channel 1-10: 915 MHz (the US and Australia)

 Channel 11-26: 2.4 GHz (Across the World)

Features of Zigbee:
1. Stochastic addressing: A device is assigned a random address and announced.
Mechanism for address conflict resolution. Parents node don’t need to maintain assigned
address table.
2. Link Management: Each node maintains quality of links to neighbors. Link quality is
used as link cost in routing.
3. Frequency Agility: Nodes experience interference report to channel manager, which then
selects another channel
4. Asymmetric Link: Each node has different transmit power and sensitivity. Paths may be
asymmetric.
5. Power Management: Routers and Coordinators use main power. End Devices use
batteries.

Zigbee Network Topologies:

Star Topology (ZigBee Smart Energy): Consists of a coordinator and several end devices,
end devices communicate only with the coordinator.
Mesh Topology (Self Healing Process): Mesh topology consists of one coordinator, several
routers, and end devices.
Tree Topology: In this topology, the network consists of a central node which is a
coordinator, several routers, and end devices. the function of the router is to extend the
network coverage.

Architecture of Zigbee:
Zigbee architecture is a combination of 6 layers.

 Application Layer

 Application Interface Layer

 Security Layer

 Network Layer

 Medium Access Control Layer

 Physical Layer
Physical layer:

 The lowest two layers i.e the physical and the MAC (Medium Access Control) Layer
are defined by the IEEE 802.15.4 specifications.

 The Physical layer is closest to the hardware and directly controls and communicates
with the Zigbee radio.

Medium Access Control layer (MAC layer):

 The layer is responsible for the interface between the physical and network layer.

 The MAC layer is also responsible for providing PAN ID and also network discovery
through beacon requests.

Network layer:

 This layer acts as an interface between the MAC layer and the application layer. It is
responsible for mesh networking.

Application layer:

 The application layer in the Zigbee stack is the highest protocol layer and it consists
of the application support sub-layer and Zigbee device object.

 It contains manufacturer-defined applications.

Zigbee Applications:

 Home Automation
 Medical Data Collection
 Industrial Control Systems
 meter reading system
 light control system

Advantages of Zigbee:
 Designed for low power consumption.
 Provides network security and application support services operating on the top of
IEEE.
 Zigbee makes possible completely networks homes where all devices are able to
communicate and be
 Use in smart home
 Easy implementation
 Adequate security features.
 Low cost.
 Mesh networking
 Reliability.

Disadvantages of Zigbee :
 Limited range
 Limited data rate
 Interoperability
 Security
NETWORK LAYER
The network layer is located between the MAC layer and the application support sublayer
(APS). It provides routing and establishes the ZigBee network topologies: star, mesh, and
cluster tree. It starts a network, assigns node addresses, configures new devices, discovers
other networks, and applies security.

Network layer architecture

Network Layer Data Entity (NLDE) Services:
The NLDE generates the network protocol data unit (NPDU) by accepting an application
protocol data unit (APDU) from the APS and adding its header to the APDU. The NLDE
then transmits the NPDU to the destination or next network hop. The network layer uses the
following primitives for data service:
• NLDE-DATA.Request
• NLDE-DATA.Confirm
• NLDE-DATA.Indication

NLDE-DATA.Request:
This command, generated by the APS, is sent to the network layer for the transfer of the
protocol data unit (PDU). The network layer adds its header to the PDU, creating a network
service data unit (NSDU).
 Destination address mode: Defines the type of destination address; 0x01 denotes group
addressing, and 0x02 indicates unicast and broadcast addressing.
• Destination address: The destination address within the network represented by 16 bits.
• NSDU length: The number of bytes in the NSDU.
• NSDU: The actual data of the NSDU.
• NSDU handle: Identification for the NSDU; must be between 0x00 to 0xFF.
• Radius: The maximum number of hops the frame may travel.
• Nonmember Radius: The number of hops a multicast frame is allowed to travel; it may
range from 0x00 to 0x07.

NLDE-DATA.Confirm:
This is generated by the NLDE and sent to the APS to indicate the status of the
NLDE.DATA.Request.

NLDE-DATA.Indication:
This is sent by the network layer to the APS for the transfer of the NSDU.

Network process:
When the ZigBee upper layer sends a discovery request command (NLME_NETWORK-
DISCOVERY.Request) to the network layer, the network layer searches for a network within
the personal operation space (POS).

Network discovery request

1. The higher layer requests network discovery by sending the NETWORK-
DISCOVERY.Request to the NLME, which includes a list of channels and the scan duration
of each channel.
2. The NLME sends an MLME-SCAN request to the MLME for an active scan. An active
scan is used to locate a coordinator in its POS.
3. The MLME sends an MLME beacon request command to the physical layer for
transmission of this command.
4. The physical later transmits the beacon request command and turns on its receiver to
receive a beacon.
5. If a beacon frame is received by the MLME with no payload, the MLME sends an MLME-
BEACON-NOTIFY to the network layer.
6. Step 2 through 5 are repeated for each channel. The complete list of networks within the
POS is transmitted to the upper layer with an NLME-NETWORK-DISCOVERY.Confirm.

Network discovery process

Network Layer Frame Format:
The network frame is transmitted to MAC layer for transmission. There are two types of
network frames: data and command frames. The network layer frame format consists of the
network header and a payload.

Network layer frame format

Frame control:

Frame Control field

 Frame type:
1. 00 Data frame
2. 01 Network command frame
3. 10 and 11 Reserved

 Protocol version: This defines the ZigBee protocol version, and its value is in the
NIB.

 Discover route: The network layer offers route discovery to find the best route for
transmitting a message to a destination. There are three possible values for route
 discovery:
4. Suppress route discovery (00): Use the current route.
5. Enable route discovery (01): The message is routed through the current route; if
there is no route, the router should start a new route discovery.
6. Force router discovery (11): The router starts route discovery even if the router
already has a route.
• Source route: If true, the network header contains the route to the destination.
• Destination IEEE address: If true, the destination address is an IEEE address.
• Source IEEE address: If true, the source address is an IEEE address.
• Security field: If this bit set to 1, the network layer will apply security to the outgoing
frame.
• Destination address: Represents the 16-bit network address of the destination.
• Source address: This represents the network address of the source.
• Sequence number: This value is incremented each time a frame is transmitted.
• Destination IEEE address: The actual destination address; if the control field for the
destination IEEE address is 1, this field contains the 64-bit IEEE address.
• Source IEEE address: The actual source address; if the control field for the source IEEE
address is 1, this field contains the 64-bit IEEE address.
• Multicast Control field: If the Multicast Flag field is set to true, the field is present;
otherwise, it is not present. The Multicast Control field indicates whether the destination
devices belong to a member group.

ZigBee Application Support Sublayer (APS)

The application support sublayer (APS) provides services to the application layer and the
network layer through the application support data entity (APSDE) and application support
management entity (APSME).

Application support sublayer

Application Support Sublayer Management Entity (ASME)
The ASME provides management of the Application Information Base (AIB), binding and
unbinding of end devices, and the managing of group addressing. The ASME uses the
following management primitives:

APSME-BIND.Request: This management entity is generated by a ZigBee device object

(ZDO) to request the binding of two endpoints or the addition of a binding record to the
binding table; binding is a logical connection between two devices.

Source address: The source address is a 64-bit IEEE address.

• APSME-BIND.Confirm: This command is generated by the APSME in response to a bind
request. It shows the status of the binding (for example, success, binding table is full, or
illegal request).
• APSME-UNBIND.Request: This is generated by a ZDO and issued to the APS to request
the unbinding of two endpoints or to remove an entry from its local binding table.
• APSME-UNBIND.Confirm: Contains the status of the APSME-UNBIND.Request
• APSME-GET.Request: This is used by the APS to read the contents of the APS
Information Base (AIB). As the name implies, the AIB contains attributes for the APS.

Application Support Sublayer Frame Format:

The APS includes the data, command, and acknowledge frame formats. The Frame Type
field within the Frame Control field defines the type of frame.

• Frame control:

Frame type (2 bits): 00 data, 01 command, 10 ACK, and 11 reserved.

• Delivery mode (2 bits): 00 unicast, 01 indirect addressing, 10 broadcast, and 11 group
addressing. For delivery mode 00 and 10, the frame should contain the source and destination
endpoint addresses.
• ACK format: This field defines the format of acknowledge frame; if set to 1, the ACK
frame should contain the cluster ID, profile ID, and source endpoint address.
• Security (1 bit): Setting this bit to 1 enables security on the APS frame.
• ACK request (1 bit): When true, the source requests an ACK from the destination.
• Extended header: If this bit set to 1, the frame contains an extended header.

APS Command Frame Format:

APS command frame format

• Frame control: corresponding description.
• APS command ID: Identifies the types of commands:
1. Key-establishment command: Establishes the link key between two end devices by
using Symmetric-Key Key Establishment (SKKE).
2. Transport-key command: Transports a key between devices. It can use either a
secured key transport through a trust center or an unsecured transport by loading the
device with the initial key.
3. Device update command: Update.

 Device update command: Updates the device’s 64-bit extended and 16-bit short
addresses.

 Remove device: Removes a device from the network.

 Request key: Requests a key from the coordinator.

 Switch key: Sent by a trustcenter to inform a device to switch its network key.

ZigBee Security
ZigBee Security Architecture:
ZigBee security architectural design principle:

 The layer that originates a frame is responsible for initially securing it.

 Only a device with an active network key can communicate to more than one hop
across the network.

 Both the APS layer and NWK layer can use the same active network key to secure the
frames. Re-use of keys helps reduces storage overhead.
  End to End message security, i.e., the only source and destination devices, can decrypt
the messages protected by a shared key, and the routing mechanism is out of trust
considerations.

 A device that forms a network is responsible for base security level, security policies,
and authentication of nodes in the network. The application layer can provide
additional application level security if required between two devices.

Security Modes:
Distributed Security Mode:
The distributed Security Mode, unique Trust Center, is not required in the network, and
routers are responsible for end device authentication.

Centralized Security Mode:

 The centralized security mode used in applications, a trust center control, and
maintain centralized security policy for network and device.

 Maintaining security and security configuration for the entire network.

 Authentication of devices and maintaining a list of devices on the network.

 Maintaining Link keys and Network keys with all the devices in the network.

ZigBee Security Keys:

ZigBee standard defines two types of symmetric keys, each of 128-bit length used for
encrypted communication.

Network Key:
128-bit Network key used in broadcast communication and any network layer
communications. Each node requires the network key to communicate securely with other
devices on the network. A device on the network acquires a network key via key transfer on
the network, i.e., key-transport.

Link Key:
A 128-bit unique Link key shared by two devices, used in unicast communication between
APL peer entities. A device can get link keys either via key-transport service over the
network, or pre-installation.
There are two different types of trust center link keys: global and unique.

Security control:
8 Bit security control field consists of a security level, a key identifier, and an extended nonce
sub-field as:

The security level identifier indicates how an outgoing frame is to be secured, how an
incoming frame purportedly has been secured. It also indicates whether or not the payload is
encrypted and to what extent data authenticity over the frame provided, as reflected by the
length of the message integrity code (MIC).

Frame counter
The counter field used to provide frame freshness and to prevent the processing of duplicate
frames.

Source Address
The source address field in security control is the extended 64-bit address of the source
device and present when the extended nonce sub-filed of the security control field set to 1.

Key Sequence Number

The key sequence number present in the auxiliary security header indicates the key sequence
number of the network key used to secure the frame. The key identifier subfield from the
security control field, when set to 1 (i.e., a network key), indicates a key sequence number
present in the auxiliary security header.
 IoT Open-Source Architecture

Architecture Overview
The OpenIoT architecture comprises seven main elements [7] as depicted in Fig. 1.

• The Sensor Middleware (Extended Global Sensor Networks, X-GSN) collects, filters and combines data
streams from virtual sensors or physical devices. The Sensor Middleware is deployed on the basis of one
or more distributed instances

Fig. 1. Overview of OpenIoT Architecture and Main Components

(nodes), which may belong to different administrative entities. The OpenIoT prototype implementation
uses X-GSN (Extended GSN), an extended version of the GSN middleware [5]. Furthermore, a mobile
broker (publish/subscribe middleware) is used for the integration of mobile sensors.
• The Cloud Data Storage (Linked Stream Middleware Light, LSM-Light) acts as a cloud database which
enables storage of data streams stemming from the sensor middleware. The cloud infrastructure stores
also metadata required for the operation of OpenIoT. The OpenIoT prototype implementation uses the
Linked Stream Middleware (LSM) [8], which has been re-designed with push-pull data functionality and
cloud interfaces.

• The Scheduler processes requests for on-demand deployment of services and ensures their proper
access to the resources (e.g. data streams) that they require. It discovers sensors and associated data
streams that can contribute to a given service. It also manages a service and activates the resources
involved in its provision.

The Service Delivery & Utility Manager (SD&UM) combines data streams as indicated by service
workflows within the OpenIoT system in order to deliver the requested service (typically expressed as an
SPARQL query). The SD&UM acts also as a service metering facility which keeps track of utility metrics
for each service.

The Request Definition component enables on-the-fly specification of service requests to the OpenIoT
platform. It comprises a set of services for specifying and formulating such requests, while also
submitting them to the Scheduler. This component is supported by a GUI (Graphical User Interface).

The Request Presentation component is in charge of the visualization of the outputs of a service. This
component selects mash-ups from an appropriate library in order to facilitate service presentation.

The Configuration and Monitoring component enables visual management and configuration of
functionalities over sensors and services that are deployed within the OpenIoT platform.
Introduction of
Open Interconnect Consortium

Open Interconnect Consortium, Inc.

Introduction to OIC – Optimized for IoT

RESTful
Architecture

Common Certification
Platform Program

CoAP for
Full Stack
Constrained
Interop. Test
Devices

12
OIC Key Concepts (1/2)

• Free IPR License (Code: Apache 2.0 & Spec: RAND-Z)

License covers both code, standards and related IPR
License applies to members and affiliates of members
• Dedicated and optimized protocols for IoT (e.g. CoAP)
Specific considerations for constrained devices
Fully compliant towards RESTful architecture
Built-in discovery and subscription mechanisms
• Standards and Open Source to allow flexibility creating solutions
Able to address all types of devices, form-factors, companies and markets
with the widest possibility of options
Open Source is just one implementation to solve a problem

13
OIC Key Concepts (2/2)

• Full stack definition for maximum interoperability

Connectivity, Platform and Vertical Services defined
License applies to members and affiliates of members
• Certification and Logo program
Guarantees all devices work together
Consistent user awareness for interoperability

14
OIC Structure
OIC
Board of Directors

Standard IoTivity
Specification & Certification Open Source Project

Open Source Coordination Steering Group

Membership
Sponsored (funded) by OIC
Technology
Planning Develops reference implementation
of OIC standard
Ecosystem
Marketing
Communications
http://www.iotivity.org
OIC Specification Overview
Core Framework Specification

Open Interconnect Consortium, Inc.

Specification Structure

Infrastructure
• Core Framework
• Security
• Remote Access
• Certification Test Plans and Test Cases

Resource Model
• Resource Specification (Domain agnostic)

Per Vertical Domain

• Device Specification
• Domain Specific Resource Specification

20
Core Framework Specification
Overview

Open Interconnect Consortium, Inc.

Objectives

• Core Framework Specification Scope

• Specifies the technical specification(s) comprising of the core
architectural framework, messaging, interfaces and protocols
based on approved use-case scenarios
• Enables the development of vertical profiles (e.g. Smart
Home) on top of the core
• Architect a core framework that is scalable from resource
constrained devices to resource rich devices
• Evaluate technical specification(s) for maximum testability
and interoperability
• Ensure alignment with OIC open source releases

22
OIC Roles

• OIC Client
– i) Initiate an transaction (send a request) & ii) access
an OIC Server to get a service

• OIC Server
– i) host OIC Resource & ii) send a response & provide
service

23
OIC Architecture

• OIC adopted RESTful Architecture

• Current OIC Architecture defines 2 logical roles that devices
can take
- OIC Server : A logical entity that exposes hosted resources
- OIC Client : A logical entity that accesses resources on an OIC Server

OIC OIC
Client Server
R

Model 1

24
Organization of an OIC Device

• OIC Device concept

Resource URI: /oic/p
rt: oic.wk.p

/oic/p if: oic.if.r

n: homePlatform
policy: bm:11
/oic/res /oic/res
pi: at1908
/oic/d /oic/d mnmn: Samsung

/oic/mnt /oic/prs

OIC Device 1 OIC Device 2

Physical Device e.g. light bulb Mandatory

Optional

25
 2. Hardware Internet of Things

IOT DEVICES

The hardware utilized in IoT systems includes devices for a remote dashboard, devices for
control, servers, a routing or bridge device, and sensors. These devices manage key tasks and
functions such as system activation, action specifications, security, communication, and
detection to support-specific goals and actions.

The most important hardware in IoT might be its sensors. These devices consist of energy
modules, power management modules, RF modules, and sensing modules. RF modules manage
communications through their signal processing, WiFi, ZigBee, Bluetooth, radio transceiver,
duplexer, and BAW.

The sensing module manages sensing through assorted active and passive measurement
devices. Here is a list of some of the measurement devices used in IoT:

Devices

accelerometers temperature sensors

magnetometers proximity sensors

gyroscopes image sensors

acoustic sensors light sensors

pressure sensors gas RFID sensors

humidity sensors micro flow sensors

3
 Internet of Things

Wearable electronic devices are small devices worn on the head, neck, arms, torso, and feet.

Smartwatches not only help us stay connected, but as a part of an IoT

system, they allow access needed for improved productivity.

Current smart wearable devices include:

Head Helmets, glasses

Neck Jewelry, collars
Arm Watches, wristbands, rings
Torso Clothing, backpacks
Feet Socks, shoes

4
 Internet of Things

Smart glasses help us enjoy more of the media and services we value, and
when part of an IoT system, they allow a new approach to productivity.

The desktop, tablet, and cellphone remain integral parts of IoT as the command center and
remotes.

The desktop provides the user with the highest level of control over the system and its
settings.

The tablet provides access to the key features of the system in a way resembling the
desktop, and also acts as a remote.

The cellphone allows some essential settings modification and also provides remote
functionality.

Other key connected devices include standard network devices like routers and switches.

5
 IoT Deployment Models
Communication world is chanting “Internet of Things” mantra for many good reasons. Most exciting reasons

could be all electronic devices would be part of internet which opens up new business opportunities for Original

Equipment Manufacturers (OEM), IoT Service Providers and Internet Service Providers (ISP). A decade ago,

IoT was a thought, from a couple of years IoT is transforming into reality. Various products, services, analytics,

intelligence, big data and monetization models have been designed and deployed in recent times. Various

communication protocols strive to find their space in IoT and aligned to it.

While hinting a plethora of opportunities, IoT throws abundant challenges to all stakeholders. Legacy

communication devices (typical Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, ZigBee, Z-Wave devices), interoperability, security,

scalability, LPWAN (Low Power Wide Area Network) and revenue model are the potential challenges which

need immediate attention and address. Nevertheless, these challenges are being addressed or partially addressed.

By the time OCF (Open Connectivity Foundation) standard was released, many organizations parked their first
leg into IoT (Smart Things, Al seen, Thread, Nest to name a few). This pro-activeness helped to prove the IoT

concept thus expedite IoT deployments. On the other hand, the same pro-activeness resulted into plurality of

deployments models.

Gateway Based Deployment

In this mode of deployment IoT devices (Things) in a WPAN (Wireless Personal Area Network) are connected to

a gateway through short range connectivity protocols. And the gateway device is connected to cloud through

internet or LPWAN. Things in this deployment are usually small or mid-size devices which run low power

connectivity protocols such as ZigBee, Z-Wave, BLE, Low Power Wi-Fi, RF, IR etc. Legacy connectivity

devices manufactured during pre IoT times can be used as Things in this type of deployment. Things are

identified in the IoT space using a post-fix over gateway’s identity. In other words, Things are identified using an

URI (Uniform Resource Identifier) in which gateway's identity is integral part of the URI. Gateway possesses the

hardware and software capabilities to leverage the communication over internet and within the WPAN. Gateway

translates the requests, responses and notifications over IP (Internet Protocol) into messages that Things can

understand and triggers the intended action on them. RESTful methods are not executed end to end in this model.

This is the most prominent and scalable deployment for home automation. Alexa, (then)SmartThings, Joy Link

hubs act as gateway devices to on-board the Things and claim the Things "Works With" them. Things

manufacturers would have to comply to the hub's IoT protocol semantics, resource model and security aspects.

Proxy Based Deployment

In this mode of deployment, Things are connected to IoT cloud via a proxy device or border router. Things in

this deployment are usually small or mid-size devices and run IPv6 stack over 6LoWPAN (IPv6 over Low power

Wireless Personal Area Networks) and low power radio links such as IEEE 802.15.4 or BLE. Things are

uniquely identified with IPv6 address in the IoT space. The resources or endpoints hosted on the Things would

be identified using an URI. In this deployment, Proxy device may also possess the capability to run a sub net and

assign link local IP addresses to Things. In this case Things IP addresses are not globally unique but the URI
could be. Proxy device facilitates the RESTFul communication between a Thing and the Cloud. If the Thing uses

CoAP based RESTful methods and Cloud uses HTTP based RESTful methods, proxy has to run HTTP-CoAP

proxy service. Thread protocol is based on this mode of deployment. Though 6LoWPAN is supported by IEEE

802.15.4 as well as Bluetooth (Internet Protocol Support Profile), this deployment is not as popular as gateway-

based deployment.

Direct Deployment over Internet

In this mode of deployment, Things are directly connected to the cloud through a Wi-Fi Access Point or wired

internet. Direct connection with the cloud demands a rich protocol stack, considerable processing power and

relatively higher energy source in the Thing. So these devices are unconstrained devices by nature. Each device

is uniquely identifiable in the cloud through an IPv6 address. If the Thing supports IO (input and output)

capability, cloud credentials would be entered manually to connect to the cloud. Otherwise, a mediator device

with IO capability shall be used to provision the Thing to cloud. Once the mediator device transfers the cloud

credentials and delegates the cloud access, Thing would directly connect to the cloud. This process is called

"Easy Setup". Easy setup is widely used to provision a Thing which doesn't have IO capability.This is another

popular deployment for home automation where Smartphone plays the mediator role. OCF standardized easy

setup to provision dumb devices to the cloud. MNOs ( Mobile Network Operators) remain mere ISPs (Internet

Service Provider) in this deployment since user has a choice of choosing the ISP independent of IoT cloud he is

using.

Direct Deployment over Cellular Radio

In this mode of deployment, Things are directly connected to the cloud through GPRS/3G/4G/5G or LPWAN (

Low Power Wide Area Network). Multiple LPWAN protocols (NB-IoT, SigFix, LoRa, Neul etc) were emerged

to leverage direct connection with the cloud. Though there is no clear winner among them, LoRa and NB-IoT are

catching traction with the support of network operators. Direct connection with the cloud demands on-device

electronic communication module (be it eUICC), communication protocol stack, considerable processing power
and relatively higher energy source in the Thing. So these devices are unconstrained devices by nature and

supports mobility. Each device is uniquely identifiable in the cloud with an IPv6 address or UICC Identifier.

MNOs have more control over this deployment as eUICC is used for authentication, authorization and avails IoT

services through operator core network. This deployment is better fit for Smart City, Smart Agriculture, Smart

Logistics, Connected car use cases.

 Future factory concepts
• Lever mechanisms for IoT in future factory 
✔ IoT implementations mainly focus three aspects
✔ The network and addressability aspect. ◦
✔ The ambient intelligence aspect.
✔ The ambient assistance aspect.
• High resolution data acquisition and ubiquitous
computing are used to offer context sensitive
services to the human. This clearly focuses the
human.
 Smart Factory KL Initiative
• In order to transfer the central paradigms of
the IoT to factory automation, many
technologies working well in the consumer
world have to be applied under industrial
conditions.
• One of the biggest obstacles keeping
responsible away from the application of new
technologies is missing trust and the lack of
best practice examples
• After feasibility study the technology initiative SmartFactory
KL was founded in 2005 as a public private partnership.
• Its target is to develop, apply and distribute in
• The basic equipment of the Smart Factory KL is an automated
production facility for liquid colored soap as shown in below
figure .
• It contains a process manufacturing part as well as a piece
handling part.
• Based on state of the art automation technology the
equipment demonstrates the migration path to tsssshe
application of smart technologies in factory environments
Smart Factory KL production facility
Digital product memories in open-loop
processes
 Brown Field IoT
• The IoT aims to be a disruptive technology in many
ways and may change how future industry will work.
• However, enabling technologies like RFID or
Wireless Sensor Networks are in place, it is often
hindered by the fact that huge investments are
needed and the local value is considered too low for
adoption.
• The creation of a global network of various
ubiquitous networks is one of the driving
technological vision behind IoT.
High value use cases for IoT
retrofitting
Iot supported interactions as part of a
complex Cyber-Physical-System
 Smart Objects, Smart Applications
• Smart Object is a bi-directional communicating
object which observes its environment and is able to
make decisions depending on the application and
based on the information extracted from the
physical world
• Sensor networks which separates the sensor node
functionality into three layers
1. Communication as part of the basic functions layer
2. Service Layer
3. Application Layer
 Architecture overview of
interconnected smart objects
 UNIT 5

IOT PLATFORMS/MIDDLEWARE

FUNCTIONAL BLOCKS OF IOT MIDDLEWARE

Middleware for IoT is required for various reasons.

• Difficult to define and enforce a common standard among all the diverse devices belonging to diverse
domain in IoT.
• Middleware acts as a bond joining the heterogeneous components together.
• Applications of diverse domains demand abstraction /adaptation layer.
• Middleware provides API (application programming interfacing) for physical layer communications,
and required services to the applications, hiding all the details of diversity.

Overview of Various IoT Middleware

Functional Components of IoT-Middleware

The functional component of an IoT-middleware is depicted in Fig. 1. The inner most circle shows the required
functional blocks. The second circle encompasses the further division of the functional blocks, and the
outermost circle shows the important modules interacting with the various functional components, but not part
of the middleware – example context processing, data storage and knowledge database. The functional
components are as follows:

Interoperation

Context detection

Device discovery and management

Security and privacy

Managing data volume

Interoperation
Interoperation shares information and uses the same across diverse domains of applications using diverse
communication interfaces. It can be further classified under three different categories like network, syntactic
and semantics . Network interoperation defines protocols for exchanging information among the various things
across different communication networks, without considering the content of information. It covers the basic
connectivity issues in physical and data-link to network, transport, session and sometimes application layer of
TCP/IP stack. Syntactic interoperation deals with the format and structure of the encoding of the information
exchanged among things. It includes the presentation and application of TCP/IP stack. Semantic interoperation
defines the rules for understanding the meaning of the content of information, and creates a domain specific
information model, known as semantic model.

Context Detection

Context is responsible for characterizing the situation of an entity where an entity can be person, place, or
object relevant to the interaction between a user and an application, including the user and applications
themselves. IoT-middleware must be context aware for working into smart environments. Context awareness
can be achieved by context detection and context processing. Context detection collects data and identifies the
factors that have significant impacts on the response. Context processing extracts the context data, processes it
and performs or takes decision based on that.

Device Discovery and Management

Device discovery and management enables any device in the IoT network to detect all its neighbouring devices
and make its presence known to each neighbour in the network. Device ontology [26] is used for storing
information about the heterogeneous devices. From IoT perspective, these modules need to be reliable, fault-
tolerant, adaptive and optimized for resource consumption [21]. Few techniques adopted for device discovery
and management of device information are listed below:

Middleware described in [16], [8], [9], tries to extend the syntactic interoperability to semantic interoperability
in application layer. This is done by combining the use of ontologies with semantic web services. Semantic
Model Driven Architecture (Semantic MDA) is introduced to facilitate application development and to promote
semantic interoperability for services and devices. It includes a set of models (Device ontology) and their usage
in design time and run time. It introduces concept of semantic devices which are software representation of
physical devices. Mapping of physical devices to semantic devices can be one-to-one or many-to-one
depending on the application. Information and data about devices and device types are stored in device
ontology. Semantic device description includes information regarding device capabilities, services, and device
malfunction and security properties. Device Description includes information like device name, vendor details,
hardware description and software description used to describe hardware and software resources of the device.
Application
Ontology Manager provides interface for using Device Ontology. New devices can be included into the device
ontology by adding sub-classes depending on specialized concepts and new properties. P2P (Point-to-Point) discovery
is supported in various middleware systems. Middlewares described in [1] and [16] adopt this technique. As described
in [12], peer-to-peer architecture is used in a system where devices support self-configurable services and scalability
from tiny embedded devices to heterogeneous P2P networked systems.

Security and Privacy

Security and privacy are responsible for confidentiality, authenticity, and non-repudiation. Security can be
implemented in two ways – (i) secure high-level peer communication which enables higher layer to communicate
among peers in a secure and abstract way and (ii) secure topology management which deals with the authentication
of new peers, permissions to access the network and protection of routing information exchanged in the network.

Managing Data Volumes

Managing data volumes is an integral part of IoT-middleware. It is believed that there will be trillions of objects which
will be part of this enormous network and hundreds of Exabytes will be stored or exchanged among the objects. In
other words there will be “Exaflood” or “Data deluge”, i.e. explosion of the amount of data collected and exchanged.
Therefore it is imperative to get novel methods to find, fetch, and transfer data. Here challenges involve in querying,
indexing, process modelling, and transaction handling.

CLASSIFICATION OF THE IOT-MIDDLEWARE

This section classifies the different IoT-middleware based on the various features like interoperation, device
management, platform portability, context awareness, security and privacy, and the support of various interface
protocols. Table 1 and Table 2 depict the classifications of various IoT-middleware systems based on the various
features and interface protocol support respectively.

Table 1. IoT-middleware comparison.

Features of Middleware

IoT Device Platform Context Security

Management Portability Awareness
Middleware Interoperation and
Privacy

HYDRA ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

ISMB ✓ ³ ✓ ³ ³

ASPIRE ✓ ³ ✓ ³ ³

UBIWARE ✓ ³ ✓ ✓ ³

UBISOAP ✓ ✓ ✓ ³ ³
 UBIROAD ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

GSN ✓ ³ ✓ ³ ✓

SMEPP ✓ ³ ✓ ✓ ✓

SOCRADES ✓ ✓ ✓ ³ ✓

SIRENA ✓ ✓ ✓ ³ ✓

WHEREX ✓ ✓ ✓ ³ ³

All the listed middlewares support device discovery and management. Context aware functionality is supported by
HYDRA, UBIWARE, UBIROAD and SMEPP. On the other hand, SOCRADES, SMEPP, GSN, UBIROAD and
HYDRA are some examples of middleware implementing security and user privacy in their architecture. Based on
platform portability, syntactic resolution, HYDRA, SMEPP and ASPIRE are OSGi compliant, UBIROAD uses

JAVA and XML, UBISOAP uses J2SE and J2ME, GSN uses XML and SQL, SIRENA and SOCRADES use DPWS
while SOCRADES also uses SAP NetWeaver [25] platform and ISMB uses any JAVA compliant platform. WhereX
[28] is developed using J2EE architecture and is integrated with Oracle Application Server 10g.It also uses Rhino rule
engine which is implementation of Java Script.

Table 2. IoT-middleware Interfaces.

IoT Middleware Interface protocols

Zigbee RFID WiFi Bluetooth Sensor (others)

HYDRA ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

ISMB ³ ✓ ³ ³ ✓

ASPIRE ³ ✓ ³ ³ ³

UBIWARE ³ ✓ ✓ ³ ✓

UBISOAP ³ ✓ ✓ ³ ✓

UBIROAD ³ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

GSN ³ ✓ ✓ ³ IEEE-1451

SMEPP ³ ³ ✓ ✓ ✓

SOCRADES ³ ✓ ³ ³ ✓

SIRENA ³ ✓ ³ ✓ ✓

WHEREX ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
 Unit 5-IoT Middleware Hydra

CONTEXT-AWARENESS IN HYDRA
The Hydra middleware introduces the term Hydra-enabled device in order to refer that its features are
specified and the device is available in the Hydra network, i.e. an embedded system. The functionality of a
hydra-enabled device is dis tributed by offering web services. This way, semantics and descriptions can be
provided via a WSDL file 3. Extended components may ensure quality of service (Qos), e.g. in multimedia
environments or check whether offered services match at what rate.
Hydra provides several procedures to network different types of devices. Resource-full devices, on which
a core set of Hydra managers can be deployed and run on such a de- vice, can immediately access the Hydra
network. Resource- constraint devices such as sensors will interact with the rest of the Hydra network
through a Proxy running on a ded- icated gateway. Such proxies handle the communication with the
resource-constraint devices and manage the pro- tocol conversion to achieve an IP communication.
The Hydra middleware needs to offer an efficient way to share resources among the Hydra Network, in a
scalable, distributed and efficient way. It also needs to prevent system failures when a node is not available,
and allow ubiquitous access to the network. Therefore, the Network Manager implements JXTA as the
Peer-to-Peer model for device to device communication.
The Crypto, Trust and Policy Managers take care for cryptographic operations, the evaluation of trust in
different tokens and the enforcement of access control security policies. Hydra introduces a layered
architecture of context-aware applications:

The Hydra Middleware Architecture.

A specific set of Hydra managers realise this layered model: The Application Device and the Application
Service Man- agers provide programming interfaces and information for the different sensor devices to the
software developers. The Data Acquisition Component retrieves the data delivered by the sensors (via push
or pull mode) and check the values for plausibility.
The Context Manager allows for the definition of an appli- cation-dependent context model using key-value
pairs or OWL/SWRL ontologies managed by the Ontology Manager. The Ontology Manager is also
involved in the reasoning about context information and the semantic processing[5].
Furthermore, the Event Manager provides a topic based publish-subscribe service for context information
and the Storage Manager realises the persistent storage of this in- formation in Hydra middleware.

The Hydra middleware addresses a lot of features as can be derived from chapter 2. The major issues that
are covered by this work are summarized again in the following:
Context awareness is provided in the scope of autho- rization, restrictions on information access, door ac-
cess control and the supervision of he patient or the owner’s presence state, respectively. If a situation oc-
curs in which certain demands are not met, the sys- tem recognizes the erroneous state and reacts to it in
a situation-specific way.
Many kinds of connections, including serial ports, LAN, WiFi or Bluetooth, can be used within a Hydra
envi- ronment.
The Hydra Middleware is designed to run on resource restricted devices like Lego NXT bricks TM, the Wii
Board or even the PS3TM(regarding memory).
The system runs within a distributed architecture, i.e. each device offers services (or data) that can be con-
sumed by any other device.
The whole inter-device communication can all be se- cured. The decision is made by the developer. The
Hydra Middleware handles the technical realization.
 IoT Applications for Smart Cities
The Internet-of-Things (IoT) is the novel cutting-edge technology which proffers to connect
plethora of digital devices endowed with several sensing, actuation and computing capabilities
with the Internet, thus offers manifold new services in the context of a smart city. The appealing
IoT services and big data analytics are enabling smart city initiatives all over the world. These
services are transforming cities by improving infrastructure, transportation systems, reduced
traffic congestion, waste management and the quality of human life. In this paper, we devise a
taxonomy to best bring forth a generic overview of IoT paradigm for smart cities, integrated
information and communication technologies (ICT), network types, possible opportunities and
major requirements. Moreover, an overview of the up-to-date efforts from standard bodies is
presented. Later, we give an overview of existing open source IoT platforms for realizing smart
city applications followed by several exemplary case studies. In addition, we summarize the
latest synergies and initiatives worldwide taken to promote IoT in the context of smart cities.
Finally, we highlight several challenges in order to give future research directions.

An Illustration Based Smart City

IOT BASED SMART CITY TAXONOMY

This section presents a taxonomy of IoT based smart cities which categorizes the literature on the
basis of existing communication protocols, major service providers, network types,
standardization efforts, offered services, and crucial requirements.

Communication Protocols

IoT based smart city realization significantly relies on numerous short and wide range
communication protocols to transport data between devices and backend servers. Most
prominent short range wireless technologies include Zig-Bee, Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, Wireless
Metropolitan Area Network (WiMAX) and IEEE 802.11p which are primarily used in smart
metering, e-healthcare and vehicular communication. Wide range technologies such as Global
System for Mobile communication (GSM) and GPRS, Long-Term Evolution (LTE), LTE-
Advanced are commonly utilized in ITS such as vehicle-to infrastructure (V2I), mobile e-
healthcare, smart grid and infotainment services. Additionally, LTE-M is considered as an
evolution for cellular IoT (C-IoT). In Release 13, 3GPP plans to further improve coverage,
battery lifetime as well as device complexity [7]. Besides well-known existing protocols, LoRa
alliance standardizes the LoRaWAN protocol to support smart city applications to primarily
ensure interoperability between several operators. Moreover, SIGFOX is an ultra narrowband
radio technology with full star-based infrastructure offers a high scalable global network for
realizing smart city applications with extremely low power consumption. A comparative
summary2 of the major communication protocols.
Service Providers
Pike Research on smart cities estimated this market will grow to hundreds of billion dollars by
2020, with an annual growth of nearly 16 billion. IoT is recognized as a potential source to
increase revenue of service providers. Thus, well-known worldwide service providers have
already started exploring this novel cutting edge communication paradigm. Major service
providers include Telefonica, SK telecom, Nokia, Ericsson, Vodafone, NTT Docomo, Orange,
Telenor group and AT&T which offer variety of services and platforms for smart city
applications such as ITS and logistics, smart metering, home automation and e-healthcare.

Network Types
IoT based smart city applications rely on numerous network topologies to accomplish a fully
autonomous environment. The capillary IoT networks offer services over a short range.
Examples include wireless local area networks (WLANs), BANs and wireless personal area
networks (WPANs). The application areas include indoor e-healthcare services, homeautomation,
street lighting. On the other hand, applications such as ITS, mobile e-healthcare and waste
management use wide area networks (WANs), metropolitan area networks (MANs), and mobile
communication networks. The above networks pose distinct features in terms of data, size,
coverage, latency requirements, and capacity.