The Criteria for Adapting a Blockchain Consensus Algorithm to IoT Networks †
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Basic Concepts
2.1. Overview of Blockchain Technology
- Decentralization: Blockchain can be used to solve bottleneck and point failure problems by eliminating the need for a trusted third party in a network [10].
- Immutability: One of the main strengths of Blockchain is its ability to store data in an immutable and secure manner. Each transaction is time-stamped and verified by the Blockchain network [11].
- Security: All transactions are encrypted, which means that modifying them becomes very difficult once they are recorded on the Blockchain [1].
- Data privacy: The immutable and reliable features of Blockchain make it an ideal choice for storing IoT data securely [12].
2.2. Overview of the IoT
3. Criteria for Adapting a Consensus Algorithm to IoT Networks (CA-IoT)
3.1. Computing Power
3.2. Latency
3.3. Data Security
- Address space: Blockchain possesses an address space that measures 160 bits, which differs from the IPv6 address space that measures 128 bits. A blockchain address is essentially a 20-byte or 160-bit hash of a public key generated through an ECDSA (Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm). Given its 160-bit address space, a blockchain has the ability to create and distribute addresses offline, allowing for the accommodation of approximately 1.46 ∗ 1048 IoT devices [21].
- Secure communications [22]: This is a critical aspect of both blockchain and IoT systems. In the context of blockchains, secure communication refers to the transmission of information between different nodes in a decentralized network in a way that maintains the integrity and confidentiality of the corresponding data. This is achieved through various cryptographic techniques such as digital signatures, hash functions, and encryption. In the case of the IoT, secure communication is essential because these devices are often connected to the internet and can transmit sensitive data such as personal information or confidential business data. IoT devices also have limited computational and storage capacity, which makes it difficult to implement complex security measures. Therefore, secure communication is crucial to ensure that data are transmitted securely between devices and to prevent unauthorized access to a network [22].
- Identification, authorization, and privacy: Blockchain smart contracts have the ability to provide decentralized authentication rules and logic allowing for the provision of singular and multi-party authentication to an IoT device [1].
3.4. Storage
3.5. Discussion
4. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Uddine, M.A.; Stranierie, A.; Gondal, I.; Balasubramanian, V. A Survey on the Adoption of Blockchain in IoT: Challenges and Solutions. Blockchain Res. Appl. 2021, 2, 100006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Salimitari, M.; Chatterjee, M. A survey on consensus protocols in blockchain for IoT networks. arXiv 2018, arXiv:1809.05613. [Google Scholar]
- Nakamoto, S. Bitcoin: A Peer-To-Peer Electronic Cash System. 2008. Available online: https://bitcoin.org/en/bitcoin-paper (accessed on 10 January 2023).
- Debus, J. Consensus methods in blockchain systems. Technol. Rep. 2017, 58, 13. [Google Scholar]
- Sompolinsky, Y.; Zohar, A. Secure high-rate transaction processing in bitcoin. In Proceedings of the Financial Cryptography and Data Security: 19th International Conference, FC 2015, San Juan, Puerto Rico, 26–30 January 2015; Revised Selected Papers 19. Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2015; pp. 507–527. [Google Scholar]
- Zheng, Z.; Xie, S.; Dai, H.N.; Chen, X.; Wang, H. Blockchain challenges and opportunities: A survey. Int. J. Web Grid Serv. 2018, 14, 352–375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dib, O.; Brousmiche, K.L.; Durand, A.; Thea, E.; Hamida, E.B. Consortium blockchains: Overview, applications and challenges. Int. J. Adv. Telecommun. 2018, 11, 51–64. [Google Scholar]
- Luu, L.; Narayanan, V.; Zheng, C.; Baweja, K.; Gilbert, S.; Saxena, P. A secure sharding protocol for open blockchains. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSAC conference on computer and communications security, Vienna, Austria, 24–28 October 2016; pp. 17–30. [Google Scholar]
- Zamani, M.; Movahedi, M.; Raykova, M. Rapidchain: Scaling blockchain via full sharding. In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, Toronto, ON, Canada, 15–19 October 2018; pp. 931–948. [Google Scholar]
- Yu, Y.; Li, Y.; Tian, J.; Liu, J. Blockchain-Based Solutions to Security and Privacy Issues in the Internet of Things. IEEE Wirel. Commun. 2018, 25, 12–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tanwar, S.; Parekh, K.; Evans, R. Blockchain-based electronic healthcare record system for healthcare 4.0 applications. J. Inf. Secur. Appl. 2019, 50, 102407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dwivedi, A.D.; Malina, L.; Dzurenda, P.; Srivastava, G. Optimized Blockchain model for Internet of Things based healthcare applications. In Proceedings of the 2019 42nd International Conference on Telecommunications and Signal Processing, Budapest, Hungary, 1–3 July 2019; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2019; pp. 135–139. [Google Scholar]
- Shi, W.; Cao, J.; Zhang, Q.; Li, Y.; Xu, L. Edge Computing: Vision and Challenges. IEEE Internet Things J. 2016, 3, 637–646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dai, H.-N.; Zheng, Z.; Zhang, Y. Blockchain for Internet of Things: A Survey. IEEE Internet Things J. 2019, 6, 8076–8094. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Minoli, D.; Sohraby, K.; Kouns, J. IoT security (IoTSec) considerations, requirements, and architectures. In Proceedings of the 2017 14th IEEE Annual Consumer Communications & Networking Conference (CCNC), Las Vegas, NV, USA, 8–11 January 2017; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2017; pp. 1006–1007. [Google Scholar]
- Mekki, K.; Bajic, E.; Chaxel, F.; Meyer, F. A comparative study of LPWAN technologies for large-scale IoT deployment. ICT Express 2018, 5, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- What Are the Different Consensus Algorithms? Available online: https://en.archipels.io/faq/what-are-different-consensus-algorithms (accessed on 2 February 2023).
- AbuNaser, M.; Alkhatib, A.A. Advanced survey of blockchain for the internet of things smart home. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE Jordan International Joint Conference on Electrical Engineering and Information Technology (JEEIT), Amman, Jordan, 9–11 April 2019; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2017; pp. 58–62. [Google Scholar]
- Uddin, A.; Stranieri, A.; Gondal, I.; Balasubramanian, V. Blockchain leveraged decentralized IoT eHealth framework. Internet Things 2020, 9, 100159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Islam, N.; Faheem, Y.; Din, I.U.; Talha, M.; Guizani, M.; Khalil, M. A blockchain-based fog computing framework for activity recognition as an application to e-Healthcare services. Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst. 2019, 100, 569–578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Antonopoulos, A.M. Mastering Bitcoin: Unlocking Digital Crypto-Currencies, 1st ed.; O’Reilly Media, Inc.: Sebastopol, CA, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Khan, M.A.; Salah, K. IoT security: Review, blockchain solutions, and open challenges. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 2018, 82, 395–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Puthal, D.; Mohanty, S.P.; Yanambaka, V.P.; Kougianos, E. PoAh A Novel Consensus Algorithm for Fast Scalable Private Blockchain for Large-scale IoT Frameworks. arXiv 2001, arXiv:2001.07297. [Google Scholar]
Security | Latency | Data Storage | Computing Power |
---|---|---|---|
High | Low (in order of milliseconds) | High | Low |
Consensus Algorithm | Latency | Data Storage | Computing Power |
---|---|---|---|
POW | High (on the order of minutes) | High | High |
PoET | Low (on the order of milliseconds) | High | Low |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Aghroud, M.; Oualla, M.; El Bermi, L. The Criteria for Adapting a Blockchain Consensus Algorithm to IoT Networks. Comput. Sci. Math. Forum 2023, 6, 9. https://doi.org/10.3390/cmsf2023006009
Aghroud M, Oualla M, El Bermi L. The Criteria for Adapting a Blockchain Consensus Algorithm to IoT Networks. Computer Sciences & Mathematics Forum. 2023; 6(1):9. https://doi.org/10.3390/cmsf2023006009
Chicago/Turabian StyleAghroud, Mohamed, Mohamed Oualla, and Lahcen El Bermi. 2023. "The Criteria for Adapting a Blockchain Consensus Algorithm to IoT Networks" Computer Sciences & Mathematics Forum 6, no. 1: 9. https://doi.org/10.3390/cmsf2023006009
APA StyleAghroud, M., Oualla, M., & El Bermi, L. (2023). The Criteria for Adapting a Blockchain Consensus Algorithm to IoT Networks. Computer Sciences & Mathematics Forum, 6(1), 9. https://doi.org/10.3390/cmsf2023006009