Mendoza-Cardenas Fredy1
Aparcana-Tasayco Andres J.1
Leon-Aguilar Rai Stiv1
Quiroz-Arroyo Jose Luis1
-
(Instituto Nacional de Investigacion y Capacitacion de Telecomunicaciones, Universidad
Nacional de Ingenieria / Lima, Peru {fmendoza, aaparcana, rleon, jquiroz}@inictel-uni.edu.pe
)
Copyright © The Institute of Electronics and Information Engineers(IEIE)
Keywords
Systematic literature review (SLR), Cryptography, Privacy, Confidentiality, Resource-constrained IoT
1. Introduction
The Internet of Things (IoT) is intelligent devices connected to a network, which
enables the collection, transmission, and processing of real-world data. The IoT is
used in a wide range of applications, such as supply chain management, industry, wireless
sensor networks, logistics, healthcare, smart cities, big data, social computing,
and cloud computing [1].
In the IoT, the devices are key elements that can be divided into two categories:
resource-rich IoT devices and resource-constrained IoT devices. Resource-rich devices
are personal computers, servers, laptops, etc. Resource-constrained devices are sensor
nodes, RFID tags, actuators, etc. [2]. Resource-constrained devices have increased in popularity due to their increased
use in applications.
Some applications work with critical data that require confidentiality during transmission
over the network. Therefore, IoT systems must offer security features that include
authorization, authentication, data confidentiality, and integrity protection [3]. In this scenario, cryptography is a tool to ensure authentication, authorization,
confidentiality, privacy, and data integrity. However, the resource-constrained nature
of some IoT applications does not make conventional cryptographic algorithms feasible
[4]. Lightweight cryptography is an answer to the problem, introducing lightweight features
such as less memory usage, less processing, and low power consumption in resource-constrained
devices [2].
Security concerns have received attention in several research fields over the past
few years. Therefore, the INICTEL-UNI’s cybersecurity research group works on cryptography
in resource-constrained IoT devices. It is thought there has been an increase in the
number of papers. A systematic literature review (SLR) is needed to search for these
papers and answer relevant questions for researchers in the area.
This study answers questions on the most productive authors, the most cited papers,
and the most frequent words used in cryptography for privacy in a resource-constrained
IoT by applying an SLR based on the Kitchenham [5] and PRISMA [6] guidelines.
The paper is structured as follows: Section 2 presents the problem in general, a summary
of related work, and the contributions of this study. Section 3 explains the methodology
used for the SLR. Section 4 analyzes and compares the results. Finally, Section 5
presents the conclusions and limitations of this study, and proposes future research.
2. Related Work
In a systematic literature review, a search strategy for review papers is applied
to compare the results. However, none of the papers found for this study completely
matched the research variables selected, the methodology used, and the questions posed.
In spite of this, important contributions were collected that at least matched some
of the points mentioned above. Likewise, this study highlights that the research papers
found were published after 2018, so a review can still be conducted to analyze the
impact of cryptography in a resource-constrained IoT.
In 2018, Gandara et al. [7] conducted a systematic literature review on hybrid cryptography in wireless sensor
networks. The study relied on three databases: IEEE Xplore, Science Direct, and the
ACM Digital Library. Four inclusion criteria, four exclusion criteria, and six quality
assessments were used, and the systematic review obtained 14 papers. That study indicated
that cryptography was used as a security mechanism to overcome security problems in
WSNs to methodically increase the level of security (confidentiality, integrity, authentication,
and non-repudiation) and to decrease the use of resources. Also in 2018, Liao et al.
[8] presented a systematic review focused on the Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT).
That study searched three databases: Scopus, IEEE Xplore, and ScienceDirect. Using
four inclusion criteria and eight exclusion criteria, the systematic review yielded
94 papers, pointed out key differences between Industry 4.0 and the IIoT, further
investigated the coexistence and limitations of multiple IIoT standards and technologies
in one application, and outlined several research directions for the future of IIoT
research. In 2019, Alloghani et al. [9] conducted a systematic review for homomorphic encryption studies in three databases:
ProQuest, Web of Science, and IEEE Xplore. Their review applied PRISMA principles,
found 59 papers, and presented research questions similar to those in our study. Macedo
et al. [10] applied a systematic literature review (based on Kitchenham guidelines) for the security
aspects of the Internet of Things. The study found 131 research papers and presented
an increased number of publications in which cryptography was included. Rani & Singh
Gill [11] presented a review of some security protocols using lightweight cryptography. That
study did not present any systematic review features comparable to our study; of importance,
however, it highlighted the presentation of different lightweight encryption algorithms.
In 2020, Haro-Olmo et al. [12] presented a systematic literature review on Blockchain from a privacy perspective.
That study performed the SLR based on Kitchenham guidelines with 28 primaries and
six databases: Google Scholar, the ACM Digital Library, Springer, IEEE Xplore, Science
Direct, and Scopus. A study by Latif et al. [13] presented a review of key management and lightweight cryptography for the IoT, which
showed the strengths and weaknesses of various lightweight cryptography algorithms.
A 2020 study by Zagi and Aziz [14] performed a systematic literature review of the IoT and privacy. They employed two
databases: ACM and Science Direct. PRISMA principles were applied, and 88 papers were
obtained. It presented the challenges affecting IoT privacy, the gaps in IoT security
aspects, plus the different types of IoT attacks and their solutions. In 2021, Rao
& Prema [15] published a review on lightweight cryptography for IoT-based applications. The authors
analyzed various lightweight cryptography solutions and their security threats against
authentication and data integrity. Also in 2021, Thakor et al. [2] presented a review of lightweight cryptography for resource-constrained IoT devices
and showed key concepts for understanding the field. They also analyzed and compared
various lightweight cryptography algorithms, concluding with future research directions
that may be useful to researchers in the field. That study served as a basis for the
present study in determining the characteristics for developing the search strategy.
At the end of a search for similar review studies, no research was found that posed
an SLR paper on cryptography for privacy in a resource-constrained IoT.
The main contribution of the present study is to analyze and visually present the
results of a systematic literature review on cryptography for privacy in a resource-constrained
IoT along with the following:
· to apply an SLR methodology based on the Kitchenham and PRISMA guidelines for cryptography,
privacy, and the resource-constrained IoT, and
· to present visual results for the questions posed by using an automated tool supported
by Microsoft Power BI software.
3. Methodology
The systematic literature review methodology by Kitchenham [5] defines research phases and techniques involving research problems and objectives,
database searches and strategies, search results, exclusion criteria, paper selection,
and quality assessment, including a data extraction strategy, and finally, data synthesis.
The execution of each phase for our study was carried out March 1-18, 2022.
3.1 Research Questions and Objectives
Formulating the research questions and establishing the research objectives is the
first phase in a systematic literature review. This phase is important for planning
the search strategy, data extraction, and data analysis. Table 1 shows our research questions and their respective objectives.
Table 1. Our Research Questions and Objectives.
|
Question
|
Objective
|
|
RQ1: How many studies were published over the years?
|
Determine which studies have been published over the years.
|
|
RQ2: Which are the countries with the most production in the area?
|
Identify the countries with the most studies produced.
|
|
RQ3: Which databases include the most papers on cryptography in a resource-constrained
IoT?
|
Determine the databases that had the most papers on cryptography in a resource-constrained
IoT.
|
|
RQ4: Who are the most productive authors in cryptography development?
|
Determine the authors who studied the development of cryptography the most.
|
|
RQ5: Which publication media are the main targets for research in the area?
|
Determine the publication media databases that are the main targets of such research.
|
|
RQ6: What are the most cited papers on cryptography and its influence on privacy in
a resource-constrained IoT?
|
Determine which papers on cryptography and its influence on privacy in the resource-constrained
IoT were cited the most.
|
|
RQ7: What are the most used keywords?
|
Identify keywords that were used the most.
|
|
RQ8: What are the most frequent words in titles and abstracts?
|
Identify the most frequently used words in titles and abstracts
|
|
RQ9: What are the affiliations with the most research in the area?
|
Determine which institutions do the most research in the area.
|
3.2 Sources and Strategies
The databases chosen contain research papers focused on engineering and were used
to search for papers relevant to our study. The databases were IEEE Xplore, Scopus,
Science Direct, and the ACM Digital Library.
The search strategy necessitates the identification of important descriptors for the
study, which are presented in Table 2. The descriptors contain synonyms that are separated by a slash (/).
Search equations were used in the search procedure, which are shown in Table 3. The syntax of each of the databases was rigorously respected.
Table 2. Search Descriptors.
|
Descriptor
|
Variable
|
|
Encryption / Cryptography
|
Independent
|
|
Privacy / Confidentiality
|
Dependent
|
|
IoT
|
|
Methodology / Method / Model
|
Table 3. Databases and Search Equations.
|
Databases
|
Search equation
|
|
IEEE Xplore
|
(("Full Text .AND. Metadata":Encryption) OR ("Full Text .AND. Metadata":Cryptography))
AND (("Full Text .AND. Metadata":Privacy) OR ("Full Text .AND. Metadata":Confidentiality))
AND ("Full Text .AND. Metadata":IoT) AND (("Full Text .AND. Metadata":Methodology)
OR ("Full Text .AND. Metadata":Method) OR ("Full Text .AND. Metadata":Model))
|
|
Scopus
|
ALL ((encryption OR cryptography) AND ( privacy OR confidentiality) AND (iot) AND
(methodology OR method OR model))
|
|
Science Direct
|
(Encryption OR Cryptography) AND (Privacy OR Confidentiality) AND (IoT) AND (Methodology
OR Method OR Model)
|
|
ACM Digital Library
|
[[All: encryption] OR [All: cryptography]] AND [[All: privacy] OR [All: confidentiality]]
AND [All: iot] AND [[All: methodology] OR [All: method] OR [All: model]]
|
3.3 Studies Identified
Once the search for research papers is carried out, the results are shown in a diagram
that includes the databases and the total set of papers found, as shown in Fig. 1.
Fig. 1. Number of relevant papers in each database.
3.4 Exclusion Criteria
Exclusion criteria were defined to filter papers relevant to the research. Given the
criteria below, papers were filtered in the following order:
EC1. The paper is older than the years 2019-2021.
EC2. The paper is not written in English.
EC3. The paper was not published in a peer-reviewed journal.
EC4. Index terms do not contain Cryptography.
EC5. The proposed solution is not applicable to privacy in a resource-constrained
IoT.
EC6. The abstract does not focus on resource-constrained or lightweight.
EC7. The paper is not unique.
EC8. The full text of the paper is not available.
3.5 Selection of Papers
The first results totaled 31 010 papers based on the strategy described in Section
3.2. The selection and filtering steps were as follows.
1) Apply exclusion criteria to obtain papers relevant to the study.
2) Apply quality assessments to include papers that give a clear answer to the given
research questions.
The results of the first step yielded 245 primary studies, as shown in Fig. 2 (PRISMA Chart).
Fig. 2. Exclusion criteria.
3.6 Quality Assessment
Applying quality assessment is the second step described in Section 3.5 to identify
a final set of papers to be included in the systematic review. Four QA criteria were
selected, as follows.
QA1. Are the research objectives clearly identified in the paper?
QA2. Does the paper explain the context in which the research was conducted?
QA3. Is the document well organized?
QA4. Are the results of the experiment clearly identified and reported?
After a review of the 245 primary studies, nine papers were discarded, and the remaining
236 studies met the quality criteria, every one having been published in journals
in Q1, Q2, and Q3 according to SCImago and which is shown in Table 4. We assume that these peer-reviewed papers were verified to ensure their relevance
and are in accordance with the objectives of the study initially posed.
Table 4. Journals and Papers by Quartile.
|
Quartile
|
Journals
|
Papers
|
|
Q1
|
33
|
168
|
|
Q2
|
12
|
60
|
|
Q3
|
2
|
8
|
|
Q4
|
0
|
0
|
|
Total
|
47
|
236
|
3.7 Data Extraction Strategy
In this subsection, use is made of a data collection structure where the necessary
information is extracted to answer the research questions. The information extracted
from each paper included the paper’s ID, title, URL, source, year, country, number
of pages, language, paper type, publisher's name, author(s), affiliation(s), number
of times cited, abstract, and keywords. Zotero was used to obtain the data shown in
Fig. 3.
Fig. 3. Report in Zotero.
3.8 Data Synthesis
Finally, the data extracted that responded to the research questions were collected
and entered into an Excel spreadsheet. Subsequently, the data obtained were analyzed
and presented visually in figures and tables with the Microsoft Power BI tool. The
online location for a listing of the 236 primary studies is in Appendix A.
4. Results and Discussion
This section describes the results for each of the research questions formulated and
discusses the results with related work.
4.1 RQ1: How many studies were published over the years?
Fig. 4 shows the distribution of papers by year from 2019 to 2021; however, during the research,
some papers published between these years were included in journals for a later year
(2022). The numbers of papers published during 2019, 2020, and 2021, were 58, 71,
and 98, respectively; the number of papers published in 2022 at the time of the search
was nine. The number of papers published during the previous few years increased significantly
each year.
The results for papers published from 2019 to 2022 demonstrate that cryptography for
privacy in the resource-constrained IoT is a current topic.
The systematic reviews found, however, are not comparable with the present study.
However, we noted that a study by Alloghani et al. [9] showed a decrease in the production of papers on homomorphic encryption from 2014
to 2018. On the other hand, Macedo et al. [10] found that studies on security aspects within the IoT that involved encryption increased
in the years 2013-2018.
Fig. 4. Numbers of papers over the years.
4.2 RQ2: Which are the countries with the most production in the area?
Fig. 5 shows a world map of the countries with the highest number of published papers on
cryptography in the resource-constrained IoT. Fig. 6 shows that China, India, Pakistan, and Iran are the countries with the highest numbers
of papers published in this review at 81, 44, 16, and 10, respectively.
The results highlight that the majority of published papers on cryptography in the
resource-constrained IoT were found on the Asian continent.
Despite not obtaining comparable review papers, a systematic review within the area
of encryption is presented. Alloghani et al. [9] wrote that the countries with the highest research output in homomorphic encryption
were India, the United States of America, the United Kingdom, and China. This study
confirms it not surprising that these countries publish about security. Homomorphic
encryption cryptographic solutions were found in this study, along with other algorithms.
The research agrees on some of the main countries. Our study highlights China and
India as having the highest research production, while the U.S. and the U.K. do not
stand out in that area.
Fig. 5. World map showing countries with the highest numbers of published papers.
Fig. 6. Number of papers published per country.
4.3 RQ3: Which databases include the most papers on cryptography in a resource-constrained
IoT?
The databases that published the most papers are Scopus, IEEE Xplore, Science Direct,
and the ACM Digital Library at 100, 74, 57, and five, respectively. Fig. 7 shows the number of publications per database. Fig. 8 shows the number of publications per database and publication year. Fig. 8 also shows that the number of publications in at least three of the databases has
increased over the years.
The results demonstrate that databases with engineering papers show increased numbers
of papers on cryptography for privacy in the resource-constrained IoT; Scopus was
the database with highest number. No similar papers raising exactly the same research
questions were found.
Fig. 7. The number of papers per database.
Fig. 8. Numbers of papers per database and publication year.
4.4 RQ4: Who are the most productive authors in cryptography development?
Fig. 9 shows publications by authors, where Ximeng Liu was listed on six papers, while Hongwei
Li, Insaf Ullah, Kim-Kwang Raymond Choo, Muhammad Asghar Khan, Saru Kumari, Satyabrata
Roy, Umashankar Rawat, and Xiaojiang Du were listed on four.
The results highlight that the most productive authors in the publication of such
papers are the 72 authors credited on two or more publications. Review papers found
did not present similar questions.
Fig. 9. Number of papers per author.
4.5 RQ5: Which publication media are the main targets for research in the area?
Fig. 10 shows that the main publication media for research in the area under study were IEEE
Access, IEEE Internet of Things Journal, Sensors, and Future Generation Computer Systems
with 55, 38, 18, and 11 papers, respectively. According to the SCImago portal, the
respective publishers of these journals are IEEE for the first two, then MDPI and
Elsevier.
The results highlight that most of the papers searched for on this research topic
were found in IEEE Access, a peer-reviewed, open access journal. The systematic reviews
found did not present the same search as the present study, therefore, no comparable
papers were found. However, the study by Alloghani et al. [9] focused on homomorphic encryption indicated that the main publication media were
the International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science and the International
Journal of Computer Network and Information Security. In our study, these journals
were not found among the main publication outlets.
Fig. 10. Number of papers per publication media.
4.6 RQ6: What are the most cited papers on cryptography and its influence on privacy
in a resource-constrained IoT?
Fig. 11 lists papers with their respective number of citations, the highest of which were
Privacy-Preserving Support Vector Machine Training Over Blockchain-Based Encrypted
IoT Data in Smart Cities; ＄mathsf{LightChain}＄: A Lightweight Blockchain System for
Industrial Internet of Things; and LAM-CIoT: Lightweight authentication mechanism
in cloud-based IoT environment (163, 106, and 101 citations, respectively)-more than
100 based on this review.
The results of this review highlight that there were at least 32 papers out of the
236 with more than 20 citations focused on cryptography and its influence on data
privacy. The review papers found did not present similar questions.
Fig. 11. Papers and numbers of citations.
4.7 RQ7: What are the most used keywords?
Results show that the most used keyword/phrase is Internet of Things at 63 mentions
in the papers from this research. Fig. 12 shows the keywords in a word cloud, in which the important keywords are security,
IoT, authentication, Blockchain, Internet of Things (IoT), and access control at 43,
36, 31, 28, 23, and 15 mentions, respectively, which are listed in Fig. 13.
In the research area, keywords that should be used include Internet of Things (or
IoT) and security. Also, key technologies such as blockchain, cloud computing, cryptography,
and attribute-based encryption should be taken into account. The review papers found
did not present similar questions.
Fig. 12. Word cloud of keywords.
Fig. 13. Number of mentions per keyword.
4.8 RQ8: What are the most frequent words in titles and abstracts?
Fig. 14 shows the words mentioned in titles as a word cloud; thus, we can see that the most
important words are IoT, lightweight, Internet, secure, and authentication at 80,
77, 67, 61, and 45, respectively.
In the titles, words that should be used are lightweight, IoT, internet, secure, authentication,
scheme, and encryption.
Fig. 15 shows words used in abstracts, represented in a word cloud, and we can see that the
most important words are security, data, IoT, scheme, devices, and encryption at 510,
487, 425, 294, 229, and 238, respectively.
In research on this area, words that should be used in abstracts are IoT, security,
data, encryption, scheme, devices, and lightweight.
No studies comparable to ours, or similar questions, were found. However, it is worth
highlighting that the study by Alloghani et al. [9] showed a word cloud from selected papers. In that study, the following words stand
out: homomorphic (1802 occurrences) followed by security, scheme, information, and
secure. Many of these words are highlighted within the present paper along with lightweight,
which appears because of the focus on the resource-constrained IoT.
Fig. 14. Word cloud of words used in titles.
Fig. 15. Word cloud of words used in abstracts.
4.9 RQ9: What are the affiliations with the most research in the area?
The results determined that the most research in the area was from Xidian University,
as seen in Fig. 16. This university in China produced 11 research papers followed by the University
of Electronic Science and Technology of China with eight papers, Manipal University
Jaipur with four papers, then Beijing University of Post and Telecommunications, COMSATS
University Islamabad, Nanjing University of Posts and Telecommunications, and Vellore
Institute of Technology with three papers each, as seen in Fig. 17.
The affiliated institutions determined as the most productive were mostly from China,
which is also the country with the highest research production on the topic. The review
papers found did not present similar questions for comparison.
Fig. 16. Word cloud of affiliated institutions.
Fig. 17. The number of papers per affiliation.
5. Conclusion
Through a rigorous study on cryptography and its influence on privacy in the resource-constrained
IoT, 236 papers were identified. The papers contributed to answering the nine research
questions posed in this paper, and were chosen after searching the most specialized
scientific databases, applying exclusion criteria as well as quality criteria by adopting
the PRISMA and Kitchenham guidelines [5], and using the Zotero tool to extract correct data. In the results and discussion,
important findings are shown in the response to RQ1, indicating that the number of
papers published from 2019 to 2021 increased. RQ2 showed that most publications of
scientific papers on cryptography for privacy in the resource-constrained IoT were
from the Asian continent. The result of RQ3 showed that most engineering paper databases
increased research production on cryptography for privacy in the resource-constrained
IoT over the three years under study, with Scopus returning the highest number of
research papers. RQ4 highlighted 72 authors as more productive in publishing papers,
with two or more to their names. RQ5 indicated that most of the publications in this
research were in IEEE Access, with RQ6 highlighting at least 32 papers with more than
20 citations focused on cryptography for privacy in the resource-constrained IoT.
From RQ7, keywords that should be used in such research papers include Internet of
Things (or IoT) and security. From RQ8 the words most frequently used in the titles
and abstracts were lightweight, IoT, encryption, and scheme. RQ9 determined that the
most productive affiliated institutions were in China, which is also the country with
more papers produced.
Finally, this study concludes that cryptography for privacy in the resource-constrained
IoT is a developing area of research. It presents an overview of how to find useful
works for research on cryptography for privacy in the resource-constrained IoT, resulting
in a list of high-level works (see Appendix A). This study presents helpful information
for researchers who are interested in knowing the work of high-level researchers at
worldwide institutions. Additionally, it presents valuable insight that could improve
the readability of new work, and it introduced related emerging technologies.
The present work has a limitation from not using more databases owing to a lack of
access. Another limitation comes from not using databases because they did not have
a powerful filtering tool. In addition, a small range of publication years was used,
so a wider range could improve the conclusions from our work.
Researchers on cryptography and its influence on privacy in the resource-constrained
IoT are advised to ensure their review papers consider descriptors and keywords found
from this study.
We are going to use the selected primary studies to answer more complex questions,
including those on cryptography algorithms and IoT devices used in this research area.
Appendix A. Selected Primary Studies
The 236 primary studies are listed in the GitLab repository (available at https://gitlab.com/crypto-iot-inictel-uni-research-group/crypto-privacy-iot-slr).
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work was supported by Instituto Nacional de Investigacion y Capacitacion
de Telecomunicaciones, Universidad Nacional de Ingenieria, Lima Peru.
REFERENCES
Jabraeil Jamali M. A., Bahrami B., Heidari A., Allahverdizadeh P., Norouzi F., 2020,
IoT Architecture, in Towards the Internet of Things, Cham: Springer International
Publishing, pp. 9-31
Thakor V. A., Razzaque M. A., Khandaker M. R. A., 2021, Lightweight Cryptography Algorithms
for Resource-Constrained IoT Devices: A Review, Comparison and Research Opportunities,
IEEE Access, Vol. 9, pp. 28177-28193
Lee G. M., Crespi N., Choi J. K., Boussard M., 2013, Internet of Things, in Evolution
of Telecommunication Services: The Convergence of Telecom and Internet: Technologies
and Ecosystems, E. Bertin, N. Crespi, T. Magedanz, Eds. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer,
pp. 257-282
Pereira F., Correia R., Pinho P., Lopes S. I., Carvalho N. B., Jan. 2020, Challenges
in Resource-Constrained IoT Devices: Energy and Communication as Critical Success
Factors for Future IoT Deployment, Sensors, Vol. 20, No. 22, Art. no. 22
Kitchenham B., Jul. 2007, Guidelines for performing Systematic Literature Reviews
in Software Engineering, Keele University, UK, EBSE Technical Report
Moher D., Liberati A., Tetzlaff J., Altman D. G., The PRISMA Group , Jul. 2009, Preferred
Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement, PLoS
Med., Vol. 6, No. 7, pp. e1000097
Gandara R. B., Wang G., Utama D. N., Sep. 2018, Hybrid Cryptography on Wireless Sensor
Network: A Systematic Literature Review, in 2018 International Conference on Information
Management and Technology (ICIMTech), Jakarta, pp. 241-245
Liao Y., de Freitas Rocha Loures E., Deschamps F., Dec. 2018, Industrial Internet
of Things: A Systematic Literature Review and Insights, IEEE Internet Things J., Vol.
5, No. 6, pp. 4515-4525
Alloghani M., et al. , Oct. 2019, A systematic review on the status and progress of
homomorphic encryption technologies, J. Inf. Secur. Appl., Vol. 48, pp. 102362
Macedo E. L. C., et al. , Oct. 2019, On the security aspects of Internet of Things:
A systematic literature review, J. Commun. Netw., Vol. 21, No. 5, pp. 444-457
Rani D., Singh Gill N., Jun. 2019, Lightweight Security Protocols for Internet of
Things: A Review, Int. J. Adv. Trends Comput. Sci. Eng., Vol. 8, No. 3, pp. 707-719
de Haro-Olmo F. J., Varela-Vaca Á. J., Álvarez-Bermejo J. A., Dec. 2020, Blockchain
from the Perspective of Privacy and Anonymisation: A Systematic Literature Review,
Sensors, Vol. 20, No. 24, pp. 7171
Latif M. A., Ahmad M. B., Khan M. K., Oct. 2020, A Review on Key Management and Lightweight
Cryptography for IoT, in 2020 Global Conference on Wireless and Optical Technologies
(GCWOT), Malaga, Spain, pp. 1-7
Zagi L. M., Aziz B., Nov. 2020, Privacy Attack On IoT: a Systematic Literature Review,
in 2020 International Conference on ICT for Smart Society (ICISS), Bandung, Indonesia,
pp. 1-8
Rao V., Prema K. V., Sep. 2021, A review on lightweight cryptography for Internet-of-Things
based applications, J. Ambient Intell. Humaniz. Comput., Vol. 12, No. 9, pp. 8835-8857
Author
Fredy Mendoza-Cardenas is a Professor at the School of Tele-communications Engineering,
Univer-sidad Nacional de Ingenieria (UNI), Peru. He is the Lab Advisor of the Advanced
Networking Laboratory at UNI. He received his B.S. degree in Electronic Engineering
from Univer-sidad Nacional de Ingenieria, Peru, in 2003. He worked as a specialist
consultant in industrial and healthcare areas. Prof Mendoza-Cardenas served as a speaker
for the IEEE Communications Society. He is involved in the Leading University Project
for International Cooperation between SeoulTech and UNI. He is a Huawei Certified
Academy Instructor. Currently, he is pursuing a Master of Science at Universidad Nacional
de Ingenieria. He is a researcher specialist at Instituto Nacional de Investigacion
y Capacitacion de Telecomunicaciones, Universidad Nacional de Ingenieria. His research
interests include Lightweight cryptography, Resource-constrained IoT, Network security,
and Software-Defined Networking.
Andres J. Aparcana-Tasayco
Andres J. Aparcana-Tasayco re-ceived his Bach. Eng. in Systems Engineering in 2021
from Universidad Autonoma del Peru, Lima, Peru. His skills are Software Development,
Database Design and Programming, Machine Learning, Networking, and Network Programmability.
Additionally, he was awarded in Huawei’s ICT Competition Peru and Thesis Workshop
by Universidad Autonoma del Peru in 2021. In addition, he has published and reviewed
papers for international conferences. He was a research committee chair in his IEEE
Student Branch and is currently an IEEE, IEEE ComSoc, and IEEE Computer member. He
currently works as a research assistant at the coordination of Cybersecurity and Networking
in Instituto Nacional de Investigacion y Capacitacion de Telecomunicaciones, Universidad
Nacional de Ingenieria, Lima, Peru. His current research interests include virtualization
technologies and Software-Defined Networking, Programmable Data Planes, Network Monitoring,
and Network Security.
Rai Stiv Leon-Aguilar received his Bachelor of Science degree in Telecommunications
Engineering in 2021 from Universidad Nacional de Ingenieria, Lima, Peru. He works
as an assistant researcher in the cybersecurity and network research group of the
Directorate of Research and Technological Development, in Instituto Nacional de Investigacion
y Capacitacion de Telecomunicaciones, Universidad Nacional de Ingenieria. He has participated
in the project CP-ABE encryption scheme on MQTT model for an IoT system. His current
research interests are cryptography, the Internet of Things, and computer security.
Jose Luis Quiroz-Arroyo received his Bachelor of Science degree in Electronic Engineering
in 1993 from Universidad Nacional de Ingenieria, Lima, Peru. He is an Electronic Engineer.
He graduated from the Telecommunications Master's Program at the National University
of San Marcos (UNMSM). He has specialization in telecommuni-cations, networking, security,
and ethical hacking. He is an instructor of courses in telecommunications, cybersecurity,
and Cisco CCNA, and is PECB ISO / IEC 27032 Lead Cybersecurity Manager, PECB ISO /
IEC 27001 Lead Implementer. He was a professor at the Faculty of Electrical and Electronic
Engineering (FIEE) of the National University of Engineering. He works as a Research
Specialist and is in charge of the cybersecurity and network research group of the
Directorate of Research and Technological Development, of the Instituto Nacional de
Investigacion y Capacitacion de Telecomunicaciones, Universidad Nacional de Ingenieria,
leading activities in Software Defined Networks (SDN), cryptography, honeypot systems,
and cyber threat intelligence. He was involved in various research and development
projects, including the installation and maintenance of the first experimental IPv6
node in Peru with connection to 6Bone, VoIP academic federated service of Peru incorporated
into NRENun.net, Open Source IMS experimental system. He has served as Coordinator
of the Mobility Working Group of RedCLARA (Latin American Cooperation of Advanced
Networks) for the implementation of the federated and confederated service of eduroam
(education roaming), collaborating in the ELCIRA Project of FP7 for deployment in
Latin America. His research interests include SDN, Internet Infrastructure Security,
Authentication and Authorization Infrastructures (AAI), IoT, and Cybersecurity.