Journal | Keywords |
---|---|
Academy of Management Discoveries | blockchain, digital currencies |
Academy of Management Perspectives | blockchain, governance |
Academy of Management Proceedings | internet of things, value proposition |
Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior | technology, work, organizations |
Big Data and Society | smart sensors, smart homes, human-computer interactions, APIs for smart cities, data co-creation, IoT for sustainability |
Business Horizons | dark data, internet of things, sensor-based entrepreneurship |
Business Information Review | Smart libraries, automated work |
Competition and Regulation in Network Industries | Smart grids/meters, AI regulations, 5G, smart cities |
Decision Support Systems | events, internet of things |
Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice | artificial intelligence, entrepreneurship |
European Management Journal | blockchain, shipping industry |
Global Business Review | Home automation, Smart cities |
Industrial Marketing Management | smart products, business markets |
Information and Organization | interfaces, internet of things |
Information Processing and Management | blockchain, IoT, blockchain, industry 4.0 |
Information Systems Research | Data Analytics and Big Data, IoT Security and Privacy, IoT-enabled Business Models |
International Journal of Engineering Business Management | Healthcare, IoT Inventory and Equipment Management, IoT for sustainability |
International Journal of Information Management | smart warehousing, voice shopping, trust, privacy |
International Journal of Management Education | online business education |
Journal of Business Research | service encounter, smart goods, digital innovation, housing market, travel agents, sustainable development, blockchain, augmented reality, purchase intention, digital business |
Journal of Business Venturing | maker movement, entrepreneurship, energy industry |
Journal of High Technology Management Research | electronic money, healthcare |
Journal of Industrial Information Integration | 5G, internet of things, logistics, RFID, blockchain, industrial IoT, wireless sensor networks |
Journal of Innovation and Knowledge | industry 4.0, decision-making |
Journal of Interactive Marketing | analytics models |
Journal of Management Studies | interorganizational, big data |
Journal of Marketing | Smart shopping/carts, retail |
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services | smart parcel locker, logistics, internet of things, retail |
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science | in-store technology, retail |
Journal of World Business | backshoring, industry 4.0 |
Long Range Planning | dynamic capabilities, digital transformation |
MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems | data analytics, asthma management, remote health, predictive analytics |
Production and Operations Management | Smart Manufacturing and Industry 4.0, Supply Chain Optimization, Predictive Maintenance |
Organization and Environment | consumer trust, energy utilities |
Research Policy | smart card |
Socio-economic Planning Sciences | internet of things, healthcare |
Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal | disruptors, entrepreneurial change |
Strategic Management Journal | platform creation |
Technology in Society | internet of things, technology acceptance, brain-machine interfaces |
Technovation | platform competition, internet of things |
Transportation Research, Part E | cybersecurity, logistics |
Theme | Subthemes | Current research status | Research gaps |
---|---|---|---|
Business Transformation | Servitization and Advanced Services; Innovation in Business Models; Sustainability and Circular Economy | Well-developed; focus on shift to service-based models and IoT-enabled business models | More research needed on long-term sustainability of IoT-based business models |
Organizational and Technical Factors | Impacts and Capabilities of Organizations; Smart Manufacturing and Industry 4.0; Technical Architecture and Security | Advancing rapidly; emphasis on organizational changes and Industry 4.0 applications | Further research required on organizational readiness and change management |
User-Centric Applications and Effects | Consumer Behavior and Intelligent Products; Enhancement of Customer/User Experience; Smart Monitoring and Applications | Growing focus; studies on user perceptions and IoT applications in various sectors | Need for more diverse sector studies beyond manufacturing and smart homes |
Challenges and Emerging Technologies | Challenges in IoT Adoption; IoT and Emerging Technologies; Data Analytics and Insights | Active area of research; addressing adoption barriers and exploring synergies with AI, blockchain | More research needed on overcoming interoperability issues and standards development |
Additional Themes | Collaboration among Stakeholders; Ethical Considerations | Emerging focus; relatively underrepresented | Urgent need for more research on ethical implications and collaborative IoT solution design |
Source(s): Table by authors
Agrawal , S. ( 2021 ), “ Integrating digital wallets: advancements in contactless payment technologies ”, International Journal of Intelligent Automation and Computing , Vol. 4 No. 8 , pp. 1 - 14 .
Al-Qaseemi , S.A. , Almulhim , H.A. , Almulhim , M.F. and Chaudhry , S.R. ( 2016 ), “ IoT architecture challenges and issues: lack of standardization ”, 2016 Future technologies conference (FTC) , IEEE , pp. 731 - 738 .
Aldossari , M.Q. and Sidorova , A. ( 2020 ), “ Consumer acceptance of internet of things (IoT): smart home context ”, Journal of Computer Information Systems , Vol. 60 No. 6 , pp. 507 - 517 , doi: 10.1080/08874417.2018.1543000 .
AlHogail , A. and AlShahrani , M. ( 2018 ), “ Building consumer trust to improve Internet of Things (IoT) technology adoption ”, International Conference on Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics , Springer , Cham , pp. 325 - 334 .
Alladi , T. , Chamola , V. , Sikdar , B. and Choo , K.K.R. ( 2020 ), “ Consumer IoT: security vulnerability case studies and solutions ”, IEEE Consumer Electronics Magazine , Vol. 9 No. 2 , pp. 17 - 25 , doi: 10.1109/mce.2019.2953740 .
Alshaal , S.E. , Michael , S. , Pamporis , A. , Herodotou , H. , Samaras , G. and Andreou , P. ( 2016 ), “ Enhancing virtual reality systems with smart wearable devices ”, 2016 17th IEEE International Conference on Mobile Data Management (MDM) , Vol. 1 , IEEE , pp. 345 - 348 , doi: 10.1109/mdm.2016.60 .
Ashton , K. ( 2009 ), “ That ‘internet of things’ thing ”, RFID Journal , Vol. 22 No. 7 , pp. 97 - 114 .
Assiri , A. and Almagwashi , H. ( 2018 ), “ IoT security and privacy issues ”, 2018 1st International Conference on Computer Applications & Information Security (ICCAIS) , IEEE , pp. 1 - 5 .
Blythe , J.M. and Johnson , S.D. ( 2018 ), “ The Consumer Security Index for IoT: a protocol for developing an index to improve consumer decision making and to incentivize greater security provision in IoT devices ”, Living in the Internet of Things: Cybersecurity of the IoT-2018 , IET , pp. 1 - 7 .
Blythe , J.M. , Sombatruang , N. and Johnson , S.D. ( 2019 ), “ What security features and crime prevention advice is communicated in consumer IoT device manuals and support pages? ”, Journal of Cybersecurity , Vol. 5 No. 1 , tyz005 , doi: 10.1093/cybsec/tyz005 .
Borges , A.F. , Laurindo , F.J. , Spínola , M.M. , Gonçalves , R.F. and Mattos , C.A. ( 2021 ), “ The strategic use of artificial intelligence in the digital era: systematic literature review and future research directions ”, International Journal of Information Management , Vol. 57 , 102225 , doi: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102225 .
Boyes , H. , Hallaq , B. , Cunningham , J. and Watson , T. ( 2018 ), “ The industrial internet of things (IIoT): an analysis framework ”, Computers in Industry , Vol. 101 , pp. 1 - 12 , doi: 10.1016/j.compind.2018.04.015 .
Brereton , P. , Kitchenham , B.A. , Budgen , D. , Turner , M. and Khalil , M. ( 2007 ), “ Lessons from applying the systematic literature review process within the software engineering domain ”, Journal of Systems and Software , Vol. 80 No. 4 , pp. 571 - 583 , doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2006.07.009 .
Brous , P. , Janssen , M. , Schraven , D. , Spiegeler , J. and Duzgun , B.C. ( 2017 ), “ Factors influencing adoption of IoT for data-driven decision making in asset management organizations ”, IoTBDS , Vol. 2 , pp. 70 - 79 .
Brous , P. , Janssen , M. and Herder , P. ( 2019 ), “ Internet of Things adoption for reconfiguring decision-making processes in asset management ”, Business Process Management Journal , Vol. 25 No. 3 , pp. 495 - 511 , doi: 10.1108/bpmj-11-2017-0328 .
Brous , P. , Janssen , M. and Herder , P. ( 2020 ), “ The dual effects of the Internet of Things (IoT): a systematic review of the benefits and risks of IoT adoption by organizations ”, International Journal of Information Management , Vol. 51 , 101952 , doi: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.05.008 .
Burgess , M. ( 2018 ), “ What is the internet of things? ”, Wired Explains , available at: https://www.wired.co.uk/article/internet-of-things-what-is-explained-iot ( accessed 7 October 2021 ).
Čolaković , A. and Hadžialić , M. ( 2018 ), “ Internet of Things (IoT): a review of enabling technologies, challenges, and open research issues ”, Computer Networks , Vol. 144 , pp. 17 - 39 , doi: 10.1016/j.comnet.2018.07.017 .
Curry , E. , Hasan , S. , Kouroupetroglou , C. , Fabritius , W. , Ul Hassan , U. and Derguech , W. ( 2018 ), “ Internet of things enhanced user experience for smart water and energy management ”, IEEE Internet Computing , Vol. 22 No. 1 , pp. 18 - 28 , doi: 10.1109/mic.2018.011581514 .
Dagher , L. , Shi , H. , Zhao , Y. and Marrouche , N.F. ( 2020 ), “ Wearables in cardiology: here to stay ”, Heart Rhythm , Vol. 17 No. 5 , pp. 889 - 895 , doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2020.02.023 .
De Boer , P.S. , Van Deursen , A.J. and Van Rompay , T.J. ( 2019 ), “ Accepting the Internet-of-Things in our homes: the role of user skills ”, Telematics and Informatics , Vol. 36 , pp. 147 - 156 , doi: 10.1016/j.tele.2018.12.004 .
De Luzi , F. , Leotta , F. , Marrella , A. and Mecella , M. ( 2024 ), “ On the interplay between business process management and internet-of-things: a systematic literature review ”, Business and Information Systems Engineering , pp. 1 - 24 , doi: 10.1007/s12599-024-00859-6 , available at : https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12599-024-00859-6#citeas
Del Giudice , M. ( 2016 ), “ Discovering the Internet of Things (IoT): technology and business process management, inside and outside the innovative firms ”, Business Process Management Journal , Vol. 22 No. 2 , doi: 10.1108/bpmj-02-2016-0029 .
Delgosha , M.S. , Hajiheydari , N. and Talafidaryani , M. ( 2021 ), “ Discovering IoT implications in business and management: a computational thematic analysis ”, Technovation , Vol. 118 , 102236 , doi: 10.1016/j.technovation.2021.102236 .
Dian , F.J. , Vahidnia , R. and Rahmati , A. ( 2020 ), “ Wearables and the internet of things (IoT), applications, opportunities, and challenges: a survey ”, IEEE Access , Vol. 8 , pp. 69200 - 69211 , doi: 10.1109/access.2020.2986329 .
Dijkman , R.M. , Sprenkels , B. , Peeters , T. and Janssen , A. ( 2015 ), “ Business models for the internet of things ”, International Journal of Information Management , Vol. 35 No. 6 , pp. 672 - 678 , doi: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2015.07.008 .
Fauquex , M. , Goyal , S. , Evequoz , F. and Bocchi , Y. ( 2015 ), “ Creating people-aware IoT applications by combining design thinking and user-centered design methods ”, 2015 IEEE 2nd World Forum on Internet of Things (WF-IoT) , IEEE , pp. 57 - 62 .
Fink , A. ( 2005 ), Conducting Research Literature Reviews: From the Internet to Paper , 5th ed., Sage , Los Angeles .
Fraga-Lamas , P. , Fernández-Caramés , T.M. and Castedo , L. ( 2017 ), “ Towards the Internet of smart trains: a review on industrial IoT-connected railways ”, Sensors , Vol. 17 No. 6 , p. 1457 , doi: 10.3390/s17061457 .
Gaur , B. , Shukla , V.K. and Verma , A. ( 2019 ), “ Strengthening people analytics through wearable IOT device for real-time data collection ”, 2019 international conference on automation, computational and technology management (ICACTM) , IEEE , pp. 555 - 560 .
Gnoni , M.G. , Bragatto , P.A. , Milazzo , M.F. and Setola , R. ( 2020 ), “ Integrating IoT technologies for an “intelligent” safety management in the process industry ”, Procedia Manufacturing , Vol. 42 , pp. 511 - 515 , doi: 10.1016/j.promfg.2020.02.040 .
Gubbi , J. , Buyya , R. , Marusic , S. and Palaniswami , M. ( 2013 ), “ Internet of Things (IoT): a vision, architectural elements, and future directions ”, Future Generation Computer Systems , Vol. 29 No. 7 , pp. 1645 - 1660 , doi: 10.1016/j.future.2013.01.010 .
Haaker , T. , Ly , P.T.M. , Nguyen-Thanh , N. and Nguyen , H.T.H. ( 2021 ), “ Business model innovation through the application of the Internet-of-Things: a comparative analysis ”, Journal of Business Research , Vol. 126 , pp. 126 - 136 , doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.12.034 .
Henriette , E. , Feki , M. and Boughzala , I. ( 2015 ), “ The shape of digital transformation: a systematic literature review ”, MCIS 2015 proceedings , Vol. 10 , pp. 431 - 443 .
Ikävalko , H. , Turkama , P. and Smedlund , A. ( 2018 ), “ Value creation in the internet of things: mapping business models and ecosystem roles ”, Technology Innovation Management Review , Vol. 8 No. 3 , pp. 5 - 15 , doi: 10.22215/timreview/1142 .
Jia , X. , Feng , Q. , Fan , T. and Lei , Q. ( 2012 ), “ RFID technology and its applications in internet of things (IoT) ”, 2012 2nd international conference on consumer electronics, communications and networks (CECNet) , IEEE , pp. 1282 - 1285 .
Kitchenham , B. , Brereton , O.P. , Budgen , D. , Turner , M. , Bailey , J. and Linkman , S. ( 2009 ), “ Systematic literature reviews in software engineering–a systematic literature review ”, Information and Software Technology , Vol. 51 No. 1 , pp. 7 - 15 , doi: 10.1016/j.infsof.2008.09.009 .
Kocakulak , M. and Butun , I. ( 2017 ), “ An overview of Wireless Sensor Networks towards internet of things ”, 2017 IEEE 7th annual computing and communication workshop and conference (CCWC) , Ieee , pp. 1 - 6 .
Kraus , S. , Breier , M. and Dasí-Rodríguez , S. ( 2020 ), “ The art of crafting a systematic literature review in entrepreneurship research ”, International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal , Vol. 16 No. 3 , pp. 1023 - 1042 , doi: 10.1007/s11365-020-00635-4 .
Krotov , V. ( 2017 ), “ The Internet of Things and new business opportunities ”, Business Horizons , Vol. 60 No. 6 , pp. 831 - 841 , doi: 10.1016/j.bushor.2017.07.009 .
Laghari , A.A. , Wu , K. , Laghari , R.A. , Ali , M. and Khan , A.A. ( 2021 ), “ A review and state of art of Internet of Things (IoT) ”, Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering , Vol. 30 , pp. 1 - 19 .
Lee , I. and Lee , K. ( 2015 ), “ The internet of things (IoT): applications, investments, and challenges for enterprises ”, Business Horizons , Vol. 58 No. 4 , pp. 431 - 440 , doi: 10.1016/j.bushor.2015.03.008 .
Lenberg , P. , Feldt , R. and Wallgren , L.G. ( 2015 ), “ Behavioral software engineering: a definition and systematic literature review ”, Journal of Systems and Software , Vol. 107 , pp. 15 - 37 , doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2015.04.084 .
Li , J. , Ma , Q. , Chan , A.H. and Man , S.S. ( 2019 ), “ Health monitoring through wearable technologies for older adults: smart wearables acceptance model ”, Applied Ergonomics , Vol. 75 , pp. 162 - 169 , doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2018.10.006 .
Li , W. , Chai , Y. , Khan , F. , Jan , S.R.U. , Verma , S. , Menon , V.G. and Li , X. ( 2021 ), “ A comprehensive survey on machine learning-based big data analytics for IoT-enabled smart healthcare system ”, Mobile Networks and Applications , Vol. 26 , pp. 1 - 19 , doi: 10.1007/s11036-020-01700-6 .
Liao , Y. , Loures , E.D.F.R. and Deschamps , F. ( 2018 ), “ Industrial Internet of Things: a systematic literature review and insights ”, IEEE Internet of Things Journal , Vol. 5 No. 6 , pp. 4515 - 4525 , doi: 10.1109/jiot.2018.2834151 .
Lim , W.M. , Kumar , S. and Ali , F. ( 2022 ), “ Advancing knowledge through literature reviews: ‘what’, ‘why’, and ‘how to contribute’ ”, The Service Industries Journal , Vol. 42 Nos 7-8 , pp. 481 - 513 , doi: 10.1080/02642069.2022.2047941 .
Liu , M. , Ma , J. , Lin , L. , Ge , M. , Wang , Q. and Liu , C. ( 2017 ), “ Intelligent assembly system for mechanical products and key technology based on internet of things ”, Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing , Vol. 28 No. 2 , pp. 271 - 299 , doi: 10.1007/s10845-014-0976-6 .
Loi , F. , Sivanathan , A. , Gharakheili , H.H. , Radford , A. and Sivaraman , V. ( 2017 ), “ Systematically evaluating security and privacy for consumer IoT devices ”, Proceedings of the 2017 Workshop on Internet of Things Security and Privacy , pp. 1 - 6 .
Lu , Y. , Papagiannidis , S. and Alamanos , E. ( 2018 ), “ Internet of Things: a systematic review of the business literature from the user and organisational perspectives ”, Technological Forecasting and Social Change , Vol. 136 , pp. 285 - 297 , doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2018.01.022 .
Madakam , S. and Uchiya , T. ( 2019 ), “ Industrial internet of things (IIoT): principles, processes and protocols ”, in The Internet of Things in the Industrial Sector: Security and Device Connectivity, Smart Environments, and Industry 4.0 , pp. 35 - 53 .
Madakam , S. , Ramaswamy , R. and Tripathi , S. ( 2015 ), “ Internet of things (IoT): a literature review ”, Journal of Computer and Communications , Vol. 3 No. 5 , pp. 164 - 173 , doi: 10.4236/jcc.2015.35021 .
Mahraz , M.I. , Benabbou , L. and Berrado , A. ( 2019 ), “ A systematic literature review of digital transformation ”, Proceedings of the international conference on industrial engineering and operations management , Toronto, Canada , available at: http://ieomsociety.org/toronto2019/papers/236.pdf
Malik , P.K. , Sharma , R. , Singh , R. , Gehlot , A. , Satapathy , S.C. , Alnumay , W.S. , Pelusi , D. , Ghosh , U. and Nayak , J. ( 2021 ), “ Industrial internet of things and its applications in industry 4.0: state of the art ”, Computer Communications , Vol. 166 , pp. 125 - 139 , doi: 10.1016/j.comcom.2020.11.016 .
Manikas , K. and Hansen , K.M. ( 2013 ), “ Software ecosystems–A systematic literature review ”, Journal of Systems and Software , Vol. 86 No. 5 , pp. 1294 - 1306 , doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2012.12.026 .
McNinch , M. , Parks , D. , Jacksha , R. and Miller , A. ( 2019 ), “ Leveraging IIoT to improve machine safety in the mining industry ”, Mining, Metallurgy and Exploration , Vol. 36 No. 4 , pp. 675 - 681 , doi: 10.1007/s42461-019-0067-5 .
Meng , Y. , Zhang , W. , Zhu , H. and Shen , X.S. ( 2018 ), “ Securing consumer IoT in the smart home: architecture, challenges, and countermeasures ”, IEEE Wireless Communications , Vol. 25 No. 6 , pp. 53 - 59 , doi: 10.1109/mwc.2017.1800100 .
Metallo , C. , Agrifoglio , R. , Schiavone , F. and Mueller , J. ( 2018 ), “ Understanding business model in the Internet of Things industry ”, Technological Forecasting and Social Change , Vol. 136 , pp. 298 - 306 , doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2018.01.020 .
Motti , V.G. and Caine , K. ( 2016 ), “ Smart wearables or dumb wearables? Understanding how context impacts the UX in wrist worn interaction ”, Proceedings of the 34th ACM International Conference on the Design of Communication , pp. 1 - 10 .
Ng , I.C. and Wakenshaw , S.Y. ( 2017 ), “ The Internet-of-Things: review and research directions ”, International Journal of Research in Marketing , Vol. 34 No. 1 , pp. 3 - 21 , doi: 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2016.11.003 .
Niknejad , N. , Ismail , W.B. , Mardani , A. , Liao , H. and Ghani , I. ( 2020 ), “ A comprehensive overview of smart wearables: the state-of-the-art literature, recent advances, and future challenges ”, Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence , Vol. 90 , 103529 , doi: 10.1016/j.engappai.2020.103529 .
Noor , M.M. and Hassan , W.H. ( 2019 ), “ Current research on internet of things (IoT) security: a survey ”, Computer Networks , Vol. 148 , pp. 283 - 294 , doi: 10.1016/j.comnet.2018.11.025 .
Nord , J.H. , Koohang , A. and Paliszkiewicz , J. ( 2019 ), “ The internet of things: review and theoretical framework ”, Expert Systems with Applications , Vol. 133 , pp. 97 - 108 , doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2019.05.014 .
Oh , J. and Kang , H. ( 2021 ), “ User engagement with smart wearables: four defining factors and a process model ”, Mobile Media and Communication , Vol. 9 No. 2 , pp. 314 - 335 , doi: 10.1177/2050157920958440 .
Okoli , C. ( 2015 ), “ A guide to conducting a standalone systematic literature review ”, Communications of the Association for Information Systems , Vol. 37 No. 1 , p. 43 , doi: 10.17705/1cais.03743 .
Okoli , C. and Schabram , K. ( 2010 ), “ A guide to conducting a systematic literature review of information systems research ”.
Palmaccio , M. , Dicuonzo , G. and Belyaeva , Z.S. ( 2021 ), “ The internet of things and corporate business models: a systematic literature review ”, Journal of Business Research , Vol. 131 , pp. 610 - 618 , doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.09.069 .
Park , E. , Cho , Y. , Han , J. and Kwon , S.J. ( 2017 ), “ Comprehensive approaches to user acceptance of Internet of Things in a smart home environment ”, IEEE Internet of Things Journal , Vol. 4 No. 6 , pp. 2342 - 2350 , doi: 10.1109/jiot.2017.2750765 .
Poyner , I.K. and Sherratt , R.S. ( 2018 ), “ Privacy and security of consumer IoT devices for the pervasive monitoring of vulnerable people ”, in Living in the Internet of Things: Cybersecurity of the IoT-2018 , IET , pp. 1 - 5 .
Qamar , S. , Abdelrehman , A.M. , Elshafie , H.E. and Mohiuddin , K. ( 2018 ), “ Sensor-based IoT industrial healthcare systems ”, International Journal of Scientific Engineering and Science , Vol. 2 No. 11 , pp. 29 - 34 .
Qiu , H. , Wang , X. and Xie , F. ( 2017 ), “ A survey on smart wearables in the application of fitness ”, in 2017 IEEE 15th Intl Conf on Dependable, Autonomic and Secure Computing, 15th Intl Conf on Pervasive Intelligence and Computing, 3rd Intl Conf on Big Data Intelligence and Computing and Cyber Science and Technology Congress (DASC/PiCom/DataCom/CyberSciTech) , pp. 303 - 307 , IEEE .
Rayome , A. ( 2018 ), “ How the term ‘internet of things’ was invented ”, available at: https://www.techrepublic.com/article/how-the-term-internet-of-things-was-invented/ ( accessed 22 October 2021 ).
Rebelo , R.M.L. , Pereira , S.C.F. and Queiroz , M.M. ( 2022 ), “ The interplay between the Internet of things and supply chain management: challenges and opportunities based on a systematic literature review ”, Benchmarking: An International Journal , Vol. 29 No. 2 , pp. 683 - 711 , doi: 10.1108/bij-02-2021-0085 .
Reim , W. , Parida , V. and Örtqvist , D. ( 2015 ), “ Product–Service Systems (PSS) business models and tactics–a systematic literature review ”, Journal of Cleaner Production , Vol. 97 , pp. 61 - 75 , doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.07.003 .
Ren , J. , Dubois , D.J. , Choffnes , D. , Mandalari , A.M. , Kolcun , R. and Haddadi , H. ( 2019 ), “ Information exposure from consumer iot devices: a multidimensional, network-informed measurement approach ”, Proceedings of the Internet Measurement Conference , pp. 267 - 279 .
Saarikko , T. , Westergren , U.H. and Blomquist , T. ( 2017 ), “ The Internet of Things: are you ready for what's coming? ”, Business Horizons , Vol. 60 No. 5 , pp. 667 - 676 , doi: 10.1016/j.bushor.2017.05.010 .
Sestino , A. , Prete , M.I. , Piper , L. and Guido , G. ( 2020 ), “ Internet of Things and Big Data as enablers for business digitalization strategies ”, Technovation , Vol. 98 , 102173 , doi: 10.1016/j.technovation.2020.102173 .
Shakdher , A. , Agrawal , S. and Yang , B. ( 2019 ), “ Security vulnerabilities in consumer iot applications ”, 2019 IEEE 5th Intl conference on big data security on cloud (BigDataSecurity), IEEE intl conference on high performance and smart computing,(HPSC) and IEEE intl conference on intelligent data and security (IDS) , IEEE , pp. 1 - 6 .
Shi , Q. , Dong , B. , He , T. , Sun , Z. , Zhu , J. , Zhang , Z. and Lee , C. ( 2020 ), “ Progress in wearable electronics/photonics—moving toward the era of artificial intelligence and internet of things ”, InfoMat , Vol. 2 No. 6 , pp. 1131 - 1162 , doi: 10.1002/inf2.12122 .
Singh , G. ( 2019 ), “ A review of factors affecting digital payments and adoption behaviour for mobile e-wallets ”, International Journal of Research in Management and Business Studies , Vol. 6 No. 4 , pp. 89 - 96 .
Singh , R.R. and Majumdar , S.K. ( 2018 ), “ Wearable internet of things (WIoT): opportunities, challenges and business models for digital entrepreneurs ”, International Journal on Recent Trends in Business and Tourism (IJRTBT) , Vol. 2 No. 4 , pp. 43 - 52 .
Sisinni , E. , Saifullah , A. , Han , S. , Jennehag , U. and Gidlund , M. ( 2018 ), “ Industrial internet of things: challenges, opportunities, and directions ”, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics , Vol. 14 No. 11 , pp. 4724 - 4734 , doi: 10.1109/tii.2018.2852491 .
Soumyalatha , S.G.H. ( 2016 ), “ Study of IoT: understanding IoT architecture, applications, issues and challenges ”, 1st International Conference on Innovations in Computing & Net-working (ICICN16), CSE, RRCE , Vol. 478 , International Journal of Advanced Networking & Applications .
Stergiou , C. , Psannis , K.E. , Gupta , B.B. and Ishibashi , Y. ( 2018 ), “ Security, privacy and efficiency of sustainable cloud computing for big data and IoT ”, Sustainable Computing: Informatics and Systems , Vol. 19 , pp. 174 - 184 , doi: 10.1016/j.suscom.2018.06.003 .
Sun , W. , Liu , J. and Zhang , H. ( 2017 ), “ When smart wearables meet intelligent vehicles: challenges and future directions ”, IEEE Wireless Communications , Vol. 24 No. 3 , pp. 58 - 65 , doi: 10.1109/mwc.2017.1600423 .
Suppatvech , C. , Godsell , J. and Day , S. ( 2019 ), “ The roles of internet of things technology in enabling servitized business models: a systematic literature review ”, Industrial Marketing Management , Vol. 82 , pp. 70 - 86 , doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2019.02.016 .
Tewari , A. and Gupta , B.B. ( 2020 ), “ Security, privacy and trust of different layers in Internet-of-Things (IoTs) framework ”, Future Generation Computer Systems , Vol. 108 , pp. 909 - 920 , doi: 10.1016/j.future.2018.04.027 .
Tranfield , D. , Denyer , D. and Smart , P. ( 2003 ), “ Towards a methodology for developing evidence‐informed management knowledge by means of systematic review ”, British Journal of Management , Vol. 14 No. 3 , pp. 207 - 222 , doi: 10.1111/1467-8551.00375 .
Williams , R. , McMahon , E. , Samtani , S. , Patton , M. and Chen , H. ( 2017 ), “ Identifying vulnerabilities of consumer Internet of Things (IoT) devices: a scalable approach ”, 2017 IEEE International Conference on Intelligence and Security Informatics (ISI) , IEEE , pp. 179 - 181 .
Wortmann , F. and Flüchter , K. ( 2015 ), “ Internet of things ”, Business and Information Systems Engineering , Vol. 57 No. 3 , pp. 221 - 224 , doi: 10.1007/s12599-015-0383-3 .
Xia , F. , Yang , L.T. , Wang , L. and Vinel , A. ( 2012 ), “ Internet of things ”, International Journal of Communication Systems , Vol. 25 No. 9 , pp. 1101 - 1102 , doi: 10.1002/dac.2417 .
Xiao , Y. and Watson , M. ( 2019 ), “ Guidance on conducting a systematic literature review ”, Journal of Planning Education and Research , Vol. 39 No. 1 , pp. 93 - 112 , doi: 10.1177/0739456x17723971 .
Yerpude , S. and Singhal , T. ( 2018 ), “ Customer service enhancement through on-road vehicle assistance enabled with internet of things (IoT) solutions and frameworks: a futuristic perspective ”, International Journal of Applied Business and Economic Research , Vol. 15 No. 16 , pp. 551 - 565 .
Zare , M. and Honarvar , A.R. ( 2021 ), “ Internet services: customer relationship management (CRM) using internet of things (IoT) ”, Journal of Management Information and Decision Sciences , Vol. 24 No. 3 , pp. 1 - 24 .
Zhang , Y. , Guo , Z. , Lv , J. and Liu , Y. ( 2018 ), “ A framework for smart production-logistics systems based on CPS and industrial IoT ”, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics , Vol. 14 No. 9 , pp. 4019 - 4032 , doi: 10.1109/tii.2018.2845683 .
Zheng , Y. , Tang , N. , Omar , R. , Hu , Z. , Duong , T. , Wang , J. , Wu , W. and Haick , H. ( 2021 ), “ Smart materials enabled with artificial intelligence for healthcare wearables ”, Advanced Functional Materials , Vol. 31 No. 51 , 2105482 , doi: 10.1002/adfm.202105482 .
We are very grateful to the Provost, the Dean of Robbins College Of Business and Entrepreneurship (RCOBE), and the Office of Scholarship and Sponsored Projects (OSSC) at Fort Hays State University for the research grant offered to the lead author towards the fulfillment of this project.
Related articles, all feedback is valuable.
Please share your general feedback
Contact Customer Support
An official website of the United States government
The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.
The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.
Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .
Jaimon t kelly.
1 Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia
2 Centre of Applied Health Economics, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia
3 Metro North Hospital and Health Service, Brisbane, Australia
4 School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
Associated data.
Examples of Internet of Things devices that can support health service delivery.
Examples of how smart homes can improve health care delivery.
Scenarios where Internet of Things can be used to improve health system efficiency.
The Internet of Things (IoT) is a system of wireless, interrelated, and connected digital devices that can collect, send, and store data over a network without requiring human-to-human or human-to-computer interaction. The IoT promises many benefits to streamlining and enhancing health care delivery to proactively predict health issues and diagnose, treat, and monitor patients both in and out of the hospital. Worldwide, government leaders and decision makers are implementing policies to deliver health care services using technology and more so in response to the novel COVID-19 pandemic. It is now becoming increasingly important to understand how established and emerging IoT technologies can support health systems to deliver safe and effective care. The aim of this viewpoint paper is to provide an overview of the current IoT technology in health care, outline how IoT devices are improving health service delivery, and outline how IoT technology can affect and disrupt global health care in the next decade. The potential of IoT-based health care is expanded upon to theorize how IoT can improve the accessibility of preventative public health services and transition our current secondary and tertiary health care to be a more proactive, continuous, and coordinated system. Finally, this paper will deal with the potential issues that IoT-based health care generates, barriers to market adoption from health care professionals and patients alike, confidence and acceptability, privacy and security, interoperability, standardization and remuneration, data storage, and control and ownership. Corresponding enablers of IoT in current health care will rely on policy support, cybersecurity-focused guidelines, careful strategic planning, and transparent policies within health care organizations. IoT-based health care has great potential to improve the efficiency of the health system and improve population health.
The challenges presented by an aging population with multiple chronic conditions are ubiquitous worldwide [ 1 ]. The medical, lifestyle, and personal health needs across aging populations will continue to place a burden on health care resources. Meeting these challenges requires a focus on empowering populations to self-manage their health through health innovation to improve well-being and attenuate health resource burden [ 2 ].
Entering the 2020 decade, more devices are connected to the internet than ever before, and this will continue to grow at a rapid trajectory. Worldwide, more than 21 billion devices have been estimated to be connected to the internet in 2020, which is 5 times the number of devices 4 years prior [ 3 ]. The Internet of Things (IoT) can be defined in its simplest scenario as a network that connects uniquely identifiable devices (or things ) to the internet, enabling them to collect, send, store, and receive data [ 4 ]. From a health care perspective, IoT can be considered as any device that can collect health-related data from individuals, including computing devices, mobile phones, smart bands and wearables, digital medications, implantable surgical devices, or other portable devices, which can measure health data and connect to the internet [ 5 ].
The growth of IoT technology has driven interest in a wide range of health practices to improve population health more specifically [ 6 ]. Recent reviews have overviewed the various services and applications of IoT in health care (eg, eHealth, mobile health [mHealth], ambient assisted living, semantic devices, wearable devices and smartphones, and community-based health care) [ 5 , 7 ]. These services have been detailed extensively and can have many applications across single condition and cluster condition management, including, for example, the ability to track and monitor health progress remotely by health care professionals, improve self-management of chronic conditions, assist in the early detection of abnormalities, fast-track symptom identification and clinical diagnoses, deliver early intervention, and improve adherence to prescriptions [ 8 ]. These applications can make better use of health care resources and provide quality and low-cost medical care.
With the 2020 public health response to the novel COVID-19 pandemic to effectively shut down traditional modes of health service delivery worldwide, efforts to reduce implementation barriers to technology-supported health delivery highlight the potential to reframe traditional models of care into virtual and distance modalities [ 9 ]. In response, many countries have successfully implemented technology-supported services to maintain health care practices and social distancing [ 10 ]. As global leaders consider policies that potentially provide more access to technology-supported health services in response to (and considerations post) the current COVID-19 crisis, it is becoming increasingly important to understand how established and emerging IoT technologies can support health systems to deliver safe and effective care in either a complementary or an alternative way during times of crisis or health epidemics [ 11 ].
This viewpoint paper will overview current technologies in health care, outline how IoT devices are improving health service delivery, and outline how IoT technologies can affect global health care in the next decade. This viewpoint paper also overviews how the disruption in health care from IoT can lead to improved access and equitable primary, secondary, and tertiary smart health care, which is more proactive, continuous, and coordinated.
The architecture of IoT in health care delivery essentially consists of 3 basic layers [ 12 ]: (1) the perception layer, (2) the network layer, and (3) the application layer. It is not our intention to extensively detail these layers; however, a summary and the related health implications are provided in the following sections.
Perception and identification technologies are the foundation of IoT. Sensors are devices that can perceive changes in an environment and can include, for example, radio frequency identification (RFID), infrared sensors, cameras, GPS, medical sensors, and smart device sensors. These sensors allow for comprehensive perception through object recognition, location recognition, and geographic recognition and can convert this information to digital signals, which is more convenient for network transmission [ 12 , 13 ]. Sensor technologies allow for treatments to be monitored in real time and facilitate the acquisition of a multitude of physiological parameters about a patient so that diagnoses and high-quality treatment can be fast-tracked. There are many examples of potentially lifesaving IoT sensor devices; however, not all devices are clinically tested or have been proved to be safe or effective. A summary of IoT devices that may support and improve health service delivery is provided in Multimedia Appendix 1 [ 14 - 47 ].
The network level of IoT technologies includes wired and wireless networks, which communicate and store processed (layer 1) information either locally or at a centralized location. Communication between things can occur over low, medium, and high frequencies, the latter being the predominant focus of IoT. These include short-range communication technologies, such as RFID, wireless sensor networks, Bluetooth, Zigbee, low-power Wi-Fi, and global system for mobile communications [ 12 ]. High-frequency fourth-generation (4G) cellular networks have seen even more communication potential, and evolving 5G networks are becoming more readily available and are expected to be a major driver of the growth of IoT applications for health care, with the potential to provide reliable connection up to thousands of devices at the same time [ 48 ].
Communicated data are stored locally (often decentralized) or sent to a centralized cloud server. Cloud-based computing to support the delivery of health services has many benefits, as it is ubiquitous, flexible, and scalable in terms of data acquisition, storage, and transmission between devices connected to the cloud [ 49 ]. The use of the cloud can be foreseen to support data-intensive electronic medical records (EMRs), patient portals, medical IoT devices (which can include smartphone apps), and the big data analytics driving decision support systems and therapeutic strategies [ 5 ]. However, with more cloud apps entering the health market, it is just as important that an evidence base supports its effectiveness and safety and can deal with the security of health data and the reliability and transparency of that data by third parties. Furthermore, it has been suggested that centralized cloud storage will present issues in the future to users, such as excessive data accumulation and latency because of the distance between IoT devices and data centers.
Decentralized data processing and networking approaches may improve the scalability of IoT in health care. Edge cloud is a newer cloud computing concept that allows IoT sensors and network gateways to process and analyze data themselves (ie, at the edge ) in a decentralized fashion, reducing the amount of data required to be communicated and managed at a centralized location [ 12 , 50 ]. Similarly, blockchain storage uses a decentralized approach to data storage, creating independent blocks containing individual sets of information, which forms a dependent link in a collective block, which in turn creates a network regulated by patients rather than a third party [ 51 ]. There are examples of platforms engineering blockchain for medical practice already [ 51 , 52 ]; however, research on edge cloud and blockchains in health care is still limited and is an important area for future research.
The application layer interprets and applies data and is responsible for delivering application-specific services to the user [ 12 ]. Some of the most promising medical applications that IoT provides are through artificial intelligence (AI). The scientific applications of AI have proliferated, including image analysis, text recognition with natural language processing, drug activity design, and prediction of gene mutation expression [ 53 ]. AI has the capability to read available EMR data, including medical history, physical, laboratory, imaging, and medications, and contextualize these data to generate treatment and/or diagnosis decisions and/or possibilities. For example, IBM Watson uses AI to read both structured and unstructured text in the EMR, read images to highlight primary and incidental findings, and compile relevant medical literature in response to clinical queries [ 54 ].
IoT-based health care and use of deep machine learning can assist health professionals in seeing the unseeable and providing new and enhanced diagnostic capability. Although diagnostic confidence may never reach 100%, combining machines and clinician expertise reliably enhances system performance. For example, compared with the diagnostic evaluation by 54 ophthalmologists and senior residents, applying AI to retinal images improved the detection and grading of diabetic retinopathy and macular edema, achieving high specificities (98%) and sensitivities (90%) [ 55 ]. AI and deep learning can also optimize disease management, can provide big data and analysis generated from mHealth apps and IoT devices, and are starting to see adoption in health care [ 56 ]. Some examples of this include predicting risk, future medical outcomes, and care decisions in diabetes and mental health [ 57 ] and predicting the progression of congestive heart failure [ 58 , 59 ], bone disease [ 60 ], Alzheimer disease [ 61 ], benign and malignant tumor classification [ 62 , 63 ], and cardiac arrhythmias [ 64 ].
IoT is an infrastructure that enables smart health services to operate. When health data are collected by IoT sensors, communicated, and stored, this enables data analytics and smart health care, which can improve risk factor identification, disease diagnoses, treatment, and remote monitoring and empower people to self-manage.
Smart health care services make use of advancements in information technologies, such as IoT, big data analytics, cloud computing, AI, and deep machine learning, to transform traditional health care delivery to be a more efficient, convenient, and a more personalized system [ 65 ]. Current developments in information computer technologies have allowed the development of health care solutions with more intelligent prediction capabilities both in and out of the hospital. We are seeing the use of virtual models to transfer care provided in hospitals to the home through the use of sensors and devices that allow remote review and monitoring of patients in their homes or treated in hospitals and creates a continuum among these through cloud access [ 7 ]. More recently, the 2020 public health efforts around the world to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 have (at least temporarily) led governments and policy makers to remove implementation and remuneration barriers to enable health care professionals to use virtual models of care for people who need it [ 9 ]. IoT also provides the opportunity to improve the quality and efficiency of the entire ecosystem of service delivery, including hospital management, medical asset management, monitoring of the workflow of staff, and optimization of medical resources based on patient flow [ 66 , 67 ].
Primary health care becoming more accessible.
A focus on disease prevention must become a priority this decade, as the burden of disease attributable to modifiable risk factors is greater than ever before [ 1 , 68 ]. IoT in health care has the potential to improve population health and transition our health care model to a true hybrid model of primary, secondary, and tertiary care, where the health system can use its existing workforce in new and more efficient ways. Transforming health delivery in this way is crucial to improving self-management for people with chronic conditions, as even among high health care users, more than 90% of lifestyle self-management is done by patients themselves, outside of hospitals, and in clinical settings [ 69 , 70 ].
There is a clear public demand for easy-to-access health information. For example, in a 2015 US survey, 58% (931/1604) of smartphone users downloaded a health-related app for their lifestyle self-management [ 71 ]. AI has also driven the availability of point-of-care health information, such as chatbots (or AI doctors), which can deliver lifestyle and medical advice. Examples of these established AI bots are Woebot, Your.Md, Babylon, and HealthTap, where a patient can input their symptoms and advice is generated instantly [ 72 ]. However, more than half of the most highly rated apps make medical claims that are not approved [ 73 ], with no formal process of approving apps or informing consumer choice [ 74 ], and much remains to be done to understand the potential of chatbots to improve health. Therefore, a reliable digital health evidence base is essential [ 75 ]. If health professionals have evidence-based digital resources, devices, and mobile apps readily at their disposal, digital prescriptions could become an enabler of wider adoption of IoT in health care and facilitate a wider population focus on disease prevention.
At the individual level, IoT offers the opportunity to link and potentially learn from nonhealth IoT technologies to monitor daily activities, provide support with information, and promote behavior changes ( Multimedia Appendix 2 ). In addition, IoT and data linkage create great potential of transparent, evidence-based decision making, which may be able to drive the shift of disease patterns and increase the well-being of citizens at scale. The integration of urban infrastructures, IoT technologies, and cloud computing allows the collection and analysis of a vast quantity of different human and non–human-related data. These data could provide valuable information about population-level surveillance in diseases and accidents, risk factors, and environmental conditions [ 76 ], which is difficult to collect through the traditional human-reported disease surveillance system and can be of particular benefit in pandemic responses [ 77 ]. For example, in Taiwan, big data analytics applied to electronic data (GPS, closed-circuit television surveillance, and credit card payments) in the community and personal mobile data have been effectively used to contact trace, communicate, and isolate potential contacts during the global COVID-19 pandemic [ 78 ]. Through IoT and data linkage, decision makers are likely to be able to make evidence-based decisions in promoting healthy social and built environments, safe transportation systems, high-quality public services, and smart health care and emergency response systems [ 76 , 79 , 80 ].
An IoT-based health care system enables the overall health care systems to move past a traditional model of service delivery, which is often reactive, intermittent, and uncoordinated, to a more proactive, continuous, and coordinated approach [ 81 ]. Such an approach is favorable because it offers the opportunity to provide high-quality care that is less invasive and appealing to patients and health care professionals. This change in the health care system landscape is also highly appealing for policy makers because it can greatly enhance the efficiency (and subsequently reduce resource use) of the health system [ 82 ] and also provide the health system flexibility to shift its models of care and delivery of services as required on an individual or population-wide basis. Multimedia Appendix 3 summarizes 7 examples of how IoT can improve the coordination of health services and likely improve our health system efficiency.
Policy support.
Policy support is one of the most important environmental enablers of IoT. Many countries already have policies in place for eHealth (eg, web-based and software programs to deliver health services) [ 83 , 84 ] and either have or are in the process of developing policies for IoT infrastructure, investment, and/or implementation in health care. For example, China, India, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, the European Union, the United States, and Vietnam currently have relevant policies in place for IoT [ 85 ]. Australia is also in the process of establishing a policy for IoT development and investment [ 86 ].
The ubiquitous nature of technology means that consumers and health care professionals have greater access to digital resources than ever before [ 87 ]. However, it is also important for health systems to be aware of the inequities that may eventuate from the widespread implementation of IoT for health care, including individuals who may not be able to afford or access technology hardware or reliable internet services because of geographic location or financial disadvantage. Similarly, if individuals do not perceive the technology as user friendly , experience poor connections, or do not feel the initiative has been designed in consultation with them (both patients and health professionals), then this often results in frustration and reluctance to use such services [ 88 , 89 ].
Cyber risk is a major obstacle to the broad adoption of IoT [ 90 ]. The privacy of patients must be ensured to prevent unauthorized identification and tracking. From this perspective, the higher the level of autonomy and intelligence of the things, the more the challenges for the protection of identities and privacy.
There is a gap in public awareness and understanding of data safety in cloud-stored health information. This is of concern, as it is the single biggest threat to the adoption of IoT from a societal perspective. The premise of IoT is clear to society; however, what is not clear to people is the actual value that IoT delivers to them personally from a health care perspective [ 91 , 92 ]. The potential threat of breached confidentiality may never go away; however, the perceived value to consumers needs to outweigh these concerns to confidently engage with IoT-supported health infrastructure [ 90 ]. The confidence and acceptability of IoT by health care professionals are similarly important. There is a diverse range of factors that affect clinicians’ acceptability of technology-supported programs, including the characteristics of the technology (eg, accuracy, compatibility with usual systems, and ease of use), individual’s attitudes and knowledge (eg, familiarity and impact on professional security), external factors (eg, patient and health professional interaction), and organization readiness (eg, training and reimbursement) [ 93 ].
IoT might allow opportunities for cyberattacks and for personal data to be collected inappropriately. IoT-based applications are vulnerable to cyberattacks for 2 basic reasons: (1) most of the communications are wireless, which makes eavesdropping very easy; and (2) most of the IoT components are characterized by low energy, and therefore, they can hardly implement complex schemes on their own to ensure security. The National Institute of Standards and Technology has recently released a draft security guide and recommendations for IoT devices, which will see an emphasis on data security in IoT devices [ 94 ]; however, whether such a guideline can or will be enforced across IoT health devices is unclear.
To move forward in IoT-based health care, transparency and enforced codes of practice regarding where centralized cloud data are stored and who owns the data, needs to be considered For example, does the data host have viewing rights to someone’s data and are these data completely controlled by individuals or are they never deleted from the cloud, despite a user’s request? Another important consideration is the sharing of data across states or territories and internationally. Privacy, security, and confidentiality of data control and storage should be federally enforced, but international hosts and suppliers may not be required to follow any such code. Therefore, the use of these platforms requires strategic planning and transparent guidelines to develop and implement robust IoT-based health care policies and models of care.
Issues around the interoperability and standardization of IoT and health care systems are a big threat to the wider adoption of IoT for health care systems. Lack of standardization threatens the development of IoT in the health setting context, as the industry and manufacturers are yet to reach a consensus regarding wireless communication protocols and standards for machine-to-machine communication. Without a unified, standardized, and interoperable system, the adoption of IoT into health care will be greatly hindered and is unlikely to have international reach [ 95 ]. Semantic interoperability in IoT is a necessary condition for big data techniques to support decision-making processes [ 96 ]. It is increasingly common for each new technology startup, device, or system manufacturer to define their own specific architecture, protocols, and data formats, which are unable to communicate with the health care environment unless they are appreciably redeveloped or adapted to interoperate with hospital IoT platforms [ 96 ]. This creates Vertical Silos [ 97 ], which demands the development of new features for granting interoperability between different systems. The future and full potential of IoT-enabled health care relies on addressing interoperability, of which some frameworks do exist [ 98 ]. Achieving interoperability across IoT platforms can provide a safer, more accessible, productive, and satisfying experience for clinicians and patients alike.
Finally, remuneration for technology-assisted health care has historically been challenging [ 99 ] and differs appreciably across different countries. This is likely to be even more complex for IoT-delivered health care, where reimbursement considerations have not been established (and this is unlikely until the abovementioned points are addressed). As international health systems establish robust policies and guidelines on cybersecurity and address the issues surrounding interoperability and standardization protocols, reimbursement and regulatory considerations across single-payer and multipayer systems should become a key priority to ensuring successful, effective, and cost-effective IoT health care models can be implemented in practice.
From this viewpoint, the potential of IoT is summarized as a growing area of research in health care. These developments provide a great opportunity for health care systems to proactively predict health issues and diagnose, treat, and monitor patients both in and out of the hospital. As the adoption of technology-supported health services increases to enable health systems to deliver flexible models of care, an increasing number of traditional health service delivery practices will be complemented or replaced through IoT. However, the implementation of IoT in health care will rely on a clear and robust code of practice for the management of data, privacy, confidentiality, and cybersecurity concerning the supply and use of IoT devices in health care. There are still important gaps for future research to address, which relate to the IoT technology itself, the health system, and the users of IoT technology. Specific future research on IoT technology needs to address how IoT devices can be designed with standardized protocols and interoperability with international and cross-state health systems. More research is also needed on the efficiency of blockchain storage compared with centralized cloud-based storage solutions in the context of IoT-supported health care delivery. From a health system perspective, there is a need for clinical guidelines on digital health prescriptions and robust policy regarding remuneration for primary and secondary care services provided through IoT. Finally, more research is needed to determine the acceptability and digital literacy of consumers and clinicians in the context of using IoT to improve the delivery and overall experience of health care. Although this viewpoint is a summary of selected literature only and not based on an exhaustive systematic review of the literature, we believe that addressing these areas for future research will go a long way to enable a wider uptake of IoT, which can ultimately save health care dollars and improve patient-centered care.
This research received no specific funding. JK was supported through a Griffith University Postdoctoral Research Fellowship. PS was partially funded through a National Health and Medical Research Council Senior Research Fellowship (#1136923). EG was supported by the Melbourne Graduate Research Scholarship. The authors wish to thank Dr Tilman Dingler for his assistance in the network section of this paper.
AI | artificial intelligence |
EMR | electronic medical record |
IoT | Internet of Things |
mHealth | mobile health |
RFID | radio frequency identification |
Multimedia appendix 2, multimedia appendix 3.
Authors' Contributions: Each author contributed to the conception and design of this paper. JK conducted the literature searches and drafted the first draft of the manuscript. EG, KC, and PS revised the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Conflicts of Interest: None declared.
You have full access to this open access article
49k Accesses
108 Citations
21 Altmetric
Explore all metrics
In recent years, the use of the Internet of Things (IoT) has increased exponentially, and cybersecurity concerns have increased along with it. On the cutting edge of cybersecurity is Artificial Intelligence (AI), which is used for the development of complex algorithms to protect networks and systems, including IoT systems. However, cyber-attackers have figured out how to exploit AI and have even begun to use adversarial AI in order to carry out cybersecurity attacks. This review paper compiles information from several other surveys and research papers regarding IoT, AI, and attacks with and against AI and explores the relationship between these three topics with the purpose of comprehensively presenting and summarizing relevant literature in these fields.
Explore related subjects.
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Since around 2008, when the Internet of Things (IoT) was born [ 1 ], its growth has been booming, and now IoT is a part of daily life and has a place in many homes and businesses. IoT is hard to define as it has been evolving and changing since its conception, but it can be best understood as a network of digital and analog machines and computing devices provided with unique identifiers (UIDs) that have the ability to exchange data without human intervention [ 2 ]. In most cases, this manifests as a human interfacing with a central hub device or application, often a mobile app, that then goes on to send data and instructions to one or multiple fringe IoT devices [ 3 ]. The fringe devices are able to complete functions if required and send data back to the hub device or application, which the human can then view.
The IoT concept has given the world a higher level of accessibility, integrity, availability, scalability, confidentiality, and interoperability in terms of device connectivity [ 4 ]. However, IoTs are vulnerable to cyberattacks due to a combination of their multiple attack surfaces and their newness and thus lack of security standardizations and requirements [ 5 ]. There are a large variety of cyberattacks that attackers can leverage against IoTs, depending on what aspect of the system they are targeting and what they hope to gain from the attack. As such, there is a large volume of research into cybersecurity surrounding IoT. This includes Artificial Intelligence (AI) approaches to protecting IoT systems from attackers, usually in terms of detecting unusual behavior that may indicate an attack is occurring [ 6 ]. However, in the case of IoT, cyber-attackers always have the upper hand as they only need to find one vulnerability while cybersecurity experts must protect multiple targets. This has led to increased use of AI by cyber-attackers as well, in order to thwart the complicated algorithms that detect anomalous activity and pass by unnoticed [ 7 ]. AI has received much attention with the growth of IoT technologies. With this growth, AI technologies, such as decision trees, linear regression, machine learning, support vector machines, and neural networks, have been used in IoT cybersecurity applications to able to identify threats and potential attacks.
Authors in [ 8 ] provide a comprehensive review of the security risks related to IoT application and possible counteractions as well as compare IoT technologies in terms of integrity, anonymity, confidentiality, privacy, access control, authentication, authorization, resilience, and self-organization. The authors propose deep learning models using CICIDS2017 datasets for DDoS attack detection for the cybersecurity in IoT (Internet of Things), which provide high accuracy, i.e., 97.16% [ 9 ]. In [ 10 ], the authors evaluate the Artificial Neural Networks (ANN) in a gateway device to able to detect anomalies in the data sent from the edge devices. The results show that the proposed approach can improve the security of IoT systems. The authors in [ 11 ] propose an AI-based control approach for detection and estimation as well as compensation of cyber attacks in industrial IoT systems. In [ 12 ], The authors provide a robust pervasive detection for IoT Environments and develop a variety of adversarial attacks and defense mechanisms against them as well as validate their approach through datasets including MNIST, CIFAR-10, and SVHN. In [ 13 ], the authors analyze the recent evolution of AI decision-making in cyber physical systems and find that such evolution is virtually autonomous due to the increasing integration of IoT devices in cyber physical systems, and the value of AI decision-making due to its speed and efficiency in handling large loads of data is likely going to make this evolution inevitable. The authors of [ 14 ] discuss new approaches to risk analytics using AI and machine learning, particularly in IoT networks present in industry settings. Finally, [ 15 ] discusses methods of capturing and assessing cybersecurity risks to IoT devices for the purpose of standardizing such practices so that risk in IoT systems may be more efficiently identified and protected against.
This review paper covers a variety of topics regarding cybersecurity, the Internet of Things (IoT), Artificial Intelligence (AI), and how they all relate to each other in three survey-style sections and provides a comprehensive review of cyberattacks against IoT devices as well as provides recommended AI-based methods of protecting against these attacks. The ultimate goal of this paper is to create a resource for others who are researching these prevalent topics by presenting summaries of and making connections between relevant works covering different aspects of these subjects.
Due to the lax security in many IoT devices, cyberattackers have found many ways to attack IoT devices from many different attack surfaces. Attack surfaces can vary from the IoT device itself, both its hardware and software, the network on which the IoT device is connected to, and the application with which the device interfaces; these are the three most commonly used attack surfaces as together they make up the main parts of an IoT system. Figure 1 illustrates a basic breakdown of a common IoT system; most of the attacks discussed in this paper occur at the network gateway and/or cloud data server connections, as these connections are generally where IoT security is most lacking.
A high-level breakdown of typical IoT structure
Before IoT attackers even attempt cyberattacks on an IoT device, they will often study the device to identify vulnerabilities. This is often done by buying a copy of the IoT device they are targeting from the market. They then reverse engineer the device to create a test attack to see what outputs can be obtained and what avenues exist to attack the device. Examples of this include opening up the device and analyzing the internal hardware—such as the flash memory—in order to learn about the software, and tampering with the microcontroller to identify sensitive information or cause unintended behavior [ 16 ]. In order to counter reverse engineering, it is important for IoT devices to have hardware-based security. The application processor, which consists of sensors, actuators, power supply, and connectivity, should be placed in a tamper-resistant environment [ 16 ]. Device authentication can also be done with hardware-based security, such that the device can prove to the server it is connected to that it is not fake.
An often low-tech type category of attacks includes physical attacks, in which the hardware of the target device is used to the benefit of the attacker in some way. There are several different types of physical attacks. These include attacks such as outage attacks, where the network that the devices are connected to are shut off to disrupt their functions; physical damage, where devices or their components are damaged to prevent proper functionality; malicious code injection, an example of which includes an attacker plugging a USB containing a virus into the target device; and object jamming, in which signal jammers are used to block or manipulate the signals put out by the devices [ 17 ]. Permanent denial of service (PDoS) attacks, which are discussed later in this paper, can be carried out as a physical attack; if an IoT device is connected to a high voltage power source, for example, its power system may become overloaded and would then require replacement [ 18 ].
One of the most popular attacks on IoTs is Man-in-the-Middle (MITM) attack. With regards to computers in general, an MITM attack intercepts communication between two nodes and allows the attacker to take the role of a proxy. Attackers can perform MITM attacks between many different connections such as a computer and a router, two cell phones, and, most commonly, a server and a client. Figure 2 shows a basic example of an MITM attack between a client and a server. In regards to IoT, the attacker usually performs MITM attacks between an IoT device and the application with which it interfaces. IoT devices, in particular, tend to be more vulnerable to MITM attacks as they lack the standard implementations to fight the attacks. There are two common modes of MITM attacks: cloud polling and direct connection. In cloud polling, the smart home device is in constant communication with the cloud, usually to look for firmware updates. Attackers can redirect network traffic using Address Resolution Protocol (ARP) poisoning or by altering Domain Name System (DNS) settings or intercept HTTPS traffic by using self-signed certificates or tools such as (Secure Sockets Layer) SSL strip [ 19 ]. Many IoT devices do not verify the authenticity or the trust level of certificates, making the self-signed certificate method particularly effective. In the case of direct connections, devices communicate with a hub or application in the same network. By doing this, mobile apps can locate new devices by probing every IP address on the local network for a specific port. An attacker can do the same thing to discover devices on the network [ 19 ]. An example of an MITM IoT attack is that of a smart refrigerator that could display the user’s Google calendar. It seems like a harmless feature, but attackers found that the system did not validate SSL certificates, which allowed them to perform an MITM attack and steal the user’s Google credentials [ 19 ].
A simple representation of a Man-in-the-Middle attack
A common form of MITM attack leveraged against IoT devices is via Bluetooth connection. Many IoT devices run Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE), which is designed with IoT devices in mind to be smaller, cheaper, and more power-efficient [ 20 ]. However, BLE is vulnerable to MITM attacks. BLE uses AES-CCM encryption; AES encryption is considered secure, but the way that the encryption keys are exchanged is often insecure. The level of security relies on the pairing method used to exchange temporary keys between the devices. BLE specifically uses three-phase pairing processes: first, the initiating device sends a pairing request, and the devices exchange pairing capabilities over an insecure channel; second, the devices exchange temporary keys and verify that they are using the same temporary key, which is then used to generate a short-term key (some newer devices use a long-term key exchanged using Elliptic Curve Diffie-Hellman public-key cryptography, which is significantly more secure than the standard BLE protocol); third, the created key is exchanged over a secure connection and can be used to encrypt data [ 20 ]. Figure 3 represents this three-phase pairing process.
A diagram illustrating the basic BLE pairing process
The temporary key is determined according to the pairing method, which is determined on the OS level of the device. There are three common pairing methods popular with IoT devices. One, called Just Works, always sets the temporary key to 0, which is obviously very insecure. However, it remains one of if not the most popular pairing methods used with BLE devices [ 20 ]. The second, Passkey, uses six-digit number combinations, which the user must manually enter into a device, which is fairly secure, though there are methods of bypassing this [ 20 ]. Finally, the Out-of-Band pairing method exchanges temporary keys using methods such as Near Field Communication. The security level of this method is determined by the security capabilities of the exchange method. If the exchange channel is protected from MITM attacks, the BLE connection can also be considered protected. Unfortunately, the Out-of-Band method is not yet common in IoT devices [ 20 ]. Another important feature of BLE devices is the Generic Attribute Profile (GATT), which is used to communicate between devices using a standardized data schema. The GATT describes devices’ roles, general behaviors, and other metadata. Any BLE-supported app within the range of an IoT device can read its GATT schema, which provides the app with necessary information [ 20 ]. In order for attackers to perform MITM attacks in BLE networks, the attacker must use two connected BLE devices himself: one device acting as the IoT device to connect to the target mobile app, and a fake mobile app to connect to the target IoT device. Some other tools for BLE MITM attacks exist, such as GATTacker, a Node.js package that scans and copies BLE signals and then runs a cloned version of the IoT device, and BtleJuice, which allows MITM attacks on Bluetooth Smart devices which have improved security over BLE [ 20 ].
Once an attacker has access to some or all of the devices on an IoT network via an MITM attack, one example of an attack they could carry out next is a False Data Injection (FDI) attack. FDI attacks are when an attacker alters measurements from IoT sensors by a small amount so as to avoid suspicion and then outputs the faulty data [ 21 ]. FDI attacks can be perpetrated in a number of ways, but in practice doing so via MITM attacks is the most practical. FDI attacks are often leveraged against sensors that send data to an algorithm that attempts to make predictions based on the data it has received or otherwise uses data to make conclusions. These algorithms, sometimes referred to as predictive maintenance systems, are commonly used in monitoring the state of a mechanical machine and predicting when it will need to be maintained or tuned [ 21 ]. These predictive maintenance algorithms and similar would also be a staple feature of smart cities, FDI attacks against which could be disastrous. An example of an FDI attack on a predictive maintenance system is sensors on an airplane engine that predict when the engine will need critical maintenance. When attackers are able to access even a small portion of the sensors, they are able to create a small amount of noise that goes undetected by faulty data detection mechanisms but is just enough to skew the algorithm’s predictions [ 21 ]. In testing, it would even be enough to delay critical maintenance to the system, potentially causing catastrophic failure while in use, which could cause a costly unplanned delay or loss of life.
Another kind of common attack on IoT devices is recruiting many devices to create botnets and launch Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks. A denial of service (DoS) attack is characterized by an orchestrated effort to prevent legitimate use of a service; a DDoS attack uses attacks from multiple entities to achieve this goal. DDoS attacks aim to overwhelm the infrastructure of the target service and disrupt normal data flow. DDoS attacks generally go through a few phases: recruitment, in which the attacker scans for vulnerable machines to be used in the DDoS attack against the target; exploitation and infection, in which the vulnerable machines are exploited, and malicious code is injected; communication, in which the attacker assesses the infected machines, sees which are online and decides when to schedule attacks or upgrade the machines; and attack, in which the attacker commands the infected machines to send malicious packets to the target [ 22 ]. One of the most popular ways to gain infected machines and conduct DDoS attacks is through IoT devices due to their high availability and generally poor security and maintenance. Figure 4 shows a common command structure, in which the attacker’s master computer sends commands to one or more infected command and control centers, who each control a series of zombie devices that can then attack the target.
A graphical representation of a common botnet hierarchy
One of the most famous malware, the Mirai worm, has been used to perpetrate some of the largest DDoS attacks ever known and is designed to infect and control IoT devices such as DVRs, CCTV cameras, and home routers. The infected devices become part of a large-scale botnet and can perpetrate several types of DDoS attacks. Mirai was built to handle multiple different CPU architectures that are popular to use in IoT devices, such as x86, ARM, Sparc, PowerPC, Motorola, etc., in order to capture as many devices as possible [ 23 ]. In order to be covert, the virus is quite small and actually does not reside in the device’s hard disk. It stays in memory, which means that once the device is rebooted, the virus is lost. However, devices that have been infected once are susceptible to reinfection due to having already been discovered as being vulnerable, and reinfection can take as little as a few minutes [ 23 ]. Today, many well-known IoT-targeting botnet viruses are derived from Mirai’s source code, including Okiru, Satori, and Reaper [ 23 ].
IoT devices may often carry out DoS attacks, but they themselves are susceptible to them as well. IoT devices are particularly susceptible to permanent denial of service (PDoS) attacks that render a device or system completely inoperable. This can be done by overloading the battery or power systems or, more popularly, firmware attacks. In a firmware attack, the attacker may use vulnerabilities to replace a device’s basic software (usually its operating system) with a corrupted or defective version of the software, rendering it useless [ 18 ]. This process, when done legitimately, is known as flashing, and its illegitimate counterpart is known as “phlashing”. When a device is phlashed, the owner of the device has no choice but to flash the device with a clean copy of the OS and any content that might’ve been put on the device. In a particularly powerful attack, the corrupted software could overwork the hardware of the device such that recovery is impossible without replacing parts of the device [ 18 ]. The attacks to the device’s power system, though less popular, are possibly even more devastating. One example of this type of attack is a USB device with malware loaded on it that, when plugged into a computer, overuses the device’s power to the point that the hardware of the device is rendered completely ruined and needs to be replaced [ 18 ].
One example of PDoS malware is known as BrickerBot. BrickerBot uses brute force dictionary attacks to gain access to IoT devices and, once logged in to the device, runs a series of commands that result in permanent damage to the device. These commands include misconfiguring the device’s storage and kernel parameters, hindering internet connection, sabotaging device performance, and wiping all files on the device [ 24 ]. This attack is devastating enough that it often requires reinstallation of hardware or complete replacement of the device. If the hardware survives the attack, the software certainly didn’t and would need reflashing, which would lose everything that might have been on it. Interestingly enough, BrickerBot was designed to target the same devices the Mirai botnet targets and would employ as bots, and uses the same or a similar dictionary to make its brute force attacks. As it turns out, BrickerBot was actually intended to render useless those devices that Mirai would have been able to recruit in an effort to fight back against the botnet [ 24 ].
Due to the structure of IoT systems, there are multiple attack surfaces, but the most popular way of attacking IoT systems is through their connections as these tend to be the weakest links. In the future, it is advisable that IoT developers ensure that their products have strong protections against such attacks, and the introduction of IoT security standards would prevent users from unknowingly purchasing products that are insecure. Alternatively, keeping the network that the IoT system resides on secure will help prevent many popular attacks, and keeping the system largely separated from other critical systems or having backup measures will help mitigate the damage done should an attack be carried out.
In order to dynamically protect systems from cyber threats, many cybersecurity experts are turning to Artificial Intelligence (AI). AI is most commonly used for intrusion detection in cybersecurity by analyzing traffic patterns and looking for an activity that is characteristic of an attack.
There are two main kinds of machine learning: supervised and unsupervised learning. Supervised learning is when humans manually label training data as malicious or legitimate and then input that data into the algorithm to create a model that has “classes” of data that it compares the traffic it is analyzing. Unsupervised learning forgoes training data and manual labeling, and instead the algorithm groups together similar pieces of data into classes and then classifies them according to the data coherence within one class and the data modularity between classes [ 25 ]. One popular machine learning algorithm for cybersecurity is naïve Bayes, which seeks to classify data based on the Bayesian theorem wherein anomalous activities are all assumed to originate from independent events instead of one attack. Naïve Bayes is a supervised learning algorithm, and once it is trained and has generated its classes will analyze each activity to determine the probability that it is anomalous [ 25 ]. Machine learning algorithms can also be used to create the other models discussed in this section
A decision tree is a type of AI that creates a set of rules based on its training data samples. It uses iterative division to find a description (often simply “attack” or “normal”) that best categorizes the traffic it is analyzing. An example of this approach in cybersecurity is detecting DoS attacks by analyzing the flow rate, size, and duration of traffic. For example, if the flow rate is low, but the duration of the traffic is long, it is likely to be an attack and will, therefore, be classified as such [ 25 ]. Decision trees can also be used to detect command injection attacks in robotic vehicles by categorizing values from CPU consumption, network flow, and volume of data written [ 25 ] as shown in Fig. 5 . This technique is popular as it is intuitive in that what the AI does and doesn’t consider anomalous traffic is known to the developer. Additionally, once an effective series of rules is found, the AI can analyze traffic in real-time, providing an almost immediate alert if unusual activity is detected.
An example of a decision tree for classifying network traffic
Another approach to decision trees is the Rule-Learning technique, which searches for a set of attack characteristics in each iteration while maximizing some score that denotes the quality of the classification (i.e., the number of incorrectly classified data samples) [ 25 ]. The main difference between traditional decision trees and the rule-learning techniques is that traditional decision trees look for characteristics that will lead to a classification, whereas the rule-learning technique finds a complete set of rules that can describe a class. This can be an advantage as it can factor in human advice when generating rules, which creates an optimized set of rules [ 25 ].
The k-nearest neighbor (k-NN) technique learns from data samples to create classes by analyzing the Euclidean distance between a new piece of data and already classified pieces of data to decide what class the new piece should be put in, to put it simply [ 25 ]. For example, the new piece of data when k, the number of nearest neighbors, equals three (3) would be classified into class two (2), but when k equals nine (9), the new piece would be classified in class 1 as shown in Fig. 6 . The k-NN technique is attractive for intrusion detection systems as it can quickly learn from new traffic patterns to notice previously unseen, even zero-day attacks. Cybersecurity experts are also researching applications of k-NN for real-time detection of cyberattacks [ 25 ]. The technique has been employed to detect attacks such as false data injection attacks and performs well when data can be represented through a model that allows the measurement of their distance to other data, i.e., through a Gaussian distribution or a vector.
How k-NN technique can classify a data point differently given different k values
Support vector machines (SVMs) are an extension of linear regression models that locates a plane that separates data into two classes [ 25 ]. This plane can be linear, non-linear, polynomial, Gaussian, sigmoid, etc., depending on the function used in the algorithm. SVMs can also separate data into more than two classes by using more than one plane. In cybersecurity, this technique is used to analyze Internet traffic patterns and separate them into their component classes such as HTTP, FTP, SMTP, and so on [ 25 ]. As SVM is a supervised machine learning technique, it is often used in applications where attacks can be simulated, such as using network traffic generated from penetration testing as training data.
Artificial neural networks (ANNs) are a technique derived from the way that neurons interact with each other in the brain in order to pass and interpret information. In ANNs, a neuron is a mathematical equation that reads data and outputs a target value, which is then passed along to the next neuron based on its value. The ANN algorithm then iterates until the output value is acceptably close to the target value, which allows the neurons to learn and correct their weights by measuring the error between the expected value and the previous output value. Once this process is finished, the algorithm presents a mathematical equation that outputs a value that can be used to classify the data [ 25 ].
A large benefit of ANNs is that they are able to adjust their mathematical models when presented with new information, whereas other mathematical models may become obsolete as new types of traffic and attacks become common [ 25 ]. This also means that ANNs are adept at catching previously unseen and zero-day attacks as they take new information into heavier consideration than static mathematical models can. Because of this, ANNs make solid intrusion detection systems and have performed well with attacks such as DoS [ 25 ].
At present, using AI in cybersecurity is a small but rapidly growing field. It is also expensive and resource intensive, so using AI to protect a small system may not be feasible. However, businesses that have large networks may benefit from these solutions, especially if they are considering or have already introduced IoT devices into their network. AI cybersecurity would also be beneficial in the massive systems one would find in a smart city, and the AI would be able to give very quick response times that are important in systems like traffic management. In the future, AI cybersecurity could also be integrated into smaller systems such as self-driving cars or smart homes. Additionally, many AI cybersecurity measures detect or thwart attacks in progress rather than preventing attacks in the first place, meaning that other preventative security measured should also be in place.
Not all AI is used for the purposes of cybersecurity; cybercriminals have begun using malicious AI to aid attacks, often to thwart the intrusion detection algorithms in the case of IoT, or attacking beneficial AI in such a way that the AI works against its own system.
Machine learning can be used to discover vulnerabilities in a system. While this can be useful for those trying to secure a system to intelligently search for vulnerabilities that need to be patched, attackers also use this technology to locate and exploit vulnerabilities in their target system. As technology soars in usage, especially technologies with low-security standards such as IoT devices, the number of vulnerabilities that attackers are able to exploit has soared as well, including zero-day vulnerabilities. In order to identify vulnerabilities quickly, attackers often use AI to discover vulnerabilities and exploit them much more quickly than developers can fix them. Developers are able to use these detection tools as well, but it should be noted that developers are at a disadvantage when it comes to securing a system or device; they must find and correct every single vulnerability that could potentially exist, while attackers need only find one, making automatic detection a valuable tool for attackers.
Fuzzing, at its core, is a testing method that generates random inputs (i.e., numbers, chars, metadata, binary, and especially “known-to-be-dangerous” values such as zero, negative or very large numbers, SQL requests, special characters) that causes the target software to crash [ 26 ]. It can be divided into dumb fuzzing and smart fuzzing. Dumb fuzzing simply generates defects by randomly changing the input variables; this is very fast as changing the input variable is simple, but it is not very good at finding defects as code coverage is narrow [ 26 ]. Smart fuzzing, on the other hand, generates input values suitable for the target software based on the software’s format and error generation. This software analysis is a big advantage for smart fuzzing as it allows the fuzzing algorithm to know where errors can occur; however, developing an efficient smart fuzzing algorithm takes expert knowledge and tuning [ 26 ].
Symbolic execution is a technique similar to fuzzing that searches for vulnerabilities by setting input variables to a symbol instead of a real value [ 26 ]. This technique is often split into offline and online symbolic execution. Offline symbolic execution chooses only one path to explore at a time to create new input variables by resolving the path predicate [ 26 ]. This means that each time one wishes to explore a new path, the algorithm must be run from the beginning, which is a disadvantage due to the large amount of overhead due to code re-execution. Online symbolic execution replicates states and generates path predicates at every branch statement [ 26 ]. This method does not incur much overhead, but it does require a large amount of storage to store all the status information and simultaneous processing of all the states it creates, leading to significant resource consumption.
When an attacker alters the input of an AI system in such a way that causes the AI to malfunction or give an incorrect output, it is known as an input attack. Input attacks are carried out by adding an attack pattern to the input, which can be anything from putting tape on a physical stop sign to confuse self-driving cars to adding small amounts of noise to an image that is imperceptible to the human eye but will confuse an AI [ 27 ]. Notably, the actual algorithm and security of the AI does not need to be compromised in order to carry out an input attack—only the input that the attacker wants to compromise the output of must be altered. In the case of tape on a stop sign, the attacker may not need to use technology at all. However, more sophisticated attacks are completely hidden from the human eye, wherein the attacker may alter a tiny part of the image in a very precise manner that is designed to misdirect the algorithm. That being said, input attacks are often categorized based on where they rest on two axes: perceivability and format.
The perceivability of an input attack is the measure of how noticeable the attack is to the human eye, while the format is the measure of how digital versus physical the attack is [ 27 ]. On one end of the perceivability axis is perceivable attacks. Altering targets, such as by deforming, removing part of, or changing its colors, and adding to the target, such as affixing physical tape or adding digital marks, are types of perceivable attacks [ 27 ]. While perceivable attacks are perceivable by humans, humans may not notice slight changes like tape on a stop sign or consider them important. A human driver still sees a stop sign with tape or scratches as a stop sign, even though a self-driving car may not. This lends itself to the effectiveness of perceivable attacks, allowing them to, in many cases, hide in plain sight. Conversely, imperceivable attacks are invisible to the human eye. This can include things such as “digital dust,” which is a small amount of noise added to the entire image that is not visible to the human eye but significant enough to an AI to change its output or an imperceptible pattern on a 3D printed object that can be picked up by AI [ 27 ]. Imperceivable attacks can also be made through audio, such as playing audio at ranges outside of the human hearing range that would be picked up by a microphone [ 27 ]. Imperceivable attacks are generally more of a security risk, as there is almost no chance that a human would notice the attack before the AI algorithm outputs an incorrect response.
The format of an attack is usually either digital or physical, without many attacks that are a combination of both [ 27 ]. In many cases of physical attacks, the attack pattern must be more obvious rather than imperceivable as physical objects must be digitized to be processed and, in that process, may lose some finer detail [ 27 ]. Some attacks are still difficult to perceive even with the detail loss, however, as with the case of 3D printed objects with a pattern that blends into the structure of the object such that it is imperceptible to humans [ 27 ]. Opposite of physical attacks are digital attacks, which attack digital inputs such as images, videos, audio recordings, and files. As these inputs are already digitized, there is no process wherein detail is lost, and as such attackers can make very exact attacks, allowing them to be more imperceptible to the human eye than physical attacks [ 27 ]. Digital attacks are not necessarily imperceptible. However—photoshopping glasses with a strange pattern over a celebrity, for example, may cause the AI to identify the image as a different person, but still a person nonetheless. An example of input attacks specific to IoT smart cars and, more broadly, smart cities. As mentioned earlier, simply placing pieces of tape in a specific way on a stop sign is enough for an algorithm to not recognize the stop sign or even classify it as a green light—this is harmful for passengers in the car if the car does not heed the stop sign, and at a larger scale could alter traffic pattern detectors in smart cities. Additionally, noise-based input attacks could cause smart assistants to malfunction and carry out unintended commands.
Data poisoning attacks and input attacks are very similar, but while the goal of input attacks is simply to alter the output of the affected input, the goal of data poisoning is to alter inputs over a long enough period of time that the AI that analyzes data has shifted and is inherently flawed; because of this, data poisoning is usually carried out while the AI is still being trained before it is actually deployed [ 27 ]. In many cases, the AI learns to fail on specific inputs that the attacker chooses; for example, if a military uses AI to detect aircraft, the enemy military may poison the AI so that it does not recognize certain types of aircraft like drones [ 27 ]. Data poisoning can also be used on AIs that are constantly learning and analyzing data in order to make and adjust predictions, such as in predictive maintenance systems. There are three main methods attackers can use to poison an AI.
Poisoning the dataset of an AI is perhaps the most direct method of data poisoning—as AI gain all of their knowledge from the training datasets they are provided, any flaws within those datasets will subsequently flaw the AI’s knowledge. A basic example of this is shown in Fig. 7 : a significant portion of the data is corrupted in the second dataset, leading the resultant machine learning model to be flawed. Dataset poisoning is done by including incorrect or mislabeled information in the target dataset [ 27 ]. As AI learn by recognizing patterns in datasets, poisoned datasets break patterns or may introduce new incorrect patterns, causing the AI to misidentify inputs or identify them incorrectly [ 27 ]. Many datasets are very large, so finding poisoned data within datasets can be difficult. Continuing the example of traffic patterns, an attacker could change dataset labels in such a way that the AI no longer recognizes stop signs or add data and labels that cause the AI to classify a red light as a green light.
A visual representation of dataset poisoning
Algorithm poisoning attacks take advantage of weaknesses that may be in the learning algorithm of the AI. This method of attack is very prominent in federated learning, which is a method of training machine learning while protecting data privacy of an individual. Federated learning, rather than collecting potentially sensitive data from users and combining it into one dataset, trains small models directly on users’ devices and then combines these models to form the final model. The users’ data never leaves their devices, and so is more secure; however, if an attacker is one of the users that the algorithm is using the data of, they are free to manipulate their own data in order to poison the model [ 27 ]. The poisoned algorithm, when combined with the rest of the algorithms, has the potential to poison the final model. They could degrade the model or even install a backdoor in this manner.
One example of federated learning is Google’s Gboard, which used federated learning to learn about text patterns in order to train predictive keyboards [ 28 ]. Although Google has extensive data vetting measures, in a less careful approach, users could potentially type nonsensical messages to confuse the predictive text or, more sinisterly, inject code into the algorithm to give themselves a backdoor. Similarly, some cutting-edge IoT devices are beginning to employ federated learning in order to learn from each other. One example of this is using machine learning to predict air pressure changes as it flows through gradually clogging filters, allowing the IoT sensor to predict when the filter will need to be changed [ 29 ]. This learning process would take a long enough time to make the study infeasible with just a few filters, but with federated learning the process is able to be sped up significantly. However, users could easily manipulate the process with their own filters in order to poison the algorithm. Although this is a relatively innocent example of algorithm poisoning, as federated learning increases in IoT, so will the potentially harmful applications of federated learning.
Finally, some attackers simply replace a legitimate model with an already poisoned model prepared ahead of time; all the attacker has to do is get into the system which stores the model and replace the file [ 27 ]. Alternatively, the equations and data within the trained model file could be altered. This method is potentially dangerous as even if a model trained model is double-checked and data is verified to be not poisoned, the attacker can still alter the model at various points in its distribution, such as while the model is still in company’s network awaiting placement on an IoT device or on an individual IoT device once it has been distributed [ 27 ].
Many of the attacks as described above can be mitigated or prevented by properly sanitizing inputs and checking for unusual data. However, some attacks are subtle and can bypass the notice of humans and even other AI, especially when the attacks are created by malevolent AI systems. These attacks and how to defend against effectively them are at the forefront of current research as the popularity of these attacks grow, but at present many attacks do not use AI for the same reason that many security systems do not: AI is resource intensive and a good algorithm requires high-level knowledge to build, making it inaccessible and infeasible to many attackers.
The various attacks discussed in this paper are listed in Table 1 , and are paired with one or more ways of protecting an IoT system from the attack. While comprehensively protecting an IoT system can be a challenging task due to the number of attack surfaces present, many of the methods listed will defend against many types of attacks; for example, as many of the attacks listed are carried out by first conducting MITM attacks, protecting the network on which an IoT system resides will protect the system from many common attacks.
Due to the nature of IoT systems to have many attack surfaces, there exists a variety of attacks against these systems, and more are being discovered as IoT grows in popularity. It is necessary to protect systems against these attacks as effectively as possible. As the number and speed of attacks grow, experts are turning to AI as a means of protecting these systems intelligently and in real-time. Of course, attackers find ways to thwart these AI and may even use AI to attack systems. This paper explores popular techniques to attempt to disrupt or compromise IoT and explains at a surface level how these attacks are carried out. Where applicable, examples are also provided in order to clarify these explanations. Next, several AI algorithms are introduced, and their applications in cybersecurity are investigated. In many cases, these models are not yet common in commercial applications but rather are still undergoing research and development or are still difficult to implement and thus rare. Nonetheless, the models discussed are promising and may become common attack detection systems within just a couple of years. Methods of attacking AI and using AI to attack are also discussed, with the frame of IoT systems. The growth of IoT systems will see these types of attacks become more and more of a threat, especially as massive networks such as smart cities begin experimentation; both as massive networks are harder to protect with a multitude of attack surfaces, and as daily life and safety revolve around AI which needs to be more or less failure-proof. This is followed by a chart reiterating the threats covered in this paper, paired with common or recommended methods of protecting against each attack. Having covered all these topics, this paper aims to provide a useful tool with which researchers and cybersecurity professionals may study IoT in the context of cybersecurity and AI in order to secure IoT systems. Additionally, it also aims to emphasize the implications of up and coming technology and the impacts that each of these fields will have on the others. It is important to consider all the potential consequences of a technological development both before and after it is made public, as cyberattackers are constantly looking to use new technologies to their benefit, whether this means diverting the technology from its original purpose or using the technology as a tool to perpetuate other attacks. This paper discusses how IoT and AI have been taken advantage of for criminal purposes or have had weaknesses exploited as an example of this, which will help readers understand current risks and help cultivate an understanding such that these weaknesses are accounted for in the future in order to prevent cyberattacks.
Evans D. The Internet of Things: how the next evolution of the internet is changing everything. Cisco Internet Business Solutions Group: Cisco; 2011.
Google Scholar
Rouse M. What is IoT (Internet of Things) and how does it work? IoT Agenda, TechTarget. http://www.internetofthingsagenda.techtarget.com/definition/Internet-of-Things-IoT . Accessed 11 Feb 2020.
Linthicum D. App nirvana: when the internet of things meets the API economy. https://techbeacon.com/app-dev-testing/app-nirvana-when-internet-things-meets-api-economy . Accessed 15 Nov 2019.
Lu Y, Xu LD. Internet of Things (IoT) cybersecurity research: a review of current research topics. IEEE Internet Things J. 2019;6(2):2103–15.
Article Google Scholar
Vorakulpipat C, Rattanalerdnusorn E, Thaenkaew P, Hai HD. Recent challenges, trends, and concerns related to IoT security: aan evolutionary study. In: 2018 20th international conference on advanced communication technology (ICACT), Chuncheon-si Gangwon-do, Korea (South); 2018. p. 405–10.
Lakhani A. The role of artificial intelligence in IoT and OT security. https://www.csoonline.com/article/3317836/the-role-of-artificial-intelligence-in-iot-and-ot-security.html . Accessed 11 Feb 2020.
Pendse A. Transforming cybersecurity with AI and ML: view. https://ciso.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/transforming-cybersecurity-with-ai-and-ml/67899197 . Accessed 12 Feb 2020.
Meneghello F, Calore M, Zucchetto D, Polese M, Zanella A. IoT: internet of threats? A survey of practical security vulnerabilities in real IoT devices. IEEE Internet Things J. 2019;6(5):8182–201.
Roopak M, Yun Tian G, Chambers J. Models deep learning, for cyber security in IoT networks. In: IEEE 9th annual computing and communication workshop and conference (CCWC), Las Vegas, NV, USA. 2019;2019:0452–7.
Cañedo J, Skjellum A. Using machine learning to secure IoT systems. In: 2016 14th annual conference on privacy, security and trust (PST), Auckland; 2016. p. 219–22, https://doi.org/10.1109/PST.2016.7906930 .
Farivar F, Haghighi MS, Jolfaei A, Alazab M. Artificial intelligence for detection, estimation, and compensation of malicious attacks in nonlinear cyber-physical systems and industrial IoT. IEEE Trans Ind Inf. 2020;16(4):2716–25. https://doi.org/10.1109/TII.2019.2956474 .
Wang S, Qiao Z. Robust pervasive detection for adversarial samples of artificial intelligence in IoT environments. IEEE Access. 2019;7:88693–704. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2919695 .
Radanliev P, De Roure D, Van Kleek M, Santos O, Ani U. Artificial intelligence in cyber physical systems. AI & society. 2020; p. 1–14.
Radanliev P, De Roure D, Page K, Nurse JR, Mantilla Montalvo R, Santos O, Maddox LT, Burnap P. Cyber risk at the edge: current and future trends on cyber risk analytics and artificial intelligence in the industrial internet of things and industry 4.0 supply chains. Cybersecurity. 2020;3:1–21.
Radanliev P, De Roure DC, Nurse JR, Montalvo RM, Cannady S, Santos O, Burnap P, Maple C. Future developments in standardisation of cyber risk in the Internet of Things (IoT). SN Appl Sci. 2020;2(2):169.
Woo S. The right security for IoT: physical attacks and how to counter them. In: Minj VP, editor. Profit From IoT. http://www.iot.electronicsforu.com/headlines/the-right-security-for-iot-physical-attacks-and-how-to-counter-them/ . Accessed 13 June 2019.
Akram H, Dimitri K, Mohammed M. A comprehensive iot attacks survey based on a building-blocked reference mode. Int J Adv Comput Sci Appl. 2018. https://doi.org/10.14569/IJACSA.2018.090349 .
Herberger C. DDoS fire & forget: PDoS—a permanent denial of service. Radware Blog, Radware Ltd. http://www.blog.radware.com/security/2015/10/ddos-fire-forget-pdos-a-permanent-denial-of-service/ . Accessed 12 Sept 2016.
Cekerevac Z, Dvorak Z, Prigoda L, Čekerevac P. Internet of things and the man-in-the-middle attacks–security and economic risks. Mest J. 2017;5:15–25. https://doi.org/10.12709/mest.05.05.02.03 .
Melamed T. An active man-in-the-middle attack on bluetooth smart devices. WIT Press, International Journal of Safety and Security Engineering. http://www.witpress.com/elibrary/sse-volumes/8/2/2120 . Accessed 1 Feb 2018.
Mode G, Calyam P, Hoque K. False data injection attacks in Internet of Things and deep learning enabled predictive analytics; 2019.
De Donno M, Dragoni N, Giaretta A, Spognardi A. Analysis of DDoS-capable IoT malwares. In: 2017 federated conference on computer science and information systems (FedCSIS), Prague; 2017. p. 807–16. https://doi.org/10.15439/2017F288 .
Mirai Botnet DDoS Attack. Corero, Corero. http://www.corero.com/resource-hub/mirai-botnet-ddos-attack/ . Accessed 9 Dec 2019.
BrickerBot Malware emerges, permanently bricks iot devices. Trend Micro, Trend Micro Incorporated. http://www.trendmicro.com/vinfo/us/security/news/internet-of-things/brickerbot-malware-permanently-bricks-iot-devices . Accessed 19 Apr 2017.
Zeadally S, Adi E, Baig Z, Khan IA. Harnessing artificial intelligence capabilities to improve cybersecurity. IEEE Access. 2020;8:23817–37.
Jurn J, Kim T, Kim H. An automated vulnerability detection and remediation method for software security. Sustainability. 2018;10:1652. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10051652 .
Comiter M. Attacking artificial intelligence. Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs. http://www.belfercenter.org/sites/default/files/2019-08/AttackingAI/AttackingAI.pdf . Accessed 25 Aug 2019.
McMahan B, Daniel R. Federated learning: collaborative machine learning without centralized training data. Google AI Blog, Google. http://www.ai.googleblog.com/2017/04/federated-learning-collaborative.html . Accessed 6 Apr 2017.
Rojek M. Federated learning for IoT. Medium, becoming human: artificial intelligence magazine. http://www.becominghuman.ai/theres-a-better-way-of-doing-ai-in-The-iot-era-feabbbc1b589 . Accessed 16 Apr 2019.
Porter E. What is a botnet? And how to protect yourself in 2020. SafetyDetectives, Safety Detectives. http://www.safetydetectives.com/blog/what-is-a-botnet-and-how-to-protect-yourself-in/#review-2 . Accessed 28 Dec 2019.
Hendrickson J. What is the mirai botnet, and how can i protect my devices? How to geek, LifeSavvy media. http://www.howtogeek.com/408036/what-is-the-mirai-botnet-and-how-can-i-protect-my-devices/ . Accessed 22 Mar 2019.
Understanding denial of service attacks. Cybersecurity and infrastructure security agency CISA. http://www.us-cert.cisa.gov/ncas/tips/ST04-015 . Accessed 20 Nov 2019.
Moisejevs I. Poisoning attacks on machine learning. Towards data science, medium. http://www.towardsdatascience.com/poisoning-attacks-on-machine-learning-1ff247c254db . Accessed 15 July 2019.
Fang M et al. Local model poisoning attacks to Byzantine-Robust federated learning. In: Usenix security symposium. arXiv:1911.11815 . Accessed 6 Apr 2020.
Download references
This work was supported in part by the Commonwealth Cyber Initiative, an investment in the advancement of cyber R&D, innovation and workforce development in Virginia, USA. For more information about CCI, visit cyberinitiative.org.
Authors and affiliations.
Batten College of Engineering and Technology, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA, USA
Murat Kuzlu
Computer Science, Christopher Newport University, Newport News, VA, USA
Corinne Fair
eKare, Inc, Fairfax, VA, USA
Ozgur Guler
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
MK, and CF conceived and designed the work as well as contributed to the acquisition, analysis, and interpretation of data. All authors discussed the results and wrote the final manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Correspondence to Murat Kuzlu .
Competing interests.
The authors declare that they no competing interests.
Publisher's note.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .
Reprints and permissions
Kuzlu, M., Fair, C. & Guler, O. Role of Artificial Intelligence in the Internet of Things (IoT) cybersecurity. Discov Internet Things 1 , 7 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43926-020-00001-4
Download citation
Received : 29 September 2020
Accepted : 30 November 2020
Published : 24 February 2021
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s43926-020-00001-4
Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:
Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.
Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative
You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.
All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .
Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.
Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.
Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.
Original Submission Date Received: .
Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.
Please let us know what you think of our products and services.
Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.
The role of 6g technologies in advancing smart city applications: opportunities and challenges.
2.1. role of ai in 6g and smart city arena, 2.1.1. applications, 2.1.2. challenges, 2.2. role of integrated sensing and communication (isac) in smart city concept, 2.2.1. applications, 2.2.2. challenges, 2.3. iot for smart cities with 6g, 2.3.1. characteristics of 6g-iot, 2.3.2. classification of iot, 2.4. blockchain (bc) and 6g-enabled smart cities, 2.5. terahertz (thz) communication, 2.5.1. applications/use cases, 2.5.2. challenges, 2.6. quantum communication (qc), 2.6.1. applications, 2.6.2. challenges, 2.7. immersive communication (ic), 2.7.1. types of immersive communication, 2.7.2. use cases for immersive communication, 2.8. visible light communication (vlc), 2.8.1. free-space optics (fso), 2.8.2. fiber-wireless system (fiwi), 2.8.3. power over fiber (pof), 2.8.4. challenges, 2.9. mobile edge computing (mec), applications, 2.10. reconfigurable intelligent surfaces (riss), 2.11. non-terrestrial networks (ntns), 2.11.1. airborne base stations (abs), uavs, and drones uses in a 6g smart city, applications/benefits, 2.11.2. satellite communication, 3. applications of 6g in smart cities, 3.1. industrial automation and smart manufacturing, 3.2. vehicle-to-everything (v2x) technology in smart cities, use cases of v2x, 3.3. smart healthcare, 3.4. smart grid, 3.5. smart waste management, 4. conclusions, open challenges and possible future research, conflicts of interest.
Click here to enlarge figure
Parameter | 5G | 6G |
---|---|---|
Data Rate, Band | ~20 Gbps, sub-6 GHz, Crowded | ~1 TBPS, ultra-fast (THz) |
Services | Limited capability to support new communication | Holographic communication, augmented reality, immersive gaming, etc. |
Latency | Low latency | Ultra-low latency and high reliability |
Architecture | Massive MIMO | Cell-free massive MIMO, intelligent surfaces |
Coverage | Infrastructure-based | Ubiquitous connectivity (space–air–ground–sea) |
Security | Security issues | Blockchain and quantum communication. |
AI Integration | Partial | Full |
Satellite Integration | No | Full |
Source Databases | IEEE Xplore, Web of Science (WoS), Taylor and Francis, ASCE Library, Scopus, and Springer |
---|---|
Search String | (“Artificial Intelligence” OR “THz” OR “ISAC” OR “Block Chain” OR “UAV”) AND (“6G”) AND (“Smart Cities”) |
Time period | 2019–2024 |
Article Type | Journal, Review, Letter, Book Chapter, Short Survey, Article |
Language Restriction | English |
Included Subject Area | Computer Science, Engineering, Energy, Business, Management and Accounting, Mathematics, Environmental Science, Decision Sciences |
Excluded Subject Area | Chemical Engineering, Arts and Humanities, Health Professions, Agricultural and Biological Sciences, Neuroscience, Multidisciplinary, Psychology, Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics, Immunology and Microbiology, Nursing, Social Sciences, Economics Econometrics and Finance, Physics and Astronomy, Materials Science, Medicine, Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology, Chemistry, Earth and Planetary Sciences |
Ref. | Authors | Year of Public. | Research Area | Major Contribution |
---|---|---|---|---|
[ ] | Fong, B et al. | 2023 | Vehicular | Investigates technical issues regarding the design and implementation of vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I) systems to enhance reliability in a smart city with 6G as backbone. |
[ ] | P Mishra et al. | 2023 | IoT, Vision | Proposes framework, architecture and requirements for 6G IoT network. Discusses emerging technologies for 6G concerning artificial intelligence/machine learning, sensing networks, spectrum bands, and security. |
[ ] | Nahid Parvaresh, Burak Kantarci, | 2023 | UAV base station | Network performance of UAV-BS is improved by use of proposed continuous actor-critic deep reinforcement learning method to address the 3D location optimization issue of UAV-BSs in smart cities. |
[ ] | Z. Yang et al. | 2023 | Edge cloud, Energy efficiency | Paper analyzes challenges in developing a low-carbon smart city in 6G-enabled smart cities. Also proposes a visual end-edge-cloud architecture (E C) that is AI-driven for attaining low carbon emission in smart cities. |
[ ] | N. Sehito et al. | 2024 | IRS, UAV, NOMA, Spectral efficiency | Paper introduces a new optimization scheme by utilizing IRSs in NOMA multi-UAV networks in 6G-enabled smart cities, resulting in significant performance enhancement in terms of spectral efficiency. |
[ ] | Prabhat Ranjan Singh et al. | 2023 | AI, Technology evolution, Smart city applications | Paper covers evolution of network technology, AI approaches for 6G systems, importance of AI in advanced network model development in 6G-enabled smart city applications. |
[ ] | Murroni, M et al. | 2023 | Vision, Enabling technologies | Paper furnishes an update on the smart city arena with the use of 6G. Paper describes the role of enabling technologies and their specific employment plans. |
[ ] | Kamruzzaman | 2022 | IoT, Energy efficiency, Use cases | Presents key technologies, their applications, and IoT technologies trends for energy-efficient 6G-enabled smart city. Also, identifies and discusses key enabling technologies. |
[ ] | Kim, N et al. | 2024 | Standardization and key enabling technologies | Paper provides key features and recent trends in standardization of smart city concept. Paper highlights potential key technologies of 6G that can be used in various urban use cases in 6G-enabled smart cities. |
[ ] | Ismail, L.; Buyya, R | 2022 | AI-enabled 6G smart cities | Discusses evolution of wireless-technology generations, AI implementation in 6G and its self-learning models in smart city applications. |
[ ] | Zakria Qadir et al. | 2023 | Survey, IoT | Emerging 6G connectivity solutions and their applications in IoT to serve smart cities are surveyed in this paper. |
[ ] | Misbah Shafi et al. | 2024 | 6G technologies | The framework of 6G network is presented with its key technologies that have substantial effect on the key performance indicators of a wireless communication network. |
Natural Resources and Energy | Mobility and Transport | Living and Environment | People and Economy | Government |
---|---|---|---|---|
Smart Grid. | People Mobility. | Pollution Control. | Education and School. | e-Governance. |
Public Lighting. | City Logistics. | Public Safety. | Entertainment and Culture. | Transparency. |
Waste Management. | Health Care. | Entrepreneurship and Innovation. | ||
Water Management | Public Spaces | |||
Welfare Services. | ||||
Smart Homes. |
Ref. | THz | AI | BC | QC | NTN (UAV) | MEC | RIS | ISAC | HC | VLC |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
[ ] | √ | √ | ||||||||
[ ] | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | |||||
[ ] | √ | |||||||||
[ ] | √ | |||||||||
[ ] | ||||||||||
[ ] | √ | √ | ||||||||
[ ] | √ | √ | ||||||||
[ ] | √ | √ | ||||||||
[ ] | √ | |||||||||
[ ] | √ | √ | ||||||||
[ ] | √ | |||||||||
[ ] | √ | |||||||||
[ ] | √ | √ | √ | |||||||
[ ] | √ | √ | ||||||||
[ ] | √ | √ | ||||||||
[ ] | √ | |||||||||
[ ] | √ | |||||||||
[ ] | √ | |||||||||
[ ] | √ | √ | ||||||||
[ ] | √ | |||||||||
[ ] | √ | |||||||||
[ ] | √ | |||||||||
[ ] | √ | |||||||||
[ ] | √ | |||||||||
[ ] | √ | |||||||||
[ ] | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | |||||
[ ] | √ | √ | √ | |||||||
[ ] | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | ||||
This Paper | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ |
Potential 6G Technology | Brief Description |
---|---|
Artificial Intelligence (AI) | AI can be used to analyze, manage and optimize resources and to efficiently support 6G networks. AI can be used for tasks like efficient channel estimation, energy efficiency, modulation recognition, data caching, traffic prediction, radio resource management, mobility management, etc. |
Terahertz Communication (THz) | Uses frequency band 0.1 to 10 THz. Ability to attain ultra-high (up to 1 Tbps) data rates and wide bandwidth. |
Blockchain (BC) | A type of distributed ledger technology to ensure safety, privacy, scalability and reliability in this complex heterogeneous architecture. |
Quantum Computing (QC) | Based on quantum no-cloning theorem and the principle of uncertainty, absolute randomness is introduced by the use of the quantum nature of information, which provides security and enhanced channel capacity. |
Non Terrestrial networks (NTN) | Includes drones and satellites and is used to extend coverage footprint of terrestrial base stations, provide additional capacity in dense urban hotspots. Used in disaster recovery and remote or rural areas. |
Mobile Edge Communication (MEC) | By placing computing resources closer to end user, it reduces delays and latency and enhances processing speed and on-premise security |
Integrated Sensing and Communication (ISAC) | Optimizes the allocation of scarce resources and contributes to better decision-making processes by combining both sensing and communication tasks, which enhances efficiency. |
Reconfigurable Intelligent Surfaces (RISs) | A planar surface with array of passive elements whose characteristics can be altered dynamically. Used in 6G-THz to improve coverage, NLOS scenarios. |
Holographic Communication (HC) | HC is an application used in transmitting human-sized immersive and interactive holograms consisting of 3D videos and images that require extremely high data rates with ultra-low latency. |
Visible Light Communication (VLC) | VLC offers numerous advantages, such as, energy efficiency, cost-effectiveness, un-licensed spectrum, no electromagnetic interference, secure access technology, and large bandwidth. |
Ref. | Year | Application Domain of Smart Cities | Technologies Used | Areas/Topics Covered |
---|---|---|---|---|
[ ] | 2024 | V2X | 6G, Blockchain, Federated learning, Fog Computing | Comprehensive V2X security analysis. Future research direction for privacy in XR, secure SDN, physical layer security in THz. |
[ ] | 2024 | Smart Traffic Management | Edge Computing, Blockchain, Reinforced learning | Traffic optimization is achieved by decentralized integration of IoT sensors on vehicles and traffic signals and edge devices and the use of BC rules for real-time decisions. |
[ ] | 2024 | Supply Chain Management | Blockchain, IoT, Edge Computing | A Blockchain-based and IoT-enabled transparent and secure supply chain management framework is proposed for public emergency services in smart cities. |
[ ] | 2023 | Intelligent Transport System (ITS) | Blockchain | An ITS cross-domain data interaction framework between devices and agencies is proposed to achieve secure and efficient cross-chain communication. |
[ ] | 2023 | IoT | Blockchain, Big Data, AI | Framework and architecture based on Blockchain, AI and Big Data. |
[ ] | 2023 | Industrial Applications | 6G, Blockchain, IoT | Case study of smart supply chain. Benefits and challenges of BT and 6G-IoT |
[ ] | 2023 | IoD (Internet of Drones) | 6G, Blockchain | Analysis of multilayered Blockchain-IoD novel Global Compliance System (GCoS) and Swarm Security (Sse) system |
[ ] | 2023 | IoT-Blockchain efficiency | 6G, IoT-oriented Blockchain | Improves Blockchain-IoT performance by targeted optimization to improve low power efficiency and slow ledger synchronization. |
[ ] | 2022 | IoV | 6G, Blockchain | A survey paper for BC in IoVs sharing underlying 6G technology. Explores how privacy and security issues in IoVs can be tackled using BC technology. |
[ ] | 2022 | Food Supply Chain Management | IoT, Blockchain | Blockchain enables traceability of food supply from factories/fields to the customer’s table. IoT devices probe food condition. |
Use Case | Description |
---|---|
Remote Surgery | ]. ]. ]. |
Holographic Teleconferencing | ]. ]. ]. |
Immersive Gaming | ]. |
Metaverse | ]. |
Tech. | Applications/Benefits | Challenges |
---|---|---|
AI | ]. , ]. , , , ]. ]. ] ]. ]. , , , , , , , , , , , ]. ]. ]. | , , ]. |
ISAC | , ]. ]. | ]. ]. ]. |
THz | , ]. , ]. ] | ]. ]. ]. |
BC | , ]. ]. ]. ] | |
QC | , , ]. , ]. , ]. , , ] | ]. , ]. |
NTN | , ]. | |
MEC | , ]. ]. | |
RIS | ]. ] ] and high-precision positioning [ , ]. ] | |
IC | , , ]. , ]. ]. ]. | |
VLC |
Application (Use Case) | Benefits | Devices/Tech Used |
---|---|---|
Smart Routing | Avoidance of traffic congestion. Useful for emergency vehicles. Traffic balancing on roads. Reduction in emissions [ ] Reduce delays. | IOT sensors. Vehicle ad-hoc networks. AI real-time routing algorithms [ ]. Cloud and edge computing for data processing and analysis. |
Smart Parking | Contribution to sustainability. Optimal utilization of parking spaces. Reduced time for drivers to search for parking spaces. | V2V and V2I communication. Use of sensors for indicating parking status. AI and cloud computing. |
Speed Harmonization | Reduces frequent need for acceleration and deceleration. Continuous traffic flow. Reduces emissions. Safe travel. | AI and cloudification. Green-light coordination. |
Green Driving | Reduction of fuel consumption. Reduction of pollution near critical areas like hospitals. | Collection of pollution data by roadside sensors. Data transfer to centralized cloud. Traffic management decision based on AI algorithm. On-road displays for flashing traffic management decisions. |
Coordinated Maneuvers | Smooth traffic flow. Emission reduction. | V2I information exchange among vehicles and RSU [ ]. Low-latency, low-delay transmission. Advanced AI implemented at edge for delay-free decisions. |
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. |
Sharma, S.; Popli, R.; Singh, S.; Chhabra, G.; Saini, G.S.; Singh, M.; Sandhu, A.; Sharma, A.; Kumar, R. The Role of 6G Technologies in Advancing Smart City Applications: Opportunities and Challenges. Sustainability 2024 , 16 , 7039. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16167039
Sharma S, Popli R, Singh S, Chhabra G, Saini GS, Singh M, Sandhu A, Sharma A, Kumar R. The Role of 6G Technologies in Advancing Smart City Applications: Opportunities and Challenges. Sustainability . 2024; 16(16):7039. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16167039
Sharma, Sanjeev, Renu Popli, Sajjan Singh, Gunjan Chhabra, Gurpreet Singh Saini, Maninder Singh, Archana Sandhu, Ashutosh Sharma, and Rajeev Kumar. 2024. "The Role of 6G Technologies in Advancing Smart City Applications: Opportunities and Challenges" Sustainability 16, no. 16: 7039. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16167039
Article access statistics, further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.
Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals
The research, which was commissioned by our supporter Virgin Money, also revealed other shocking statistics around internet use.
New research commissioned by our supporter Virgin Money reveals almost a third of people (29%) know a friend or relative who doesn’t have access to data/the internet¹, which has often prevented them from completing simple tasks like registering for a service, purchasing an item, or booking travel.
The research also found that one in five people (20%) in Britain could only cope a maximum of two hours without access to the internet while over one in ten (11%) can only cope less than an hour.
During the weekend a fifth of people in Britain spend between four to five hours using data enabled services (such as browsing the internet, scrolling through social media etc.); 14% use it for over 10 hours.
The most common everyday tasks people complete online (via any internet-enabled device) include:
The research was carried out as part of the bank’s ongoing work to help reduce the digital divide and raise awareness of the impact of data poverty.
Data from our Digital Nation infographic shows that although 92% of people in the UK think most essential services require internet access ², 4 in 10 (45%) households with children in the UK today do not meet the Minimum Digital Living Standard and 8.5 million people lack the most basic digital skills to use the internet .
In response to this and as part of its work to tackle data poverty, Virgin Money recently completed its first SIM-Free Saturday, a new company-wide challenge that encourages colleagues to take part in an internet detox and experience the impact of digital exclusion for themselves.
During the challenge, which took place on 10 August, Virgin Money colleagues were asked to live a day without data and complete a series of tasks that could usually be done quickly and easily online, without using the internet for help.
This included checking their bank balance, finding out the cost of a train ticket between their nearest national rail station and London King’s Cross or London St.Pancras and checking the weather forecast for their local area for the next seven days, plus others.
James Peirson, general counsel & purpose officer at Virgin Money, said: “Digital exclusion is a real issue in the UK. For many low or no-income households paying for regular internet access is another bill they simply can’t afford but, in this digital age, it’s essential.
“We designed the SIM-Free Saturday challenge to help showcase just how important bridging the digital divide is. We’re thankful to those colleagues who took part and have had a great response, with many saying it has really helped them to experience the importance of our drive to support digital inclusion and better understand why we’re working hard to reduce data poverty.”
SIM-Free Saturday is just one in a number of initiatives Virgin Money is carrying out to help raise awareness of and reduce the digital divide.
Virgin Money is the first and only bank in the UK to take part in the National Databank programme - founded by Good Things Foundation and Virgin Media O2 - which works like a foodbank, but provides free mobile data, texts and calls for people in need .
Through the National Databank, digitally excluded people (whether they are a Virgin Money customer or not) can visit their nearest Virgin Money store or banking hub and pick up an O2 SIM card loaded with 25GB of free data, which renews every month for six months.
Colleagues across the bank also work to raise awareness and secure donations to our National Device Bank, which works alongside the National Databank to provide free smart devices, including laptops, mobiles and tablets , to people who are unable to afford them.
Virgin Money are also working with us on Learn My Way, our free beginners' online digital skills platform , to provide training to anyone looking for help to improve their digital skills.
For more details about Virgin Money, including store and banking hub locations visit: https://uk.virginmoney.com/ .
¹ Research carried out with 2,000 UK adults by OnePoll in July 2024
² Public First (2024), Poll for Good Things Foundation
In this long read, our Director of Evidence and Engagement, Dr. Emma Stone, sets out the thinking which has shaped our approach to the Data Poverty Lab.
As the Minimum Digital Living Standard project progresses, Dr Emma Stone draws together insights from stakeholders and wider research on rural digital inequalities in this long read.
Our Group CEO Helen comments on Labour's pledge to digital inclusion and reflects on Peter Kyle's visit to a Digital Inclusion Hub.
IMAGES
COMMENTS
The internet of everything (IoE), connecting people, organizations and smart things, promises to fundamentally change how we live, work and interact, and it may redefine a wide range of industry sectors. This conceptual paper aims to develop a vision of how the IoE may alter business models and the ways in which individuals and organizations ...
The Internet of Things (IoT)-centric concepts like augmented reality, high-resolution video streaming, self-driven cars, smart environment, e-health care, etc. have a ubiquitous presence now. These applications require higher data-rates, large bandwidth, increased capacity, low latency and high throughput. In light of these emerging concepts, IoT has revolutionized the world by providing ...
During recent years, one of the most familiar names scaling new heights and creating a benchmark in the world is the Internet of Things (IoT). It is indeed the future of communication that has transformed things (objects) of the real-world into smart objects. The functional aspect of IoT is to unite every object of the world under one common infrastructure; in such a manner that humans not ...
New formal methods research to create abstractions, formalisms and semantics at IoT layer. Artificial Intelligence of Things (AIoT), Explainable Machine Learning for IoT, Intelligent Edge. Research on the unique IoT challenges in security, reliability and privacy. High-level policy languages for specifying permissible communication patterns.
First, we will explore perspectives on the definition of the Internet of Things (IoT) followed by key constructs and concepts underlying IoT including a general research framework for conceptualising IoT. Then, we will delve into a further level of granularity and present a selection of IoT Reference Architectures before concluding.
The Internet of things is a new revolution that has shifted people's lifestyles from conventional to high-tech. Smart cities, smart homes, pollution management, energy conservation, smart transportation and smart industries are examples of IoT-driven developments. A lot of critical research studies and inspections have existed exhausted order ...
PDF | In this paper, we seek to highlight the concept of Internet of Things (IoT) in general, as well as reviewing the main challenges of the IoT... | Find, read and cite all the research you need ...
The rapid increase of data and service requirements brings new challenges for Internet of Thing. Emerging technologies and intelligent techniques can play a compelling role in prompting the development of intelligent architectures and services in Internet of Things to form the artificial intelligence Internet of Things.
Abstract Internet of Things (IoT) is a revolutionary and novel platform where a smart network connects to the large number of electronic devices via internet through available communication systems for reliable and real time connectivity, sensing thus acquiring data from sensors, computing and actuating devices. A review of the current status of IoT features, architecture, communication ...
Since the term first coined in 1999 by Kevin Ashton, the Internet of Things (IoT) has gained significant momentum as a technology to connect physical objects to the Internet and to facilitate machine-to-human and machine-to-machine communications. Over the past two decades, IoT has been an active area of research and development endeavors by many technical and commercial communities. Yet, IoT ...
The Internet of Everything (IoE) is an evolution of IoT, and it is considered as a combination of data, people, process, and physical devices. Recently, IoE has drawn significant attention from research community due to its wide variety of potential applications.
This paper focus on future applications of Internet of Things. The Internet of things (IoT) describes the network of physical objects—"things"—that are embedded with sensors, software, and ...
The current statuses and future promises of the Internet of Things (IoT), Internet of Everything (IoE) and Internet of Nano-Things (IoNT) are extensively reviewed and a summarized survey is presented. The analysis clearly distinguishes between IoT and IoE, which are wrongly considered to be the same by many commentators. After evaluating the current trends of advancement in the fields of IoT ...
This paper systematically reviews the evolution of Internet of Things (IoT) research in business and management over the past decade and a half. It synthesizes current knowledge, identifies major themes, gaps, and future opportunities to guide scholars on potential research directions within this exponentially growing domain.
ciated with the Internet of Things.From an Internet Society principle perspective, we believe that the Internet should be a source of empowerment globally, regardless of a user's location, region, or state of economic development, and that the full range of abilities and principles97 that drive our work and the suc.
The aim of this paper is to identify several important IoT research topics and areas, ranging from energy harvesting, data analytics, search, recommendation, security, privacy and trust in IoT, as well as the topics that arise in the adoption of new computing paradigms such as social computing, service computing, edge computing, and artificial intelligence (e.g., conversational AI and text ...
The rapid development and implementation of smart and IoT (Internet of Things) based technologies have allowed for various possibilities in technological advancements for different aspects of life. The main goal of IoT technologies is to simplify processes ...
Internet of Everything, highlights salient research issues, and provides a short introduction and discussion of the papers in the minitrack. 1. Introduction • ... research and have practical implications for designing and developing successful wearable products.
The intersection of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and the Internet of Things (IoT) presents extensive opportunities to bolster sustainability across diverse sectors, with a particular focus on water management. This paper explores the convergence of sustainability,...
Practitioner papers from reputable sources were included in the review because of the topic, the importance of currency, and the paucity of IoT empirical studies. In most cases, there was conformity between the concept papers and research papers reviewed.
The Internet of Things (IoT) is a system of wireless, interrelated, and connected digital devices that can collect, send, and store data over a network without requiring human-to-human or human-to-computer interaction. The IoT promises many benefits to streamlining and enhancing health care delivery to proactively predict health issues and ...
Abstract In the recent past, Internet of Things (IoT) has been a focus of research. With the great potential of IoT, there comes many types of issues and challenges.
Abstract—With the Internet of Things (IoT) gradually evolving as the subsequent phase of the evolution of the Internet, it becomes crucial to recognize the various potential domains for application of IoT, and the research challenges that are associated with these applications. Ranging from smart cities, to health care, smart agriculture ...
This approach enables the detection of the usage history, the usage scheme, and the research landscape topic in scientific papers on IoT in smart cities. This study included 976 articles from 2013 to 2023.
The paper delves into the significance of the Internet of Things (IoT) as a crucial data source for data science technology, particularly in the realm of energy consumption prediction for smart residential buildings.
This review paper compiles information from several other surveys and research papers regarding IoT, AI, and attacks with and against AI and explores the relationship between these three topics with the purpose of comprehensively presenting and summarizing relevant literature in these fields.
Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.
In addition to analysing the current security structure, this paper provides a research taxonomy for IoT. Our study is more comprehensive than many that have come before it on the topic of the Internet of Things; we look at everything from sensors to real-world applications. Previous Next Internet of Things (IoT) Smart Homes Applications Healthcare
Google has violated US antitrust law with its search business, a federal judge ruled Monday, handing the tech giant a staggering court defeat with the potential to reshape how millions of ...
Research reveals friends & family are experiencing digital exclusion. New research commissioned by our supporter Virgin Money reveals almost a third of people (29%) know a friend or relative who doesn't have access to data/the internet¹, which has often prevented them from completing simple tasks like registering for a service, purchasing an item, or booking travel.