IFKMS: Inverse Function-based Key Management Scheme for IoT networks

Nafi, Mohammed; Messai, Mohamed-Lamine; Bouzefrane, Samia; Omar, Mawloud

doi:10.1016/j.jisa.2022.103370

Cited by 5 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While in our solution, the gateway node needs to send one and receive (n gm ) messages, and the constrained node needs to send one and receive one message. Furthermore, the number of the involved constrained nodes in the revocation process is the smallest in our solution and the same for the gateway nodes; This makes our solution outperforms [14,16] in the case of a drained node for the constrained and the gateway nodes.…”

Section: Solutionmentioning

confidence: 86%

“…Figure 5, Figure 6, and Figure 7 demonstrate the communication overhead required by all the limited-resource nodes in the network in the three cases of compromised, left, and drained nodes, respectively. Our solution [14,16] Fig. 5 Communication overhead required by all the constrained nodes in the network in the case of compromised nodes.…”

Section: Communication Overheadmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The efficiency of our solution surpasses that of current solutions in terms of communication overhead, as evidenced by the results; this is due to the decentralization of Blockchain and the delegation of most communication tasks to the gateway nodes. Each gateway is responsible for communicating only with its attached constrained nodes, unlike previous studies such as [14] and [16]. Furthermore, most communication is carried out by the constrained nodes, with the gateway communicating with all network nodes, thereby increasing the communication overhead of the constrained devices.…”

Section: Communication Overheadmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our solution [14,16] Fig. 7 Communication overhead required by all the constrained nodes in the network in the case of drained nodes.…”

Section: Drained Nodes Communication Overhead [Kbytes]mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Optimizing energy consumption can pave the way for more efficient and durable IoT Networks. Our solution [14,16] Fig. 8 Energy consumption of communication between all the constrained nodes in the network in the case of compromised nodes.…”

Section: Energy Consumptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

A Smart Contract-based Blockchain Solution for Key Revocation in IoT Networks

Bettayeb,

Messai,

Hemam

2024

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The emergence and growing use of advanced technologies have opened up new possibilities for addressing the security challenges of resource-constrained IoT networks. As IoT devices exchange sensitive data, secure key management is essential for IoT network security, particularly during the key revocation phase. However, current IoT key management solutions require improvements due to the resource limitations of IoT devices. Despite these limitations, existing key revocation solutions still have several areas for improvement, including high communication overheads. Therefore, a decentralized and efficient solution is necessary to address these issues in IoT networks, with a focus on security. This paper proposes a new solution for key revocation based on Blockchain technology using smart contracts to minimize communication overhead and energy consumption in IoT networks. The paper presents a security and performance analysis to assess its correctness. The results indicate that our proposal outperforms other solutions by having a reduced communication overhead of 93.55\%, 91.87\%, and 99.75\% compared to other solutions during the compromising, leaving, and draining cases, respectively. This demonstrates that our solution is efficient and suitable for IoT networks.

show abstract

Section: Solutionmentioning

confidence: 86%

Section: Communication Overheadmentioning

confidence: 99%