IoT Public Fog Nodes Reputation System: A Decentralized Solution Using Ethereum Blockchain
Open accessAbstract
Public fog nodes extend cloud services for the Internet of Things (IoT) clients and smart devices to provide additional computation capabilities, storage space, and reduce latency and response time. The openness and pervasiveness of public fog nodes leads to the requirement of using trust models to ensure reliability, security, privacy, and meet the service-level agreements (SLAs). Conventional trust models for public fog nodes are centrally configured, deployed, and maintained considering security, privacy, and SLA requirements. However, these trust models enforce centralized governance policies across the system which leads towards the single-point-of-failure and single-point-of-compromise over IoT devices' and users' personal data. This paper proposes a decentralized trust model in order to maintain the reputation of publicly available fog nodes. The reputation is maintained considering users' opinions about their past interactions with the public fog nodes. The proposed trust model is designed using public Ethereum blockchain and smart contract technologies in order to enable decentralized trustworthy service provisioning between IoT devices and public fog nodes. The proposed approach is tested and evaluated in terms of security, performance, and cost. The results show that using blockchain for decentralized reputation management could become more advantageous when compared to the existing centralized trust models.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The performance of the system was not analyzed with respect to power consumption, throughput and other parameters.
“The performance of the system was not analyzed with respect to power consumption, throughput and other parameters.”
From A survey on the adoption of blockchain in IoT: challenges and solutions (2021) · cites this paper as [111]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
The Internet of Things: A survey
Atzori, L., Iera, A., & Morabito, G. (2010) · Computer Networks · doi:10.1016/j.comnet.2010.05.010 · Cited by 15,613 · see citing works
Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash SystemPreprint
Nakamoto, S. (2019) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3440802 · Cited by 14,600 · see citing works
(2015) · Cited by 3,471 · see citing works
IoT security: Review, blockchain solutions, and open challenges
Khan, M. A., & Salah, K. (2018) · Future Generation Computer Systems · doi:10.1016/j.future.2017.11.022 · Cited by 2,488 · see citing works
Self-citation(2017) · Cited by 1,724 · see citing works
Tsankov, P., Dan, A., Drachsler-Cohen, D., Gervais, A., Bünzli, F., & Vechev, M. (2018) · ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS) · doi:10.1145/3243734.3243780 · Cited by 1,051 · see citing works
The Fog Computing Paradigm: Scenarios and Security Issues
Stojmenovic, I., & Wen, S. (2014) · Annals of Computer Science and Information Systems · doi:10.15439/2014f503 · Cited by 1,037 · see citing works
A Survey of Blockchain Security Issues and Challenges
Lin, I., & Liao, T.-C. (2017) · International journal of network security · doi:10.6633/ijns.201709.19(5).01 · Cited by 1,012 · see citing works
Blockchain for AI: review and open research challenges
Salah, K., Rehman, M. H. U., Nizamuddin, N., & Al-Fuqaha, A. (2019) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2018.2890507 · Cited by 1,001 · see citing works
Self-citationFog Computing: A Taxonomy, Survey and Future Directions
Mahmud, R., Ramamohanarao, K., & Buyya, R. (2017) · Internet of things · doi:10.1007/978-981-10-5861-5_5 · Cited by 935 · see citing works
Blockchain and IoT Integration: A Systematic Survey
Panarello, A., Tapas, N., Merlino, G., Longo, F., & Puliafito, A. (2018) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s18082575 · Cited by 756 · see citing works
Trust and reputation model in peer-to-peer networks
Wang, Y., & Vassileva, J. (2004) · International Conference on Peer-to-Peer Computing · doi:10.1109/ptp.2003.1231515 · Cited by 479 · see citing works
Combating Deepfake Videos Using Blockchain and Smart Contracts
Hasan, H. R., & Salah, K. (2019) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2019.2905689 · Cited by 339 · see citing works
Self-citationA User Authentication Scheme of IoT Devices using Blockchain-Enabled Fog Nodes
Almadhoun, R., Kadadha, M., Alhemeiri, M., Al-Shehhi, M. R., & Salah, K. (2018) · IEEE/ACS International Conference on Computer Systems and Applications (AICCSA) · doi:10.1109/aiccsa.2018.8612856 · Cited by 281 · see citing works
Self-citationQoS-Based Service Selection and Ranking with Trust and Reputation Management
Vu, L., Hauswirth, M., & Aberer, K. (2005) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/11575771_30 · Cited by 270 · see citing works
The rise of ransomware and emerging security challenges in the Internet of Things
Yaqoob, I., Ahmed, E., Rehman, M. H. U., Ahmed, A. I. A., Al-Garadi, M. A., Imran, M. A., & Guizani, M. (2017) · Computer Networks · doi:10.1016/j.comnet.2017.09.003 · Cited by 269 · see citing works
Self-citationRATEWeb: Reputation Assessment for Trust Establishment among Web services
Malik, Z., & Bouguettaya, A. (2009) · The VLDB Journal · doi:10.1007/s00778-009-0138-1 · Cited by 262 · see citing works
Rep on the block: A next generation reputation system based on the blockchain
Dennis, R., & Owen, G. (2015) · International Conference for Internet Technology and Secured Transactions · doi:10.1109/icitst.2015.7412073 · Cited by 233 · see citing works
Security threats scenarios in trust and reputation models for distributed systems
Mármol, F. G., & Pérez, G. M. (2009) · Computers & Security · doi:10.1016/j.cose.2009.05.005 · Cited by 213 · see citing works
Q-rater: A collaborative reputation system based on source credibility theory
Cho, J., Kwon, K., & Park, Y. (2008) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2008.02.034 · Cited by 56 · see citing works
Preserving privacy of feedback providers in decentralized reputation systems
Hasan, O., Brunie, L., & Bertino, E. (2011) · Computers & Security · doi:10.1016/j.cose.2011.12.003 · Cited by 54 · see citing works
Strengthening the Blockchain-Based Internet of Value with Trust
Truong, N. B., Um, T., Zhou, B., & Lee, G. M. (2018) · International Conference on Communications · doi:10.1109/icc.2018.8423014 · Cited by 52 · see citing works
Opportunistic Computation Offloading in Mobile Edge Cloud Computing Environments
Rehman, M. H. U., Sun, L. C., Wah, T. Y., Iqbal, A., & Jayaraman, P. P. (2016) · IEEE International Conference on Mobile Data Management (MDM) · doi:10.1109/mdm.2016.40 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
Self-citationTRFIoT: Trust and Reputation Model for Fog-based IoT
Hussain, Y., & Huang, Z. (2018) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-00021-9_18 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
The Emergence of Edge-Centric Distributed IoT Analytics Platforms
Rehman, M. H. U., Jayaraman, P. P., & Perera, C. (2017) · Internet of Things · doi:10.1201/9781315155005-11 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- M. Debe. K. Salah, M. H. Rehman and D. Svetinovic, ''Blockchain-based decentralized reputation system for public fog nodes,'' in Proc. ACS/IEEE Int. Conf. Comput. Syst. Appl. (AICCSA), Abu Dhabi, UAE, Nov. 2019, pp. 1-6.
- P. Tsankov, D. Andrei, D.-C. Dana, G. Arthur, B. Florian, and V. Martin, ''Securify: Practical security analysis of smart contracts,'' in Proc. ACM SIGSAC Conf. Comput. Commun. Secur., 2018, pp. 67-82.
- MUHAMMAD HABIB UR REHMAN received the Ph.D. degree in mobile distributed analytics systems from the Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology, University of Malaya, Malaysia. He is currently a Postdoctoral Research Fellow with the Center for Cyber Physical Sys- tems, Khalifa University, UAE. His research inter- ests include blockchain, edge computing, big data, and the Internet of Things. DAVOR SVETINOVIC received the Ph.D. degree in computer science from the University of Water- loo, Canada, 2006. He is currently an Associate Professor of computer science with the Masdar Institute, Khalifa University of Science and Tech- nology, UAE, and also a Research Affiliate with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), USA. Previously, he worked as a Visiting Pro- fessor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technol- ogy (MIT) and a Postdoctoral Researcher at the Lero-the Irish Software Engineering Center, Ireland, and the Vienna Uni- versity of Technology, Austria. He leads the Strategic Requirements and Systems Security Group (SRSSG), and he has extensive experience work- ing on complex multidisciplinary research projects. He has published over 75 articles in leading journals and conferences. His current research interests include systems security and privacy, blockchain engineering, cryptocurren- cies, and requirements engineering. He is a Senior Member of ACM.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A survey on the adoption of blockchain in IoT: challenges and solutions
Uddin, M. A., Stranieri, A., Gondal, I., & Balasubramanian, V. (2021) · Blockchain: Research and Applications · doi:10.1016/j.bcra.2021.100006 · Cited by 365 · see citing works
Alzoubi, Y. I., Gill, A., & Mishra, A. (2022) · Journal of Cloud Computing · doi:10.1186/s13677-022-00353-y · Cited by 60 · see citing works
Monetization of services provided by public fog nodes using blockchain and smart contracts
Debe, M., Salah, K., Ur Rehman, M. H., & Svetinovic, D. (2020) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2020.2968573 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Self-citationTrust management for service migration in Multi-access Edge Computing environments
Le, V. T., Ioini, N. E., Barzegar, H. R., & Pahl, C. (2022) · Computer Communications · doi:10.1016/j.comcom.2022.07.039 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
- Authors
- Debe, M., Salah, K., Rehman, M. H. U., & Svetinovic, D.
- Affiliations
- Khalifa University of Science and Technology (AE)
- Venue
- IEEE Access
- Published
- 2019
- Volume
- 7
- Pages
- 178082-178093
- ISSN
- 2169-3536 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2995625611
- Cited by
- 105
- References
- 25
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 32 · 2020: 13
- FWCI
- 22.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- IEEE Access (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- WU Research (acceptedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- Center for Cyber-Physical Systems, Khalifa University of Science and Technology, UAE
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Blockchain Technology Applications and Security
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › IoT and Edge/Fog Computing
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Access Control and Trust
- Keywords
- Internet of Things, reputation management, Ethereum, smart contracts, fog computing security, service level agreements, single point of failure
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
