Cited by 130Privacy-Preserving Technologies in DataPrivacy, Security, and Data ProtectionIoT and Edge/Fog Computing

Privacy in Internet of Things: From Principles to Technologies

Open access
Li, Chao, Palanisamy, Balaji·2019·IEEE Internet of Things Journal

Abstract

Ubiquitous deployment of low-cost smart devices and widespread use of high-speed wireless networks have led to the rapid development of the Internet of Things (IoT). IoT embraces countless physical objects that have not been involved in the traditional Internet and enables their interaction and cooperation to provide a wide range of IoT applications. Many services in the IoT may require a comprehensive understanding and analysis of data collected through a large number of physical devices that challenges both personal information privacy and the development of IoT. Information privacy in IoT is a broad and complex concept as its understanding and perception differ among individuals and its enforcement requires efforts from both legislation as well as technologies. In this paper, we review the state-of-the-art principles of privacy laws, the architectures for IoT and the representative privacy enhancing technologies (PETs). We analyze how legal principles can be supported through a careful implementation of PETs at various layers of a layered IoT architecture model to meet the privacy requirements of the individuals interacting with IoT systems. We demonstrate how privacy legislation maps to privacy principles which in turn drives the design of necessary PETs to be employed in the IoT architecture stack.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/jiot.2018.2864168

Cites

170 of 170 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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 personal information protection law is not specific and systematic, and the legal constraints are loose.

    “The personal information protection law is not specific and systematic, and the legal constraints are loose [114].”

    From A Survey of IoT Privacy Security: Architecture, Technology, Challenges, and Trends (2024) · cites this paper as [114]

    The Legislation section (p. 2) says the United States lacks general information-privacy legislation covering all states and areas, and that OECD privacy guidelines were nonbinding. Those points support a narrower concern about gaps and weak constraints, but the paper does not characterize personal-information protection law generally as unspecific or unsystematic; it also describes comprehensive, enforceable EU privacy laws. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Flagged first, then by citations

5 of the 175 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 16

  1. [14][14] M. Langheinrich, 'Privacy by designprinciples of privacy-aware ubiquitous systems,' in Ubicomp 2001: Ubiquitous Computing. Springer, 2001, pp. 273-291. -
  2. [37][37] R. Minerva, A. Biru, and D. Rotondi, 'Towards a definition of the internet of things (iot),' IEEE Internet Initiative, no. 1, 2015. -
  3. [49][49] Z. Specification, 'Zigbee alliance,' ZigBee Document 053474r06, Version, vol. 1, 2006. -
  4. [63][63] J. L. H. Ramos, J. B. Bernab´ e, and A. F. Skarmeta, 'Towards privacypreserving data sharing in smart environments,' in Innovative Mobile and Internet Services in Ubiquitous Computing (IMIS), 2014 Eighth International Conference on. IEEE, 2014, pp. 334-339. -
  5. [85][85] Y. Xu, X. Qin, Z. Yang, Y. Yang, and K. Li, 'A personalized k-anonymity privacy preserving method,' JOURNAL OF INFORMATION &COMPUTATIONAL SCIENCE, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 139-155, 2013. -
  6. [103][103] M.-J. O. Saarinen and D. W. Engels, 'A do-it-all-cipher for rfid: Design requirements,' IACR Cryptology EPrint Archive, vol. 2012, p. 317, 2012. -
  7. [106][106] P. Gauravaram, L. R. Knudsen, K. Matusiewicz, F. Mendel, C. Rechberger, M. Schl¨ affer, and S. S. Thomsen, 'Grøstl-a sha-3 candidate,' in Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings. Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum f¨ ur Informatik, 2009. -
  8. [109][109] J. Bethencourt, A. Sahai, and B. Waters, 'Ciphertext-policy attributebased encryption,' in Security and Privacy, 2007. SP'07. IEEE Symposium on. IEEE, 2007, pp. 321-334. -
  9. [114][114] M. Ambrosin, M. Conti, and T. Dargahi, 'On the feasibility of attributebased encryption on smartphone devices,' in Proceedings of the 2015 Workshop on IoT challenges in Mobile and Industrial Systems. ACM, 2015, pp. 49-54. -
  10. [124][124] A. Poschmann, G. Leander, K. Schramm, and C. Paar, 'New lightweight des variants suited for rfid applications,' in FSE, vol. 4593, 2007, pp. 196-210. -
  11. [129][129] C. De Canniere and B. Preneel, 'Trivium,' New Stream Cipher Designs, pp. 244-266, 2008. -
  12. [136][136] A. Banks and R. Gupta, 'Mqtt version 3.1. 1,' OASIS standard, vol. 29, 2014. -
  13. [152][152] L. Cranor, M. Langheinrich, and M. Marchiori, 'A p3p preference exchange language 1.0 (appel1. 0),' W3C working draft, vol. 15, 2002.
  14. [160][160] T. Liu and M. Martonosi, 'Impala: A middleware system for managing autonomic, parallel sensor systems,' in ACM Sigplan Notices, vol. 38, no. 10. ACM, 2003, pp. 107-118.
  15. [168][168] A. Pintus, D. Carboni, and A. Piras, 'Paraimpu: a platform for a social web of things,' in Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on World Wide Web. ACM, 2012, pp. 401-404.
  16. [175][175] M. A. Razzaque, M. Milojevic-Jevric, A. Palade, and S. Clarke, 'Middleware for internet of things: a survey,' IEEE Internet of Things Journal, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 70-95, 2016.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Li, C., & Palanisamy, B.
Affiliations
University of Pittsburgh (US)
Venue
IEEE Internet of Things Journal
Published
2019-02
Volume
6
Issue
1
Pages
488-505
ISSN
  • 2327-4662 (ISSN-L)
  • 2372-2541
OpenAlex
W2885623796
Cited by
130
References
175
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 10
FWCI
7.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Internet of Things Journal (publishedVersion)
  • D-Scholarship@Pitt (University of Pittsburgh) (acceptedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Privacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Privacy, Security, and Data Protection
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › IoT and Edge/Fog Computing
Keywords
Internet of Things, privacy, privacy-enhancing technologies, privacy law, privacy principles, IoT architecture, data privacy, data protection

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