Cited by 125Blockchain Technology Applications and SecurityBlockchain Technology in Education and LearningIoT and Edge/Fog Computing

A trust architecture for blockchain in IoT

Open access
Dedeoglu, Volkan, Jurdak, Raja, Putra, Guntur D., Dorri, Ali, Kanhere, Salil S.·2019·Proceedings of the 16th EAI International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Systems: Computing, Networking and Services

Abstract

Blockchain is a promising technology for establishing trust in IoT networks, where network nodes do not necessarily trust each other. Cryptographic hash links and distributed consensus mechanisms ensure that the data stored on an immutable blockchain can not be altered or deleted. However, blockchain mechanisms do not guarantee the trustworthiness of data at the origin. We propose a layered architecture for improving the end-to-end trust that can be applied to a diverse range of blockchain-based IoT applications. Our architecture evaluates the trustworthiness of sensor observations at the data layer and adapts block verification at the blockchain layer through the proposed data trust and gateway reputation modules. We present the performance evaluation of the data trust module using a simulated indoor target localization and the gateway reputation module using an end-to-end blockchain implementation, together with a qualitative security analysis for the architecture.

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 · 10.1145/3360774.3360822

Cites

20 of 20 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?

  • Three papers [1,7,11] employ the blockchain to ensure data security, such as the trustworthiness of sensor observations, while the blockchain is also a storage medium.

    “Three papers [1,7,11] employ the blockchain to ensure data security, such as the trustworthiness of sensor observations, while the blockchain is also a storage medium.”

    From A Systematic Review of Data Quality in CPS and IoT for Industry 4.0 (2023) · cites this paper as [11]

    The Trust Architecture section describes a blockchain-based system that records transactions and trust estimates, supporting the storage and auditability aspects of the claim. But the Introduction explicitly says blockchain does not guarantee the authenticity of sensor observations; the proposed data-trust module assesses that separately. Observational data may also be stored off-chain rather than on the blockchain itself. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Four of these papers investigate how data security solutions can improve data quality, in particular data accuracy.

    “Four of these papers [7,11,19,31] investigate how data security solutions can improve data quality (in particular, data accuracy).”
  • There is an explicit dependency between the data storage solution and the data quality support (i.e., ensuring data security) in these two works.

    “There is an explicit dependency between the data storage solution and the data quality support (i.e., ensuring data security) in these two works.”
  • Six primary studies [5,7,11,13,21,41] focus on data quality management in edge-based architecture levels (L2 and L3).

    “Six primary studies [5,7,11,13,21,41] focus on data quality management in edge-based architecture levels (L2 and L3).”

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dedeoglu, V., Jurdak, R., Putra, G. D., Dorri, A., & Kanhere, S. S.
Affiliations
  • Data61 (AU)
  • Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (AU)
  • UNSW Sydney (AU)
Venue
Proceedings of the 16th EAI International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Systems: Computing, Networking and Services
Publisher
ACM
Published
2019-11-12
Pages
190-199
OpenAlex
W2955398858
Cited by
124
References
20
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 1
FWCI
12.25
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • EAI International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Systems: Computing, Networking and Services (MobiQuitous) (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Blockchain Technology Applications and Security
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Blockchain Technology in Education and Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › IoT and Edge/Fog Computing
Keywords
blockchain, Internet of Things, trust architecture, data trust, block verification, target localization, Internet of Things security

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