CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 36IoT and Edge/Fog ComputingInternet of Things and AINetwork Security and Intrusion Detection

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 53 of the 54 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Cybersecurity Model Based on Hardening for Secure Internet of Things Implementation

Open access
Echeverría, Aarón, Cevallos, Cristhian, Ortiz-Garces, Ivan, Andrade, Roberto O.·2021·Applied Sciences
DOI 10.3390/app11073260
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The inclusion of Internet of Things (IoT) for building smart cities, smart health, smart grids, and other smart concepts has driven data-driven decision making by managers and automation in each domain. However, the hyper-connectivity generated by IoT networks coupled with limited default security in IoT devices increases security risks that can jeopardize the operations of cities, hospitals, and organizations. Strengthening the security aspects of IoT devices prior to their use in different systems can contribute to minimize the attack surface. This study aimed to model a sequence of seven steps to minimize the attack surface by executing hardening processes. Conducted a systematic literature review using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) techniques. In this way, we were able to define a proposed methodology to evaluate the security level of an IoT solution by means of a checklist that considers the security aspects in the three layers of the IoT architecture. A risk matrix adapted to IoT is established to evaluate the attack surface. Finally, a process of hardening and vulnerability analysis is proposed to reduce the attack surface and improve the security level of the IoT solution.

Overview

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 · 10.3390/app11073260

Cites

53 of 53 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 IoT architecture based on layering model.
Figure 1 IoT architecture based on layering model.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 2 Literature review based on PRISMA methodology.
Figure 2 Literature review based on PRISMA methodology.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 3 Word cloud generated by Rayyan based on the records identified in the Systematic Literature Review (SLR).
Figure 3 Word cloud generated by Rayyan based on the records identified in the Systematic Literature Review (SLR).CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 4 Projected research based on proposals.
Figure 4 Projected research based on proposals.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 5 Proposed model for security hardening on IoT systems.
Figure 5 Proposed model for security hardening on IoT systems.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 6 Risk evaluation process.
Figure 6 Risk evaluation process.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 7 Risk and impact matrix.
Figure 7 Risk and impact matrix.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 8 IoT attack surface variables.
Figure 8 IoT attack surface variables.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 9 CIS Controls distribution in layer-based hardening process.
Figure 9 CIS Controls distribution in layer-based hardening process.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 10 IoT architecture employed.
Figure 10 IoT architecture employed.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 11 Ports scan.
Figure 11 Ports scan.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 12 VLANs created for hardening process.
Figure 12 VLANs created for hardening process.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 13 Ports scan Raspberry Pi.
Figure 13 Ports scan Raspberry Pi.CC-BY · From the PDF

Verification

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Gregg, M., and Santos, O. (2019). Certified Ethical Hacker (CEH) Version 10 Cert Guide, Pearson IT Certification. [3rd ed.].
  2. Prastika, 2019, Audit dam implementasi CIS Benchmark pada sistem operasi Linux Debian Server, J. Jarkom, 6, 1
  3. Radanliev, P., De Roure, D., Nurse, J.R.C., Nicolescu, R., Huth, M., Cannady, S., and Montalvo, R.M. (2020). Cyber risk impact assessment assessing the risk from the IoT to the digital Economy. SN Appl. Sci., 1–12. · DOI

Cited by

See all 36

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Echeverría, A., Cevallos, C., Ortiz-Garces, I., & Andrade, R. O.
Affiliations
  • Universidad de Las Américas (EC)
  • Escuela de Ingeniería en Tecnologías de la Información, FICA, Universidad de Las Américas, Quito 170125, Ecuador
  • National Polytechnic School (EC)
ORCID
Venue
Applied Sciences
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2021-04-06
Volume
11
Issue
7
Pages
3260
ISSN
2076-3417 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3390/app11073260
OpenAlex
W3152184839
Cited by
31
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 1
FWCI
2.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Applied Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › IoT and Edge/Fog Computing
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Internet of Things and AI
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Network Security and Intrusion Detection
Keywords
Internet of Things security, attack surface reduction, security checklist, IoT architecture layers, risk matrix, vulnerability assessment, smart cities, smart grid, smart healthcare

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