EA

Article http://dx.doi.org/10.26855/ea.2023.04.013

Comparison of Encryption Algorithms for Wearable Devices in IoT Systems

TOTAL VIEWS: 5294

Hao Zhou

University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.

*Corresponding author: Hao Zhou

Published: June 13,2023

Abstract

In industrial, medical, transportation and other key applications, the dependence on the Internet of Things applications is increasing rapidly, which has greatly changed the security landscape. In the past, enterprise applications generally had available resources to deal with security algorithms at any time, but nowadays, enterprise-level IoT applications are suffering from increasing threats, and their attack targets are the expanding network of resource-constrained IoT devices. When enterprises are eager to meet the rapidly emerging opportunities of the Internet of Things, the deployed IoT devices often fail to support basic security measures in function, so it is difficult to protect the stored data, and it is impossible to guarantee the exchange of data and commands on vulnerable networks. The thesis is about the comparison of encryption algorithms for wearable devices. Because the most popular wearable devices in the market are smartwatches, choosing the smartwatches as sample to analysis. Moreover, based on the current cryptographic protocol standards that are being used in IoT, choosing AES, PRESENT, RSA and ECC algorithms as the comparison in the encryption algorithms. Also, the hybrid algorithm called HAN show impressive potential and security in encryption.

Keywords

Internet of things system, Wearable equipment, Encryption algorithm, Compare

References

[1] Debasis Bandyopadhyay and Jaydip Sen. Internet of things: Applications and challenges in technology and standardization. CoRR, abs/1105.1693, 2011.

[2] Isha Bhardwaj, Ajay Kumar, and Manu Bansal. A review on lightweight cryptography algorithms for data security and authentication in iots. In 2017 4th International Conference on Signal Processing, Computing and Control (ISPCC), pages 504-509, 2017.

[3] Isha Bhardwaj, Ajay Kumar, and Manu Bansal. A review on lightweight cryptography algorithms for data security and authen-tication in iots. 10, 2017.

[4] A. Bogdanov, L. R. Knudsen, G. Leander, C. Paar, A. Poschmann, M. J. B. Robshaw, Y. Seurin, and C. Vikkelsoe. Present: An ultra-lightweight block cipher. In Pascal Paillier and Ingrid Verbauwhede, editors, Cryptographic Hardware and Embedded Systems - CHES 2007, pages 450-466, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2007. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

[5] Zoran Cekerevac, Zdenek Dvorak, L. Prigoda, and Petar Cˇekerevac. Internet of things and the man-in-the-middle attacks – security and economic risks. MEST Journal, 5:15-5, 072017.

[6] Conurets. Top 10 wearable iot devices in 2022, 2022.

[7] Ashok Kumar Das, Sherali Zeadally, and Debiao He. Taxonomy and analysis of security protocols for internet of things. Future Generation Computer Systems, 89:110-125, 2018.

[8] Daniel Dimov. Privacy implications of google glass, 2013.

[9] HP. Hp study reveals smartwatches vulnerable to attack, 2015.

[10] Yih-Chun Hu, A. Perrig, and D.B. Johnson. Wormhole attacks in wireless networks. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Com-munications, 24(2):370-380, 2006.

[11] Kai Kang, Zhibo Pang, and Cong Wang. Security and privacy mechanism for health internet of things. The Journal of China Universities of Posts and Telecommunications, 20:64-68, 2013.

[12] Parikshit Mahalle, Sachin Babar, Neeli R. Prasad, and Ramjee Prasad. Identity management framework towards internet of things (iot): Roadmap and key challenges. In Natarajan Meghanathan, Selma Boumerdassi, Nabendu Chaki, and Dhinaharan Nagamalai, editors, Recent Trends in Network Security and Applications, pages 430-439, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2010. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

[13] Dindayal Mahto, Danish Khan, and DILIP YADAV. Security analysis of elliptic curve cryptography and rsa. 062016.

[14] Amir Moradi, Axel Poschmann, San Ling, Christof Paar, and Huaxiong Wang. Pushing the limits: A very compact and a thre-shold implementation of aes. In Kenneth G. Paterson, editor, Advances in Cryptology – EUROCRYPT2011, pages 69-88, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2011. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

[15] Mukrimah Nawir, Amiza Amir, Naimah Yaakob, and Ong Bi Lynn. Internet of things (iot): Taxonomy of security attacks. In 2016 3rd International Conference on Electronic Design (ICED), pages 321-326, 2016.

[16] Yogesh Ojha. Hacked miband 3, 2018.

[17] R.C. Prof and Ramesh Shahabadkar. A comprehensive survey on exiting solution approaches towards security and privacy requirements of iot. International Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering, 8:2319-2326, 082018.

[18] Bitdefender Research. Bitdefender research exposes security risks of an- droid wearable devices, 2014.

[19] Seyedmostafa Safavi and Zarina Shukur. Improving google glass security and privacy by changing the physical and software structure. Life Sciences, 11, 052014.

[20] Amad Shah, Masood Habib, Taimur Sajjad, Muhammad Umar, and Muhammad Babar. Applications and challenges faced by internet of things. 

[21] In Applications and Challenges Faced by Internet of Things-A Survey, pages 182-188, 012017.

[22] Rounak Sinha, Hemant Kumar Srivastava, and Sumit Kumar Gupta. Performance based comparison study of rsa and elliptic curve cryptography. 2013.

[23] CVE vulnerability database. Vulnerability details: Cve-2020-14130, 2020.

[24] CVE vulnerability database. Vulnerability details: Cve-2021-1813, 2021.

[25] CVE vulnerability database. Vulnerability details: Cve-2022-25830, 2022.

[26] CVE vulnerability database. Vulnerability details: Cve-2022-26763, 2022.

[27] CVE vulnerability database. Vulnerability details: Cve-2022-26766, 2022.

[28] Candid W. Google glass still vulnerable to wifi hijacking despite qr photo-bombing patch, 2013.

[29] Wu, J., et al. (2018). A secure and efficient wearable healthcare system based on body sensor networks. Future Generation Computer Systems, 78, 614-624. doi: 10.1016/j.future.2017.08.029.

[30] Li, X., et al. (2018). A lightweight and secure encryption algorithm for wearable devices in the Internet of Things. Sensors, 18(11), 4006. doi: 10.3390/s18114006.

[31] Feng, Y., et al. (2019). Efficient encryption schemes for wearable healthcare systems. IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics, 23(6), 2665-2672. doi: 10.1109/JBHI.2018.2876920.

[32] Jiang, S., et al. (2020). A secure wearable device system based on hybrid encryption algorithm. IEEE Access, 8, 181383-181391. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3024392.

[33] Song, Y., et al. (2021). A lightweight and practical secret key generation scheme based on rolling indices for wearable Internet of things. Measurement, 178, 254-262. doi: 10.1016/j.measurement.2021.

How to cite this paper

Comparison of Encryption Algorithms for Wearable Devices in IoT Systems

How to cite this paper: Hao Zhou. (2023). Comparison of Encryption Algorithms for Wearable Devices in IoT Systems. Engineering Advances3(2), 144-148.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.26855/ea.2023.04.013