Introduction

The Internet of Things (IoT) is a network of physical objects that are embedded with
sensors, software, and other technologies to collect and exchange data. The term IoT
was first used by Kevin Ashton in 1998, and it has since become a major area of
research and development.

The IoT has the potential to revolutionize many industries, including manufacturing,
healthcare, and transportation. For example, IoT-enabled devices can be used to monitor
and control machinery in factories, track patient health data, and manage traffic flow.

The IoT is still in its early stages of development, but it has the potential to have a major
impact on our lives. As IoT devices become more widespread, we can expect to see new
and innovative applications that make our lives easier, safer, and more efficient.

Here are some additional details about the IoT:

 The IoT is a network of physical objects that are connected to the internet.

 These objects can collect and exchange data about their environment.

 The IoT can be used to monitor and control devices, track data, and automate
tasks.

 The IoT has the potential to revolutionize many industries.

Here are some examples of how the IoT is being used today:

 Smart homes: IoT devices can be used to control lights, thermostats, and other
appliances in the home.

 Smart cities: IoT devices can be used to monitor traffic flow, water usage, and
other city services.

 Smart manufacturing: IoT devices can be used to monitor and control machinery
in factories.
  Smart healthcare: IoT devices can be used to track patient health data and
provide remote medical care.

The IoT is a rapidly growing field with the potential to have a major impact on our lives.
As IoT devices become more widespread, we can expect to see new and innovative
applications that make our lives easier, safer, and more efficient (Weber, 2009)(Weiser,
1999).

History

The Father of IoT

The Internet of Things (IoT) was named as a concept in 1999 by Kevin Ashton. Ashton
was a brand manager for Oil of Olay at Procter & Gamble, and he recognized a
disconnect between the inventory systems at retailers and the actual inventory on the
shelf. He pioneered radio frequency ID (RFID) technology on cosmetics, which allowed
the shelf and register to talk to the products and inventory system. This closed the gap
between inventory tracking and supply chain management.
Though Ashton coined the term “Internet of Things,” he later amended that the name
“Internet for Things” might have been a better description. This is because the IoT is not
just about connecting devices to the internet. It is about using those connections to
create new and innovative ways to interact with the world around us.

The IoT is still in its early stages of development, but it has the potential to revolutionize
many industries. For example, IoT-enabled devices can be used to monitor and control
machinery in factories, track patient health data, and manage traffic flow.The IoT is a
rapidly growing field with the potential to have a major impact on our lives. As IoT
devices become more widespread, we can expect to see new and innovative applications
that make our lives easier, safer, and more efficient.

Timeline of IoT

Kevin Ashton coined the term "Internet of Things" (IoT) in 1999. He was working at
Procter & Gamble at the time, and he proposed using RFID chips to track products
through the supply chain. Ashton's vision of IoT has since become a reality, and there
are now billions of connected devices around the world.

The history of IoT dates back much further than 1999. The first radio voice
communication was transmitted in 1900, and satellites were first launched into space in
the 1950s. The development of the Internet in the 1960s and 1970s was also a major
milestone in the history of IoT. In 1989, a group of students at Carnegie Mellon
University created a Coca-Cola vending machine that could be accessed through
ARPANET (the precursor to the Internet). This was one of the first examples of an IoT
device.

In 1991, John Romkey and Simon Hackett created the Internet Toaster, which was an
automated toaster that could be controlled over the Internet. This device was one of the
first to raise concerns about the security and privacy of IoT devices. The first webcam
was installed at Cambridge University in 1993. This webcam was used to monitor the
coffee pot in the computer science department. In 1994, Steve Mann created the
EyeTap, which was a camera that could be worn on the head and used to live-stream
video to the Internet.

The RFID technology that Ashton pioneered was adopted by major organizations such
as the US Department of Defense and Walmart. By 2005, IoT was a major enough trend
that it was formally reported on by the United Nations International
Telecommunications Union. Since then, improvements in WiFi, microchips, and
machine learning have continued to improve the functionality and performance of IoT
devices. Today, there are billions of connected devices around the world, and IoT is
transforming many industries, including manufacturing, healthcare, and transportation.

Here are some additional details about the history of IoT:

 1982: A group of students at Carnegie Mellon University create the first

ARPANET-connected vending machine.

 1991: John Romkey and Simon Hackett create the Internet Toaster.

 1993: The first webcam is installed at Cambridge University.

  1994: Steve Mann creates the EyeTap.

 1999: Kevin Ashton coins the term "Internet of Things."

 2005: IoT is formally reported on by the United Nations International

Telecommunications Union.

 2010: The number of connected devices exceeds the number of people on the
planet.

 2023: There are billions of connected devices around the world, and IoT is
transforming many industries.

IoT Devices 

Identification Sensing Communication Computation

Services Semantics

Figure 2: Attributes of IoT devices adopted from (Radoglou

Grammatikis, Sarigiannidis and Moscholios, 2019)

1. Internet of Things in Transportation System 

The transportation and logistics sector plays a crucial role in global economies by
facilitating the movement of people, goods, and products between locations. Container
transportation is a significant part of the supply chain, with up to 95% of manufactured
goods being transported in containers at some point. As the global consumer class is
projected to grow by 35% by 2030, there is an increasing demand on the transportation
sector. Consequently, the industry is focusing on addressing its main challenges, which
revolve around visibility, agility, and sustainability.

To tackle these challenges, companies in the transport and logistics sector are leveraging
Internet of Things (IoT) technologies. By equipping conventional trucks with built-in
sensors and onboard diagnostics systems, they can transform these vehicles into data-
transmitting assets. This enables managers to track their vehicles, adapt to changing
environments, and identify inefficiencies in real-time.

In the transport and logistics industry, IoT is often referred to as telematics, which forms
the foundation for fleet tracking and fleet management software. Data capture devices
installed on vehicles or mobile assets transmit critical information to a web-based
software platform through secure cellular networks.

The range of data capture devices and the information they gather continues to expand.
Traditional telematics devices are now accompanied by AI cameras that convert video
into data feeds and mobile applications that enable instant data capture from remote
workers. This growing abundance of data is reshaping how businesses in the
transportation sector operate, and those who effectively utilize this data for operational
decision-making are poised for success.

However, as the transportation industry embraces IoT and operational technology (OT),
it also faces new cybersecurity risks. IoT and OT have a well-documented history of
vulnerabilities, and the transportation industry is not exempt from these risks as it adopts
these technologies.

2. Lack of Security in Third-Party IoT and OT Devices

2.1 Inadequate Security in Third-Party IoT and OT Devices

Numerous transportation companies rely on third-party vendors for the development and
maintenance of their IoT and OT devices. However, this dependency creates a
vulnerability that can be exploited by cybercriminals. These devices are often designed
without adequate security measures, making them easy targets for cyberattacks.
Additionally, they frequently lack the latest security patches, leaving them susceptible to
known exploits. This poses a significant problem for the transportation industry, as
many companies lack the resources to effectively secure their IoT and OT devices. An
example of the consequences is the WannaCry ransomware attack in 2017, which caused
extensive damage globally. similar disasters. This entails collaborating with OT security
vendors to ensure that devices are developed with security as a central focus.

2.2 Limited Visibility of the Attack Surface

IoT and OT devices are often distributed across transportation companies' networks,
spanning multiple locations and even countries. This decentralized nature makes it
challenging for IT and security teams to gain a comprehensive understanding of their
attack surface. Without visibility into the entire network, securing it becomes a difficult
task, and timely detection and response to attacks are hindered. The 2017 NotPetya
attack on Maersk serves as an example, where the attack spread through the company's
network, resulting in substantial financial losses and operational disruptions.
Transportation companies must strive to obtain visibility into their attack surface to
prevent similar incidents. This can be achieved by collaborating with reputable OT
security vendors who can provide IoT and OT security platforms, enabling
comprehensive device visibility and facilitating effective detection and response to
attacks.

2.3 Insecure Communications Protocols

IoT and OT devices frequently employ insecure and outdated communications

protocols, lacking support for modern internet and network security features. This
weakness allows attackers to intercept communications and eavesdrop on network
traffic. A notable case is the Mirai botnet attack in 2016, which exploited insecure IoT
devices to launch a massive DDoS attack, disrupting major websites. Addressing this
issue requires ensuring that IoT and OT devices utilize secure communications protocols
such as TLS/SSL or IPSec for secure and encrypted communication.

2.4 Inadequate Industrial Control Systems (ICS) Cybersecurity

IoT and OT devices often control critical industrial systems, such as power grids or
production plants, which are frequently inadequately secured. This makes them
attractive targets for cyberattacks. The Stuxnet worm attack on Iran's nuclear enrichment
facilities exemplifies the potential consequences of poorly secured industrial control
systems, leading to significant damage and financial losses. Transportation companies
must prioritize the highest level of security for their industrial control systems. This
includes partnering with OT security vendors and implementing security controls like
firewalls and intrusion detection/prevention systems.

2.5 Insufficient Security Controls in Place

Many IoT and OT devices lack adequate security controls, often due to their design not
prioritizing security. Consequently, these devices become easy targets for attacks. An
infamous case is the 2014 Jeep Cherokee hack, where insufficient security controls in
the vehicle's entertainment system allowed attackers to take control of critical functions
such as steering and braking. To prevent such attacks, transportation companies must
implement robust security controls to protect their IoT and OT devices effectively.

2.6 Lack of Staff Training and Awareness

Insufficient training and awareness among transportation company staff can lead to
insecure use of IoT and OT devices. For example, employees may connect devices to
the network without proper security controls in place, inadvertently creating
vulnerabilities.

To mitigate the risk of human error leading to cyberattacks, transportation companies

must ensure that their staff receives comprehensive training and awareness programs.
Regular training sessions, conducted monthly or quarterly, can help keep employees
updated on security risks and preventive measures. Collaboration with OT

3 Attacks on the Transportation Systems

As the transportation industry becomes increasingly digitized, it faces the risk of

cyberattacks targeting its interconnected and complex systems. For instance, threat
actors can exploit vulnerabilities in cargo systems, compromising the integrity of
manifests and potentially disrupting customs processes or facilitating illegal activities.
These attacks can also extend to other systems within the transportation network,
causing significant disruptions and economic damage. It is crucial to address these risks
and implement robust cybersecurity measures.

3.1 Complex IT/OT Dynamics of the Transportation Industry

The transportation industry relies on numerous systems and IoT devices to manage
operations across various modes of transport. The scale and complexity of these systems
continue to grow, requiring enhanced visibility and cyber resilience measures.
Downtime or disruptions in these systems can have severe consequences, impacting the
movement of people and goods. However, the convergence of information technology
(IT) and operational technology (OT) in the transportation industry presents challenges
as OT security teams often lack the necessary tools and expertise to manage the
evolving security landscape.

3.2 OT Security Processes Lacking in Transportation Systems

Historically, OT security in transportation systems has been less robust compared to

other industries, resulting in a lack of fundamental security processes. For example,
authentication practices and access management may be inadequate, with outdated
passwords and unaddressed accounts of former employees. These vulnerabilities leave
transportation systems susceptible to even unsophisticated threat actors. Basic security
workflows need to be implemented and maintained to protect these critical systems
effectively.

All Four of the World’s Largest Maritime Shipping Operators Have Been Targeted by
Cyber Attacks

Major maritime shipping operators have experienced cyberattacks, including

ransomware incidents, leading to significant disruptions and financial losses. These
incidents highlight the urgent need for improved cybersecurity in the transportation
industry. Digitalization initiatives are driving OT security teams to evaluate their
systems, identify potential gaps, and prioritize cyber readiness. Embracing digital
systems and addressing legacy applications can enhance operational efficiency while
mitigating security risks.

3.3 Lots of Valuable Data, Little Protection

The proliferation of IoT devices in transportation and logistics systems has resulted in a
wealth of sensor data. However, many of these devices lack built-in security measures,
and the commissioning process often introduces unintentional security gaps. This
expanded attack surface, coupled with potential zero-day exploits from IoT devices and
vendors, poses significant risks to OT environments. Gaining visibility into the OT/IoT
network is critical to strengthen security and identify vulnerabilities and risks
effectively.

3.4 Overcoming Narrow Focus on IT/OT/IoT

By obtaining a comprehensive view across IT, OT, and IoT, you can identify devices
attempting to access the internet. Broadening your perspective helps uncover potential
entry points where malicious actors can infiltrate and cause harm.

Let's consider an illustrative example of a backdoor: a vendor connects a modem to an

organization's control system environment to enable remote access. This is done to
eliminate the need for on-site visits for tasks like system configuration, maintenance, or
incident management. Unfortunately, modems and similar devices are often overlooked
and left vulnerable, creating an open pathway for unauthorized access to internal
systems.

Having visibility offers valuable insights into the environment, enabling the security
team to comprehend ongoing activities at all times. With enhanced visibility of lateral
movement, they can identify and expose any irregularities within their environment and
respond promptly instead of discovering a problem days later.

As transportation systems grow increasingly complex, visibility can shed light on what
used to be an opaque control system.

Lack of Maritime Cybersecurity Awareness

Currently, awareness of cybersecurity in the maritime industry is low or virtually non-
existent. The industry has been undergoing digitization, but there is a considerable
knowledge gap. It is crucial for individuals involved in the industry to gain at least a
basic understanding of cybersecurity and its implications.

Implementing Cybersecurity Solutions

To prevent cyberattacks during cargo transportation, companies can adopt several key
strategies to strengthen their defenses:

- Network Segmentation: Dividing the network into smaller

4. Vulnerabilities of IoT in transportation systems

Insufficient Password Protection: Numerous IoT devices come with default or

hardcoded passwords that are easily guessable or crackable by hackers. This leaves the
devices vulnerable to unauthorized access and potential misuse, including turning them
into botnets for launching cyberattacks. For instance, in 2016, the Mirai malware
infected a vast number of IoT devices with weak passwords, enabling a massive DDoS
attack.

Neglect of Regular Patches and Updates: Many IoT devices do not receive timely and
secure updates from manufacturers or vendors, leaving them exposed to known or newly
discovered vulnerabilities. Exploiting these vulnerabilities, hackers can compromise the
device, its data, or even cause physical damage and disrupt transportation systems. An
example would be manipulating traffic signals by exploiting a vulnerability in a traffic
light controller, leading to accidents or congestion.

Insecure Interfaces: Numerous IoT devices have web, cloud, or mobile interfaces that
allow remote access or control. However, these interfaces often lack adequate
encryption, authentication, or authorization mechanisms, making them susceptible to
interception, spoofing, or tampering by hackers. For instance, hackers could seize
control of a car's mobile app and manipulate its steering, braking, or acceleration
functions.
 Insufficient Data Protection: Many IoT devices collect and transmit sensitive or
personal data, such as location, speed, and health status. However, these data are often
inadequately encrypted, anonymized, or stored, making them prone to theft, leakage, or
misuse by hackers or unauthorized third parties. For example, hackers could steal a
driver's location data and exploit it for stalking or blackmail purposes.

IoT Security Threats:

Despite the numerous opportunities that IoT brings to businesses, there are several
factors that contribute to security threats. For example, the availability of open-source
code, like Magento React, allows hackers to exploit code vulnerabilities. Here are some
other factors that pose security threats:

1. Use of Default Passwords: Many devices are shipped with default passwords that are
widely known, making it easy for attackers to compromise them. Security cameras,
home routers, and light control systems are examples of devices at risk.

2. Insecure Communication: IoT devices often transmit messages over networks

without encryption, leaving them vulnerable to interception. Implementing secure
communication protocols like Transport Layer Security (TLS) ensures a safe
connection. Isolating devices through multiple networks also enhances communication
privacy.

3. Leakage of Personal Information: Unpatched IoT devices can leak IP addresses,

enabling attackers to determine precise locations and residential addresses. Using a
virtual private network (VPN) helps protect IoT connections and hide IP addresses.

4. Automation and AI Risks: Automation and artificial intelligence (AI)

AI technologies are currently being implemented globally, but automation carries a

drawback: a single programming error or flawed algorithm can cause a complete
collapse of the AI network and the infrastructure it manages. Since automation and
artificial intelligence are essentially lines of code, cybercriminals gaining unauthorized
access can take control of the automation and manipulate it at will. Therefore, it is
crucial to safeguard these systems against such threats and attacks.

Illustrative Cyberattacks:

Hackers possess the capability to launch attacks and infiltrate numerous unprotected
connected devices, leading to the destruction of infrastructure, network disruptions, or
unauthorized access to sensitive data. The following are notable cyberattacks that
highlight vulnerabilities in IoT systems:

The Mirai Botnet:

In October 2016, an IoT botnet, consisting of a network of computers running bots,

orchestrated one of the most severe DDoS attacks on Dyn, an Internet performance
management services provider. This attack resulted in the offline status of several
prominent websites, including CNN, Netflix, and Twitter.

The Mirai malware infected computers that actively scoured the internet for vulnerable
IoT devices. By exploiting well-known default usernames and passwords, such as those
used in digital cameras and DVR players, the malware infected these devices and added
them to the botnet.

Cold in Finland:

In November 2016, malicious actors deliberately disabled the heating in two buildings
located in the Finnish city of Lappeenranta. They followed up with a DDoS attack that
repeatedly caused the heating controllers to reboot, preventing the heating from
functioning. Given Finland's extremely low temperatures during that time of year, this
attack had significant consequences.

The Jeep Hack: During July 2015, a group of researchers conducted a security
assessment on a Jeep SUV. They successfully gained control of the vehicle by exploiting
a vulnerability in the firmware update through the Sprint cellular network. This allowed
them to manipulate the vehicle's speed and steering, even causing it to veer off the road.
Stuxnet: One of the most well-known IoT attacks is Stuxnet, which targeted a uranium
enrichment plant in Natanz, Iran. The attack compromised the Siemens Step7 software
running on Windows, providing access to the industrial program logic controllers. This
enabled the attackers to control various machines at the industrial sites and gain access
to critical industrial information.(Doshi et al., 2021)

The discovery of an issue with the nuclear facility's computer system occurred in 2010
when a high number of uranium enrichment centrifuges began to malfunction.
Subsequently, malicious files containing the Stuxnet worm were found on Iranian
computer systems. While Iran has not disclosed detailed information about the attack's
impact, it is estimated that 984 uranium-enrichment centrifuges were damaged, leading
to a 30% reduction in enrichment efficiency.

Addressing IoT Vulnerabilities: If your business heavily relies on IoT devices, it is

crucial to assess the security of your information systems and the data processed by
these devices. Implementing effective security solutions to protect against cyberattacks
and ransomware resulting from IoT vulnerabilities is essential. Hiring a cybersecurity
expert or utilizing services like Cyber Management Alliance's Virtual Cyber Assistant
can provide guidance and support for enhancing cybersecurity maturity.

Virtual Cyber Assistants offer several ways to address IoT vulnerabilities and mitigate
the risks they pose:

1. Conducting a Cyber Health Check to assess your overall business cyber health.
2. Assisting in the creation, review, or refresh of Cybersecurity Incident Response
Plans.
3. Conducting Cyber Attack Tabletop Exercises to test the effectiveness of your
plans against DDoS attacks, phishing attacks, etc., stemming from IoT security
loopholes.
4. Initiating your journey towards Ransomware Prevention and Protection.
 5. Assisting in obtaining Cyber Essentials certification for your business, providing
peace of mind that your IoT devices are protected against common internet-
based attacks.

IoT transportation systems encounter several challenges, including security

vulnerabilities, privacy concerns, cost implications, interoperability issues, and the lack
of standardization. To address these problems, measures such as implementing strong
encryption, anonymization techniques, open-source technologies, developing standards,
and fostering collaboration with manufacturers can be employed. By overcoming these
challenges, IoT transportation systems have the potential to revolutionize transportation,
enhancing safety, efficiency, and comfort.(Y. Li & Liu, 2021) (Mishra et al., 2022)

Benefits of IoT include:

1. Improved efficiency and productivity: Automating tasks, real-time data collection,

and valuable insights enable businesses to make better decisions, increase efficiency,
and boost productivity. For instance, IoT-connected devices can automate lighting,
thermostat control, and security systems, freeing up employees for more critical tasks
while saving energy.

2. Increased safety and security: IoT enables businesses to monitor assets, track
employees, and detect unauthorized access, enhancing safety and security measures. For
example, IoT sensors can monitor warehouse conditions, track goods, and identify
potential security breaches, preventing accidents and theft.

3. Enhanced customer experience: Personalized recommendations, improved customer

service, and simplified interactions are made possible by IoT. IoT devices can track
customer preferences, offer real-time support, and streamline ordering and delivery
processes, leading to higher customer satisfaction and loyalty.

4. Reduced costs: Automation, optimization, and waste reduction through IoT help
businesses lower costs. IoT devices can automate inventory management, enable
predictive maintenance, and optimize energy usage, resulting in reduced labor,
maintenance, and energy expenses.

5. Improved decision-making: IoT provides insights into complex data that would be
difficult to collect otherwise, empowering businesses to make better decisions. For
instance, IoT devices capture data on customer behavior, employee productivity, and
asset performance, enabling trend identification, predictions, and informed decision-
making.

6. New business opportunities: IoT opens avenues for creating new products, entering
new markets, and expanding into new industries. Smart homes, connected cars, and
wearable devices are examples of IoT-driven innovations that create new markets and
opportunities for growth.

Literature review

The term "Internet of Things" was initially proposed by Kevin Ashton of Procter &
Gamble in 1999. The Internet of Things (IoT) is the network of physical devices,
buildings, vehicles, and other items equipped with electronics, software, and network
connectivity to enable the collection, analysis, and dissemination of massive
amounts of data. These gadgets might be anything from commonplace domestic
items to cutting-edge office machinery.

As can be seen in Figure 1, IoT emerges from a complex ecosystem that includes
people, physical objects/devices, and the internet.

Things/ Objects
Internet of Things
IoT

Humans Internet

Figure 2: simple illustration of IoT adopted from (Stojkoska and

Trivodaliev, 2017)
Smart objects, which can communicate and compute with one other, are all around us,
say Stojkoska and Trivodaliev (2017). For instance, this includes everything from
elementary sensors to complex smartphones to elaborate factory machinery. The term
"Internet of Things" is used to describe the interconnected global network of physical
things and machines. According to Vermesan and Friess (2013), the IoT is a network
that enables incongruous items to communicate over the internet at any time and from
any location.

There has been a lot of focus on the IoT in academia and the corporate world over the
past five to six years. One of the most important aspects of Industry 4.0 nowadays
(Perera, et al., 2014).

By 2020, there would have been over 50 billion IoT devices, and by 2021, it is projected
that they would have produced 4.4 zettabytes of data. It is estimated that the IoT market
will range from $1.6 trillion to $14.4 trillion in 2025 (Al-Fuqaha, et al., 2015), with far-
reaching effects on nearly every facet of the economy and human life, including
transportation, medicine, agriculture, housing, transportation, education, and commerce.

There are currently billions of connected devices, items, and gadgets in use all over the
world because of the IoT. The gathering and dissemination of information, particularly
data. This potential of IoT was endorsed by Gubbi, et al. (2013), who defined it as the
connectivity of sensing and actuating devices, allowing them to communicate
information across platforms via a uniform framework and generate a common
operational picture for enabling novel applications.
The goal of the Internet of Things (IoT) is to revolutionise the web by connecting
billions of things and gadgets via wireless networks so that they may exchange data and
information with each other and the world at large. A highly decentralised common pool
of resources linked by a dynamic system of networks can be developed by increasing
RFID processing capacities, the number of wireless sensor networks (WSNs), and
storage capacity at lower costs (Borgohain, et al., 2015).
In practise, IoT connections can take place not only between devices but also between
humans and their physical environments. Having a unique identity is necessary for
interoperability in IoT systems, which includes people, vehicles, computers, books,
televisions, mobile phones, clothing, food, medicine, passports, and luggage (Soullie,
2014).

People, corporations, and governments will all benefit greatly from the IoT. Helping
governments cut healthcare costs and improve quality of life is only one of many goals,
such with lowering carbon footprints, expanding access to education in neglected areas,
and enhancing mobility.

Consumer, business, industrial, and infrastructure are typical categories used to

categorise the wide variety of uses for IoT devices.

Consumers

A growing number of IoT devices are being created for consumer use. These devices
include:

 Connected vehicles: These vehicles are equipped with sensors and software that
allow them to communicate with other vehicles, infrastructure, and pedestrians.
This can help to improve safety and efficiency.

 Home automation: These devices allow consumers to control their home's lights,
thermostats, and other appliances from anywhere in the world. This can make
life more convenient and energy-efficient.

 Wearable technology: These devices, such as smartwatches and fitness trackers,

collect data about the user's activity and health. This data can be used to improve
fitness, track sleep patterns, and monitor chronic conditions.

 Connected health: These devices, such as insulin pumps and pacemakers, can be
used to monitor and control medical conditions. This can help to improve patient
care and reduce the risk of complications.
  Appliances with remote monitoring capabilities: These appliances, such as
refrigerators and washing machines, can be monitored and controlled remotely.
This can help consumers to save energy and avoid costly repairs.

Home automation is a broader idea that includes IoT devices like smart lights,
thermostats, security cameras, and entertainment centres. Home automation may help
homeowners save money in the long run by either reducing their energy consumption or
increasing their awareness of it.

Here are some specific examples of how IoT devices can be used for home automation:

 Lighting: Smart light bulbs can be programmed to turn on and off at certain
times, or they can be controlled by a smartphone app. This can help to save
energy by ensuring that lights are not left on when no one is home.
 Heating and air conditioning: Smart thermostats can be programmed to adjust
the temperature of a home based on the time of day or the presence of people.
This can help to save energy by preventing the heating or cooling system from
running unnecessarily.
 Media and security systems: Smart speakers and displays can be used to control
home entertainment systems, such as TVs and stereos. They can also be used to
arm and disarm security systems. This can make life more convenient and can
also help to improve security.
 Camera systems: Smart security cameras can be used to monitor a home from
anywhere in the world. This can help to deter crime and can also provide peace
of mind for homeowners who are away from home.(Kang et al., 2017)

A smart home or automated home can be controlled by a platform or hub that connects
smart devices and appliances. There are a number of different platforms and hubs
available, each with its own strengths and weaknesses.

Some of the most popular platforms include:

  Apple HomeKit: HomeKit is a platform developed by Apple that enables
command of smart home gadgets from an iOS mobile or wearable computer.
HomeKit is much-liked because of how well it works with other Apple goods
and how simple it is to set up.

 Amazon Alexa: Alexa is a voice assistant developed by Amazon that can be

utilized for controlling smart devices at home. Alexa is available on a variety of
devices, including the Amazon Echo, the Amazon Echo Dot, and the Amazon
Fire TV. Alexa is known for its wide range of compatibility with smart home
devices.

 Google Assistant: Google Assistant is a voice assistant developed by Google that

can be used to control smart home devices. Google Assistant is available on a
variety of devices, including the Google Home, the Google Home Mini, and the
Google Pixel phone. Google Assistant is known for its ability to understand
natural language and its integration with other Google products.

 Samsung SmartThings: SmartThings is a platform developed by Samsung that

allows users to control their smart home devices using a smartphone or tablet.
SmartThings is known for its flexibility and its ability to connect to a wide range
of smart home devices.

In addition to these commercial platforms, there are also a number of open-source

platforms available. Open-source platforms are typically more customizable and less
expensive than commercial platforms. However, they can be more difficult to set up and
use.

Some of the most popular open-source platforms include:

 Home Assistant: Home Assistant is an open-source platform that allows users to

control their smart home devices using a variety of devices, including a
computer, a smartphone, or a tablet. Home Assistant is known for its flexibility
and its ability to connect to a wide range of smart home devices.

 OpenHAB: OpenHAB is an open-source platform that allows users to control

their smart home devices using a variety of devices, including a computer, a
 smartphone, or a tablet. OpenHAB is known for its extensibility and its ability to
connect to a wide range of smart home devices.

 Domoticz: Domoticz is an open-source platform that allows users to control their

smart home devices using a computer or a smartphone. Domoticz is known for
its ease of use and its ability to connect to a wide range of smart home devices.
(Goyal et al., 2021; Kang et al., 2017; Karlgren et al., n.d.; Laplante et al., 2018;
Shafiq et al., 2022)

IoT Sensors Data Storage Data Processing

User
Interface

Figure 3: How internet of things works adopted from

(Stojkoska and Trivodaliev,2017)

Elder care

The provision of aid to the elderly and the disabled is an important use case for smart
homes. These home setups incorporate adaptive technology to make life easier for
people with physical impairments. Users with vision or movement impairments can
benefit from voice control, and those with hearing loss can use alert systems that
connect directly to their cochlear implants. In the event of a medical emergency, such as
a fall or a seizure, they can be fitted with additional safety mechanisms. Using smart
home technology in this way has the potential to improve users' independence and
overall happiness.

Here are some specific examples of how smart home technology can be used to assist
elderly individuals and people with disabilities:

 Voice control: Voice control can be used to operate lights, thermostats, and other
appliances. This can be helpful for people with limited mobility or vision.
 Alert systems: Alert systems can be used to notify caregivers or family members
if someone falls or has a medical emergency. This can be helpful for people who
live alone or who have difficulty getting around.
 Security systems: Security systems can be used to monitor a home for break-ins
or other problems. This can be helpful for people who are concerned about their
safety.
 Assistive technology: Assistive technology can be used to help people with
disabilities perform everyday tasks. This can include things like wheelchairs,
walkers, and other devices.(Aburukba et al., 2016; da Costa et al., 2018; Demiris
& Hensel, 2008; Laplante et al., 2018; Mattern & Flörkemeier, 2010; Mulvenna
et al., 2017).

Organizations

In this context, "IoT" means "Internet of Things," and "Enterprise" means "business" or
"corporate." It is predicted that 9.1 billion devices will be connected to the EIoT by
2019.

The Internet of Medical Things (IoMT) is a subset of the IoT that is used for healthcare,
medical research, and patient monitoring. The Internet of Medical Things (IoMT) has
been called "Smart Healthcare" since it is the technology behind the digitization of the
healthcare system, which links together all of the existing digital medical resources and
services.

Connected medical monitoring and alert systems can both benefit from IoMT gadgets.
The term "health monitoring devices" encompasses everything from simple
thermometers and stethoscopes to sophisticated gadgets that can track the activity of
pacemakers, electronic wristbands like Fitbit, and even high-tech hearing aids. There has
been an uptick in the use of "smart beds" in some healthcare facilities, which can tell
when they are occupied and when a patient is making an attempt to rise from bed. It may
also make adjustments on its own to provide the right amount of support and pressure to
the patient in the absence of human intervention.

As stated in a 2015 analysis by Goldman Sachs, IoT healthcare devices "can save the
United States more than $300 billion in annual healthcare expenditures by increasing
revenue and decreasing cost." In addition,'m-health,' which draws on compiled health
data, was developed as a result of the use of mobile devices to facilitate medical follow-
up.

Here are some specific examples of how IoMT devices are being used in healthcare:

 Remote patient monitoring: IoMT devices can be used to monitor patients

remotely, without the need for them to visit a doctor's office. This can be helpful
for patients who live in rural areas or who have difficulty getting to a doctor's
office.
 Fall detection: IoMT devices can be used to detect falls in elderly patients. This
can help to prevent injuries and to ensure that patients receive the care they need.
 Prescription adherence: IoMT devices can be used to track whether patients are
taking their medications as prescribed. This can help to improve patient
outcomes and to reduce the risk of medication errors.
 Pain management: IoMT devices can be used to monitor pain levels and to
deliver pain medication as needed. This can help to improve patient comfort and
to reduce the risk of addiction.
IoMT is a rapidly growing field with the potential to revolutionize healthcare. As the
technology continues to develop, we can expect to see even more innovative and useful
ways to use IoMT devices to improve patient care. (Dey et al., 2018; Engineer et al.,
2018a, 2018b; Gatouillat et al., 2018; Kricka, 2019)

Sensors can be installed in homes to check on the well-being of the elderly, make sure
they're getting the right care, and help those who have lost mobility recover it through
therapy. By linking home monitoring devices with hospital-based systems, for example,
these sensors establish a network of intelligent sensors capable of collecting, processing,
transferring, and analysing important information in a variety of settings. The IoT can
also enable other consumer gadgets that promote healthy lifestyles, such as connected
scales or wearable heart monitors. Continuous monitoring of health status Antenatal and
chronic patients can also take advantage of IoT platforms to keep track of their vitals
and prescription schedules.

Here are some specific examples of how IoT devices are being used to monitor the
health of senior citizens:

 Fall detection: IoT devices can be used to detect falls in elderly patients. This
can help to prevent injuries and to ensure that patients receive the care they need.
 Medication adherence: IoT devices can be used to track whether patients are
taking their medications as prescribed. This can help to improve patient
outcomes and to reduce the risk of medication errors.
 Activity monitoring: IoT devices can be used to track the activity levels of
elderly patients. This can help to identify patients who are at risk of falls or other
health problems.
 Social interaction: IoT devices can be used to connect elderly patients with
friends and family members. This can help to reduce loneliness and isolation.
(Aburukba et al., 2016; Dey et al., 2018; Istepanian et al., 2011a, 2011b;
Laplante et al., 2018; Swan, 2012)
  Technological developments in the manufacture of plastic and fabric electronics
have made it possible to create ultra-low cost, disposable IoMT sensors. For
battery-free sensing devices, these sensors and the accompanying RFID chips
can be printed directly into paper or e-textiles. Proven use cases include portable
and low-system-complexity medical diagnostics at the point-of-care. The
literature on this topic is extensive (Demiris & Hensel, 2008; Dincer et al., 2017;
Grell et al., 2019).
 In 2018, iomt was used in the healthcare, insurance, and clinical laboratory
sectors. IoMT has opened the door for doctors, patients, and anyone involved in
their care (such as guardians, nurses, family members, and the like) to all be a
part of a system where their information is securely stored and easily accessible
by all members of the healthcare team. Access to improved and novel forms of
dynamic data is made possible by IoMT in the insurance sector. Biosensors,
wearables, connected healthcare devices, and mobile apps that monitor user
activity are all examples of sensor-based solutions. Better pricing and
underwriting can result from this.
 IoMT has the potential to revolutionize healthcare by enabling remote patient
monitoring, early disease detection, and improved clinical decision-making. As
the technology continues to develop, we can expect to see even more innovative
and useful ways to use IoMT to improve patient care. (Grell et al., 2019;
Mahmud et al., 2018a)

Transportation

Digital variable speed-limit sign

Integration of transportation-wide communications, controls, and data processing is

made easier by the IoT. The Internet of Things can be used in every part of a
transportation system, from the vehicle itself to the infrastructure supporting it to the
person operating the vehicle. Inter- and intra-vehicular communication, intelligent
traffic control, intelligent parking, electronic toll collection systems, logistics and fleet
management, vehicle control, safety, and road assistance are all made possible by the
dynamic interplay between various parts of a transportation system.

Here are some specific examples of how IoT is being used in transportation:

 Inter- and intra-vehicular communication: IoT devices can be used to

communicate between vehicles, allowing them to share information about their
location, speed, and direction of travel. This can be used to improve traffic flow
and prevent accidents.
 Smart traffic control: IoT devices can be used to collect data about traffic
conditions and use this data to control traffic signals and other devices. This can
be used to improve traffic flow and reduce congestion.
 Smart parking: IoT devices can be used to monitor parking spaces and provide
real-time information about their availability. This can help drivers to find
parking more easily and reduce the amount of time they spend circling for a spot.
 Electronic toll collection systems: IoT devices can be used to collect tolls
electronically, without the need for drivers to stop and pay at a booth. This can
reduce traffic congestion and improve the flow of traffic.
 Logistics and fleet management: IoT devices can be used to track the location
and status of vehicles in a fleet. This can be used to improve efficiency and
reduce costs.
 Vehicle control: IoT devices can be used to control the speed, direction, and
braking of a vehicle. This can be used to improve safety and reduce accidents.
 Safety: IoT devices can be used to monitor the condition of a vehicle and alert
the driver to potential problems. This can help to prevent accidents.
 Road assistance: IoT devices can be used to provide roadside assistance to
drivers who have broken down. This can help to reduce the number of accidents
and improve the safety of drivers. (Mahmud et al., 2018b)

V2X communications

In vehicular communication systems, vehicle-to-everything communication (V2X),

consists of three main components: vehicle-to-vehicle communication (V2V), vehicle-
to-infrastructure communication (V2I) and vehicle to pedestrian communications (V2P).
V2X is the first step to autonomous driving and connected road infrastructure.

Home automation

IoT devices can be used to monitor and control the mechanical, electrical, and electronic
systems used in various types of buildings (e.g., public and private, industrial,
institutions, or residential) in home automation and building automation systems. In this
context, three main areas are being covered in literature:
 The integration of the Internet with building energy management systems to
create energy-efficient and IoT-driven "smart buildings".
 The possible means of real-time monitoring for reducing energy consumption
and monitoring occupant behaviors.
 The integration of smart devices in the built environment and how they might be
used in future applications.
The integration of the Internet with building energy management systems (BEMS) has
the potential to create energy-efficient and IoT-driven "smart buildings". BEMS are
typically used to monitor and control building systems such as heating, ventilation, and
air conditioning (HVAC), lighting, and water usage. IoT devices can be used to extend
the capabilities of BEMS by providing real-time data on building performance. This
data can be used to identify areas where energy savings can be made, such as by
adjusting HVAC settings or turning off lights when no one is in the building.

In addition to reducing energy consumption, IoT devices can also be used to monitor
occupant behaviors. This information can be used to improve occupant comfort and
productivity. For example, IoT devices can be used to track occupancy levels in a
building and adjust the HVAC settings accordingly. This can help to ensure that the
building is always comfortable, without wasting energy.

Finally, IoT devices can be used to integrate smart devices into the built environment.
This can be done by connecting smart devices to the Internet and then integrating them
with building systems such as HVAC, lighting, and security. This integration can
provide a number of benefits, such as improved energy efficiency, increased security,
and enhanced occupant comfort. (Engineer et al., 2018a; Haase et al., 2016)

Industrial

Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) devices collect data from connected equipment,
operational technology (OT), locations, and people. This data can be used to regulate
and monitor industrial systems. For example, IIoT devices can be used to track the
location of assets in an industrial storage unit. This can help to prevent the loss of assets,
which can save time and money.

Manufacturing

The Internet of Things (IoT) can connect various manufacturing devices equipped with
sensing, identification, processing, communication, actuation, and networking
capabilities. IoT can be used for industrial applications and smart manufacturing, such
as network control and management of manufacturing equipment, asset and situation
management, or manufacturing process control. Intelligent systems enable rapid
manufacturing and optimization of new products and rapid response to product
demands.
The Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) also includes digital control systems to automate
process controls, operator tools and service information systems to optimize plant safety
and security. IoT can also be applied to asset management via predictive maintenance,
statistical evaluation, and measurements to maximize reliability. Industrial management
systems can be integrated with smart grids, enabling energy optimization. Networked
sensors provide measurements, automated controls, plant optimization, health and safety
management, and other functions. (Gubbi et al., 2013; Lu Tan & Neng Wang, 2010)

Agriculture

The Internet of Things (IoT) can be used in farming to collect data on a variety of
factors, including temperature, rainfall, humidity, wind speed, pest infestation, and soil
content. This data can be used to automate farming techniques, take informed decisions
to improve quality and quantity, minimize risk and waste, and reduce the effort required
to manage crops.

For example, farmers can now monitor soil temperature and moisture from afar and
even apply IoT-acquired data to precision fertilization programs. The overall goal is that
data from sensors, coupled with the farmer's knowledge and intuition about his or her
farm, can help increase farm productivity, and also help reduce costs.

In August 2018, Toyota Tsusho began a partnership with Microsoft to create fish
farming tools using the Microsoft Azure application suite for IoT technologies related to
water management. Developed in part by researchers from Kindai University, the water
pump mechanisms use artificial intelligence to count the number of fish on a conveyor
belt, analyze the number of fish, and deduce the effectiveness of water flow from the
data the fish provide. The FarmBeats project from Microsoft Research that uses TV
white space to connect farms is also a part of the Azure Marketplace now.

Here are some specific examples of how IoT is being used in farming:

 Precision agriculture: IoT sensors can be used to collect data on soil moisture,

temperature, and nutrient levels. This data can be used to create precise fertilizer
and irrigation plans, which can help to improve crop yields.
 Crop monitoring: IoT sensors can be used to monitor crop health and growth.
This data can be used to identify potential problems early on, such as pests or
diseases.
 Livestock monitoring: IoT sensors can be used to track the location and health of
livestock. This data can be used to improve animal welfare and productivity.
 Farm management: IoT sensors can be used to track the movement of
equipment, inventory, and personnel on a farm. This data can be used to improve
efficiency and safety.

Maritime
Internet of Things (IoT) devices are being used to monitor the environments and
systems of boats and yachts. Many pleasure boats are left unattended for days in
summer, and months in winter, so such devices provide valuable early alerts of boat
flooding, fire, and deep discharge of batteries. The use of global internet data networks
such as Sigfox, combined with long-life batteries, and microelectronics allows the
engine rooms, bilge, and batteries to be constantly monitored and reported to connected
Android & Apple applications.

Here are some of the benefits of using IoT devices to monitor boats and yachts:

 Early warning of potential problems: IoT devices can detect problems such as

flooding, fire, and battery discharge early on, giving the owner time to take
action to prevent damage.

 Reduced risk of theft: IoT devices can track the location of a boat or yacht,
making it more difficult for thieves to steal.

 Improved efficiency: IoT devices can help to improve the efficiency of boat and
yacht operations by monitoring fuel consumption, engine performance, and other
factors.

 Increased safety: IoT devices can help to improve the safety of boat and yacht
operations by monitoring for hazards such as fire, flooding, and carbon
monoxide leaks.

Infrastructure

The Internet of Things (IoT) is a key application for monitoring and controlling
operations of sustainable urban and rural infrastructures like bridges, railway tracks, and
on- and offshore wind farms. IoT infrastructure can be used to monitor any events or
changes in structural conditions that can compromise safety and increase risk.
The IoT can benefit the construction industry by:
 Cost-saving: IoT can help to reduce costs by automating tasks, such as
scheduling repair and maintenance activities.
 Time reduction: IoT can help to reduce time by providing real-time data
analytics and insights.
  Better quality workday: IoT can help to improve the quality of workday by
providing a safer and more efficient work environment.
 Paperless workflow: IoT can help to eliminate paper-based processes, which can
save time and money.
 Increased productivity: IoT can help to increase productivity by automating tasks
and providing real-time data analytics.
IoT devices can also be used to control critical infrastructure like bridges to provide
access to ships. The usage of IoT devices for monitoring and operating infrastructure is
likely to improve incident management and emergency response coordination, and
quality of service, up-times, and reduce costs of operation in all infrastructure-related
areas. Even areas such as waste management can benefit from automation and
optimization that could be brought in by the IoT.

Metropolitan
There are several planned or ongoing large-scale deployments of the IoT, to enable
better management of cities and systems. For example, Songdo, South Korea, is a fully
equipped and wired smart city. Much of the city is planned to be wired and automated,
with little or no human intervention.

Another example is Santander, Spain. The city has a smartphone app that is connected to
10,000 sensors that enable services like parking search, environmental monitoring, and
public transportation.

Other examples of large-scale deployments underway include:

 The Sino-Singapore Guangzhou Knowledge City
 Work on improving air and water quality, reducing noise pollution, and
increasing transportation efficiency in San Jose, California
 Smart traffic management in western Singapore

San Diego-based Ingenu has built a nationwide public network for low-bandwidth data
transmissions using the same unlicensed 2.4 gigahertz spectrum as Wi-Fi. Ingenu's
"Machine Network" covers more than a third of the US population across 35 major
cities including San Diego and Dallas.
French company, Sigfox, commenced building an Ultra Narrowband wireless data
network in the San Francisco Bay Area in 2014, the first business to achieve such a
deployment in the U.S. It subsequently announced it would set up a total of 4000 base
stations to cover a total of 30 cities in the U.S. by the end of 2016, making it the largest
IoT network coverage provider in the country thus far.
Cisco also participates in smart cities projects. Cisco has started deploying technologies
for Smart Wi-Fi, Smart Safety & Security, Smart Lighting, Smart Parking, Smart
Transports, Smart Bus Stops, Smart Kiosks, Remote Expert for Government Services
(REGS) and Smart Education in the five km area in the city of Vijaywada, India.
Another example of a large deployment is the one completed by New York Waterways
in New York City to connect all the city's vessels and be able to monitor them live 24/7.
The network was designed and engineered by Fluidmesh Networks, a Chicago-based
company developing wireless networks for critical applications. The NYWW network is
currently providing coverage on the Hudson River, East River, and Upper New York
Bay. With the wireless network in place, NY Waterway is able to take control of its fleet
and passengers in a way that was not previously possible. New applications can include
security, energy and fleet management, digital signage, public Wi-Fi, paperless ticketing
and others.

Energy management
Many energy-consuming devices, such as lamps, household appliances, motors, and
pumps, already integrate Internet connectivity. This allows them to communicate with
utilities not only to balance power generation but also to optimize energy consumption
as a whole. These devices allow for remote control by users or central management via a
cloud-based interface, and enable functions such as scheduling (e.g., remotely powering
on or off heating systems, controlling ovens, changing lighting conditions, etc.).
The smart grid is a utility-side IoT application. Systems gather and act on energy and
power-related information to improve the efficiency of the production and distribution
of electricity. Using advanced metering infrastructure (AMI) Internet-connected devices,
electric utilities not only collect data from end-users but also manage distribution
automation devices like transformers.

The smart grid is a complex system that requires the integration of many different
technologies. However, the potential benefits are significant. The smart grid can help to
reduce energy consumption, improve reliability, and lower costs. It can also help to
integrate renewable energy sources into the grid.

The smart grid is still in its early stages of development, but it has the potential to
revolutionize the way we generate, distribute, and use energy.

Environmental monitoring 

Environmental monitoring applications of the IoT typically use sensors to assist in

environmental protection by monitoring air or water quality, atmospheric or soil
conditions, and can even include areas like monitoring the movements of wildlife and
their habitats. Development of resource-constrained devices connected to the Internet
also means that other applications like earthquake or tsunami early-warning systems can
also be used by emergency services to provide more effective aid. IoT devices in this
application typically span a large geographic area and can also be mobile. It has been
argued that the standardization that IoT brings to wireless sensing will revolutionize this
area. (S. Li et al., 2011)

Living Lab

Another example of integrating the IoT is the Living Lab, which integrates and
combines research and innovation processes, establishing within a public-private-people
partnership. There are currently 320 Living Labs that use the IoT to collaborate and
share knowledge between stakeholders to co-create innovative and technological
products.
For companies to implement and develop IoT services for smart cities, they need to have
incentives. Governments play key roles in smart city projects as changes in policies will
help cities to implement the IoT, which provides effectiveness, efficiency, and accuracy
of the resources that are being used. For instance, the government can provide tax
incentives and cheap rent, improve public transportation, and offer an environment
where start-up companies, creative industries, and multinationals may co-create, share a
common infrastructure and labor markets, and take advantage of locally embedded
technologies, production processes, and transaction costs.
The relationship between the technology developers and governments who manage the
city's assets is key to provide open access to resources to users in an efficient way .
(Scuotto et al., 2016)

Military

The Internet of Military Things (IoMT) is the application of IoT technologies in the
military domain for the purposes of reconnaissance, surveillance, and other combat-
related objectives. It is heavily influenced by the future prospects of warfare in an urban
environment and involves the use of sensors, munitions, vehicles, robots, human-
wearable biometrics, and other smart technology that is relevant on the battlefield.

One example of an IoT device used in the military is the Xaver 1000 system. The Xaver
1000 was developed by Israel's Camero Tech, which is the latest in the company's line
of "through wall imaging systems". The Xaver line uses millimeter wave (MMW) radar,
or radar in the range of 30-300 gigahertz. It is equipped with an AI-based life target
tracking system as well as its own 3D 'sense-through-the-wall' technology. The Xaver
1000 can be used to detect and track people through walls, even if they are hidden
behind objects or in darkness. This makes it a valuable tool for military personnel who
need to be able to see what is happening on the other side of a wall without exposing
themselves to danger. The Xaver 1000 is just one example of the many IoT devices that
are being developed for use in the military. As the technology continues to develop, we
can expect to see even more innovative and sophisticated IoT devices being used on the
battlefield. These devices will help to make military operations more efficient, safer, and
more effective.

Battlefield Things
The Internet of Military Things (IoMT) is a network of interconnected devices, systems,
and applications that use the Internet to collect and exchange data in the military
domain. IoMT devices can be used for a variety of purposes, including:
 Reconnaissance and surveillance: IoMT devices can be used to collect data on
enemy positions, movements, and activities. This information can be used to
plan and execute military operations.
 Target acquisition: IoMT devices can be used to identify and track targets. This
information can be used to direct fire or launch weapons.
 Logistics: IoMT devices can be used to track the movement of supplies and
equipment. This information can be used to ensure that troops have the supplies
they need when they need them.
 Health: IoMT devices can be used to monitor the health of soldiers. This
information can be used to identify and treat injuries and illnesses early on.
 Training: IoMT devices can be used to train soldiers in a variety of skills,
including marksmanship, first aid, and combat tactics.

IoMT is still in its early stages of development, but it has the potential to revolutionize
the way the military operates. By connecting devices and systems together, IoMT can
provide commanders with a real-time view of the battlefield and enable them to make
better decisions faster. IoMT can also help to improve the safety and effectiveness of
soldiers by providing them with the information and resources they need when they
need them.

Ocean of Things
The Ocean of Things (OoT) program is a DARPA-led program designed to establish an
Internet of Things (IoT) across large ocean areas for the purposes of collecting,
monitoring, and analyzing environmental and vessel activity data. The project entails the
deployment of about 50,000 floats that house a passive sensor suite that autonomously
detect and track military and commercial vessels as part of a cloud-based network.
The OoT program is still in its early stages, but it has the potential to revolutionize the
way we monitor and understand the ocean. The data collected by the OoT network will
provide valuable insights into ocean health, climate change, and maritime security. The
OoT network could also be used to track illegal fishing, pollution, and other threats to
the ocean.

Product digitalization
There are several applications of smart or active packaging in which a QR code or NFC
tag is affixed on a product or its packaging. The tag itself is passive, however, it
contains a unique identifier (typically a URL) which enables a user to access digital
content about the product via a smartphone. Strictly speaking, such passive items are not
part of the Internet of Things (IoT), but they can be seen as enablers of digital
interactions. The term "Internet of Packaging" has been coined to describe applications
in which unique identifiers are used to automate supply chains and are scanned on a
large scale by consumers to access digital content. Authentication of the unique
identifiers, and thereby of the product itself, is possible via a copy-sensitive digital
watermark or copy detection pattern for scanning when scanning a QR code, while NFC
tags can encrypt communication.

Here are some examples of how the Internet of Packaging is being used:

 Traceability: Unique identifiers can be used to track the movement of products

through the supply chain, from the factory to the store shelf. This can help to
prevent counterfeiting and ensure that products are delivered to consumers in a
timely and safe manner.
 Recommendations: By scanning a QR code or NFC tag, consumers can access
information about a product, such as its ingredients, nutritional information, and
reviews. This information can help consumers make informed decisions about
which products to buy.
 Marketing: Companies can use the Internet of Packaging to engage with
consumers and promote their products. For example, they can send out
 personalized coupons or offers to consumers who scan a QR code or NFC tag.
(Chen et al., 2020; Demiris & Hensel, 2008; Gatouillat et al., 2018; Scuotto et
al., 2016)

Bluetooth LoraWan Z-wave NFC WiFi Cellular Zigbee

Figure 4: Main technologies & protocols behind IoT Systems (https://data-

flair.training/blogs/)

ARCHITECTURUL DESCRIPTION OF IOT SYSTEM

The IoT system architecture has a seven-layer structure, from bottom to top:

 Hardware layer: This layer includes the physical devices that make up the IoT
system, such as sensors, actuators, and gateways.
 Sensing and actuating device layer: This layer includes the devices that collect
data from the physical world and send it to the IoT system, and the devices that
receive data from the IoT system and control physical devices in the real world.
 Intelligent device layer: This layer includes the devices that process data from
the sensing and actuating device layer and generate information that can be used
by the application layer.
 Physical information layer: This layer includes the data that is collected from the
physical world by the sensing and actuating device layer.
  Logical information layer: This layer includes the information that is generated
by the intelligent device layer from the data that is collected from the physical
world.
 Service layer: This layer includes the services that are provided by the IoT
system, such as data collection, data processing, and data visualization.
 Application layer: This layer includes the applications that use the services that
are provided by the IoT system.

The IoT system architecture is designed to allow devices to communicate with each
other and with the cloud. This allows data to be collected from the physical world,
processed, and analyzed, and then used to control devices in the real world. The IoT
system architecture is still evolving, but it has the potential to revolutionize the way we
live and work. By connecting devices to the internet, we can collect data from the
physical world and use it to make better decisions, improve efficiency, and create new
products and services.(Lv et al., 2017)

Attacks on the IoT systems

The Internet of Things (IoT) has garnered significant interest from academic and
industrial sectors alike. It encompasses the integration of various technologies such as
radiofrequency identification (RFID), sensors, smart devices, cloud computing, and
internet connectivity, among others. However, connecting multiple devices also brings
forth numerous potential threats and attacks. For instance, malware viruses can rapidly
propagate through the IoT, posing unprecedented risks. The IoT system faces different
types of threats and attacks across its four design aspects:

(1) Data perception and collection: This aspect is susceptible to attacks like data
leakage, unauthorized access, breach of sovereignty, and authentication breaches.

(2) Data storage: Attacks on data storage can manifest as denial-of-service attacks,
unauthorized access, data integrity breaches, impersonation, and modification of
sensitive data.
(3) Data processing: Computational attacks targeting data processing can generate
incorrect results and compromise the integrity of the processed data.

(4) Data transmission: Attacks during data transmission can include channel attacks,
session hijacking, routing attacks, and flooding. Additionally, compromised sensors can
fabricate or modify data, leading to issues like data attenuation, theft, loss, and breach.

The IoT treats all entities equally, without distinguishing between humans and machines.
It encompasses a wide range of elements, including end users, data centers, processing
units, smartphones, tablets, Bluetooth, ZigBee, the Infrared Data Association (IrDA),
ultra-wideband (UWB), cellular networks, Wi-Fi networks, near field. (Chen et al.,
2020; S. Li et al., 2011; Lv et al., 2017)

DIFFERENT PHASES OF IOT SYSTEM

1.1 Phase I: Collection, acquisition & perception of Data

Whether it's a telemedicine app or a system for tracking vehicles, the initial stage
involves gathering or obtaining data from various devices or objects. Depending on the
nature of the object, different types of data collectors are employed. The object can be
either stationary, such as body sensors or RFID tags, or mobile, like sensors and chips in
vehicles.

1.2 Phase II: Storage

In the first phase, it is essential to store the data that has been collected. If the object
itself has its own storage capacity, the data can be stored there. However, IoT
components typically have limited memory and processing capabilities. In such cases,
the cloud assumes the responsibility of storing the data for stateless devices.

1.1 Phase III: Intelligent processing

The Internet of Things (IoT) utilizes data stored in cloud data centers (DCs) to deliver
real-time intelligent services for various aspects of work and daily life. In addition to
analyzing data and providing prompt responses to queries, the IoT also assumes control
over connected devices. It does not differentiate between a physical object and a
software bot, as it offers intelligent processing and control services impartially to all
interconnected things.

1.4 Phase IV: Transmission

Data transmission occurs in all phases:

 From sensors, RFID tags, or chips to DCs

 From DCs to processing units
 From processors to controllers, devices, or end users

1.5 Phase V: Deliverance

Ensuring the timely and accurate delivery of processed data to connected devices is a
critical responsibility that must be consistently fulfilled. As the Internet of Things (IoT)
evolves, privacy and security become paramount concerns. Regardless of the
perspective taken by academia and industry, the IoT is still in its developmental stage
and susceptible to various threats and attacks. The preventive and recovery systems
employed in traditional networks and the Internet are inadequate for the IoT due to its
unique interconnectedness.

1.5.1 Attacks in the Data Perception Phase

The data perception phase raises concerns regarding data leakage, sovereignty, breach,
and authentication.

1-1) Data Leakage or Breach:

Data leakage refers to the unauthorized export of data, either intentionally or

unintentionally, internally or externally, involving hardware or software. It can occur
when data or information is transmitted to an unintended destination, often carried out
by a dishonest or dissatisfied employee. Data leakage poses a significant threat to data
reliability.

1-2) Data Sovereignty:

Data sovereignty implies that digitally stored information is subject to the laws of the
country. Given the global nature of the IoT, data sovereignty becomes a crucial factor to
consider.

1-3) Data Loss:

Data loss differs from data leakage in that it is an accidental loss of work due to
hardware or software failures or natural disasters. Data loss is not driven by revenge or
malicious intent but occurs as a result of unforeseen circumstances.

1-4) Data Authentication:

Since data can be perceived from any device at any time, there is a risk of data forgery
by intruders. It is essential to ensure that the received data originate from intended and
legitimate users only. Furthermore, data integrity must be verified to confirm that the
data have not been tampered with during transit. Data authentication serves to maintain
the integrity and originality of the data.

1-5) Attack on Availability:

Ensuring availability is a primary concern for the intended clients. Distributed denial of
service (DDoS) attacks cause overload conditions by inundating data centers (DCs) with
a massive volume of distributed attackers. However, there are various overload threats
that can render DCs unavailable to their intended clients. The following are analyzed:

- Flooding by Attackers

- Flooding by Legitimate Users (Flash Crowd)

- Flooding by Spoofing

- Flooding by Aggressive Legitimate Users

1-5-1) Flooding by Attackers:

DDoS attacks involve flooding DCs with malicious or incompatible packets. The
Matchboard Profiler can easily detect this type of overload threat, allowing the user to
filter the attacker at the firewall.
1-5-2) Flash Crowd:

Flash crowd refers to an overload condition caused by a sudden surge of legitimate users
simultaneously requesting DC resources. Buffering excess requests for a specific period
can alleviate this overload condition.

1-5-3) Spoofing Attackers:

Spoofing attackers engage in impersonation, which can be detected by acknowledging

each request and maintaining a sequence number of the requests along with the
requesters' Internet Protocol (IP) address.

1-5-4) Aggressive Legitimate Users:

Aggressive legitimate users are restless users who repeatedly initiate similar requests
within a short time span. This behavior leads to an overload condition where the flood of
requests from legitimate users slows down DC performance.

1-6) Modification of data

During transit from sensors, the data can be captured, modified, and forwarded to the
intended node. Complete data need not be modified; part of the message is sufficient to
fulfill the intention.(Lv et al., 2017; Nguyen et al., 2015)

ATTACKS AS PER ARCHITECTURE

The IoT has not yet been confined to a particular architecture. Different vendors and
applications adopt their own layers (Lv et al., 2017)

2.1 External Attack:

To fully capitalize on the benefits of the IoT, security concerns must be addressed as a
priority. The primary concern lies in establishing trust in the cloud service provider.
Organizations knowingly entrust both sensitive and non-sensitive data to these services,
but they lack awareness of where their data will be processed or stored.

2.2 Wormhole Attack:

The wormhole attack is a well-known threat in ad hoc networks. In the IoT, it can target
both stationary and dynamic objects, ranging from everyday devices like wristwatches
and refrigerators to vehicles.

2.3 Selective Attack:

In selective attacks, malicious nodes selectively filter certain packets while allowing
others to pass. This means that packets carrying crucial sensitive data for further
processing may be dropped intentionally.

2.4 Sinkhole Attack:

Sensors left unattended in the network for extended periods are particularly vulnerable
to sinkhole attacks. The compromised node attracts information from surrounding nodes
and can subsequently launch additional attacks, such as selective forwarding,
fabrication, and modification.

2.5 Sewage Attack:

In a sewage pool attack, the objective of a malicious user is to redirect all messages
from a specific region towards themselves and then intercept the base station node,
making selective attacks less effective.

2.6 Witch Attack:

The witch attack exploits the failure of a legitimate node. When the legitimate node
fails, the malicious node intercepts the factual link, diverting all future communication
through itself and resulting in data loss.

2.7 HELLO Attacks:

In HELLO flood news attacks, each object introduces itself using HELLO messages to
reachable neighbors at its frequency level. A malicious node can cover a wide frequency
area, positioning itself as a neighbor to all nodes in the network.

2.8 Addressing All Things in IoT:

Spoofing the IP address of virtual machines (VMs) poses a significant security

challenge. Malicious users acquire the IP addresses of VMs and introduce malicious
machines to attack users of these VMs, enabling unauthorized access to confidential data
for malicious purposes.

2.9 Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS):

DDoS attacks, launched by hundreds or even thousands of attackers, involve flooding

the network with large-sized unwanted traffic packets, aiming to exhaust memory
resources. These attacks prevent legitimate requests from reaching the data center (DC)
while consuming the DC's bandwidth.

2.13 Goodput:

Goodput refers to the application-level throughput, representing the number of useful

information bits delivered by the network to a specific destination per unit of time.

2.14 Data Centers (DCs):

DCs are centralized repositories, either physical or virtual, designed for storing,
managing, and disseminating data and information related to a specific knowledge
domain or business.

2.15 Botnet:

A botnet refers to a collection of compromised computers connected to the internet,

which are under the control of a malicious entity. Each compromised computer, known
as a "bot," is infected with malware distributed by the attacker. The controller of the
botnet can manipulate these compromised computers through communication channels,
such as Internet Relay Chat (IRC) or hypertext transfer protocol (HTTP).

2.16 Confidentiality:

Confidentiality involves ensuring that all client data transmitted over the network
channel is secure and tamper-proof, providing assurance to the intended clients.

2.17 Physical Security:

Continuous auditing and safety checkpoints are necessary to maintain the physical
security of the hardware involved in serving clients. These measures help identify
potential threats and ensure system integrity.

2.18 Software Security:

Software security safeguards against corruption or modification of application software

by threats. The compromise of application programming interfaces (APIs) and related
software interfaces can affect multiple clients who rely on those specific applications.

2.19 Network Security:

Network security encompasses protecting against bandwidth attacks, such as denial-of-

service (DoS) and distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks. These attacks can cause
severe congestion in the network, disrupting normal operations and leading to
communication failures.

2.20 Legal Service-Level Agreement (SLA) Issues:

SLAs between customers and service providers must adhere to legal requirements, as
cyber laws may vary across different countries. Incompatibilities between SLAs can
give rise to compliance issues.

2.21 Eavesdropping:

Eavesdropping involves intercepting network traffic to gain unauthorized access. It

poses a threat to confidentiality. The man-in-the-middle attack is a specific type of
eavesdropping, where the attacker establishes connections with both participants of a
conversation, making them believe they are communicating directly while secretly
intercepting and manipulating the conversation.

2.22 Replay Attack:

A replay attack occurs when an attacker intercepts and saves old messages, later
replaying them as if they were sent by one of the participants

ATTACKS BASED ON COMPONENTS:

The Internet of Things (IoT) connects various heterogeneous objects, enabling them to
communicate sensitive data over long distances. In addition to common risks like
attenuation, theft, loss, breach, and disasters, compromised sensors can also fabricate
and modify data. It is crucial to verify the end user at the entry level and differentiate
between humans and machines. Various types of Completely Automated Public Turing
tests to tell Computers and Humans Apart (CAPTCHA) assist in this essential
discrimination.

CONNECTIVITY PROTOCOLS-BASED ATTACKS:

IoT objects employ different connectivity protocols, broadly categorized as wired and
wireless protocols. Wired connections rely on physical mediums, while wireless
connections use radio waves. Both technologies possess distinct properties such as
range, data rate, power consumption, spectrum, TCP/IP support, and topology.

3.1 RFID-Based Attacks:

RFID (Radio Frequency Identification) technology facilitates automatic information

exchange between tags and readers via radio waves. RFID employs Automatic
Identification and Data Capture (AIDC) technology and finds applications in credit
cards, asset tracking, and military uses.

3.2 Replay:

In replay attacks, an attacker captures and later replays the transmitted signal between
the reader and the tag, falsifying the tag's accessibility.

3.3 Spoofing:

In spoofing attacks, a malicious tag impersonates a valid tag to gain unauthorized

access. The attacker eavesdrops on data from a valid tag and copies it to another tag.

3.4 Tracking:

Tracking attacks target individuals by utilizing RFID tags placed on household items.
This practice raises privacy concerns as it enables tracking individuals' movements and
creating detailed purchasing profiles.
3.5 Unauthorized Access:

Due to the lack of authentication in RFID systems, tags can be vulnerable to

unauthorized attacks. The goal of such attacks is to manipulate the sensitive data stored
in the tags.

3.6 Virus:

Although RFID tags have limited storage capacity, they can still be exploited by viruses
to spread within the supply chain. This poses a potential threat to the security of RFID
systems.

3.7 Eavesdropping:

As RFID systems transmit data wirelessly without human intervention, there is a risk of
eavesdropping. Attackers can capture sensitive data transmitted between tags and
readers since many RFID systems lack encryption techniques.

3.6 Man-in-the-Middle (MITM):

MITM attacks can occur during data transmission between RFID readers and tags.
Attackers intercept and modify the communication channel, allowing them to
manipulate information in real-time before it reaches the intended recipient.

3.7 Killing Tag:

A killing tag attack aims to disable RFID tags, preventing their communication with
readers. It is essential to protect against such attacks by securing the kill command with
a strong password.
Research Methodology

The paradigm is the essential philosophical stepping stone, according to De Villiers

(2005, p. 3), whereas Guba and Lincoln (1994, p. 105) define it as a core set of beliefs.
Researchers' epistemologies and ontologies, as well as the methods they use to gather
information, are shaped by the worldview in which they operate. It affects how they see
the world, where they fit in it, and how potential connections can form between various
factors. The methodology selected also directs studies that aim to increase our
understanding. Easterby-Smith et al. (2002) state that although epistemology includes a
set of beliefs about the best techniques to explore the world, ontology contains the
assumptions established about reality. Researchers in the subject of IS might choose
from a number of different approaches. Several aspects, including the field, research
objectives, researcher's history, and the anticipated responses, influence the decision to
use a single or numerous approaches. To ensure the reliability of my results, I plan to
use a variety of research techniques, including in-depth interviews with participants in a
focus group setting. Positivism, interpretivism, and critical realism are the pillars upon
which this research methodology rests. These paradigms are the theoretical and
methodological foundations upon which the body of scientific knowledge rests.

I will be focusing my methodology part on interpretivism because of its close

relationship to qualitative research among these ideologies. Reality is socially produced
(ontology), and understanding it requires assigning meanings to it (epistemology),
according to the interpretivism paradigm (Creswell, 2017). Research participants' points
of view within the research domain is the focus of the interpretivism paradigm.
Qualitative research methods such as interviews, questionnaires, observations, and focus
groups are utilised (Creswell, 2017). The premise of this method is that people create
social realities via their own activities and relationships. But researchers must remember
that social reality is not something that can be assessed scientifically; rather, it can only
be interpreted. This brings up the problem of bias, as the researcher's own worldview
and set of assumptions can colour their findings (Creswell, 2017). In order to assure the
reliability, validity, and credibility of their findings, researchers use various methods to
combat bias. Creswell's (2017) study design framework is shown in Figure 10.
Research design

Since my study objectives and methodology are now clear and my fundamental
questions have been answered. Franz and Robey (1984) have advocated an idiographic
rather than nomothetic research technique in the IS domain, which centres around
investigating a single event, entity, or circumstance. As my data collection took place
during a specific event in my building, I adopted an idiographic approach to my study.
Researchers should expect to get answers to their questions if they follow this research
technique to its logical conclusion (saunders, et al., 2009). Research questions and the
study's overarching goals should inform the research strategy selected, as stated by
Rowley (2002). Experiments, surveys, questionnaires, archival analyses, histories, and
case studies are just some of the research methods mentioned by Yin (1994).
Weduawatta et al. (2011) state that the following factors determine which of these
methods should be chosen: Choices among research methods In-depth interviews for a
qualitative study, type F Theoretical frameworks Participatory social construction
Approaches to Research Challenges, Information Gathering, Information Processing,
Interpretation, and Verification Using a Qualitative Exploratory Research Approach

• The exploratory, unstructured character of the study questions (as in my thesis).

• The amount to which the researcher can alter the participants' environments in their
natural state

• Current occurrences, as opposed to those further back in time, are of primary interest
to the researcher.

containing the above-mentioned objectives in mind, I developed a questionnaire

containing open-ended, exploratory questions to facilitate conversation with respondents
(Weduawatta, et al., 2011). In the following paragraphs, I will detail the methodology
that I will use to conduct this study.

Research approach

The three primary types of research methods identified by Aaker, Kumar, and Day
(2000) are exploratory, descriptive, and informal. To better understand the problem
within a selected population (to learn more about their familiarity with IoT devices), I
conducted exploratory research within qualitative methodologies, which fits well with
my chosen research paradigm of interpretivism. By looking at the big picture,
exploratory research can shed light on the nature of the problem, alternative courses of
action, and the importance of considering both micro and macro aspects (Aaker, Kumar,
& Day, 2000). At the same time, there are two main concerns that need to be at the
centre of any qualitative information systems research. The first is the methodology and
benchmark, while the second is the methodology and theoretical underpinnings.
Information systems are too important to be dismissed by other fields (Lee and
Liebenau, 1997). After adopting this method, the researcher is free to investigate the
participants' environments using an inductive strategy and a fluid framework (Creswell,
2017).

Data collection methods

Twenty people took part in the research. 14 men and 6 women made up the 20 people
that took part. Six people (four in their thirties, two in their forties, four in their fifties,
and two in their sixties) took part in the study. I spent about two to three weeks in early
April, 2023, gathering and analysing the data. For reliable and realistic findings, data
gathering strategies must be appropriate for the questions being asked (Harling, 2002).
And in qualitative research projects, the sample should be chosen for a specific goal, as
stated by Creswell (2017). In addition, the sample needs to be appropriate for the study's
objectives and questions. And the researcher can easily get in touch with them. The
author of the aforementioned thesis assumed that the residents of his building, Hosta
Hus (https://groenttorvet.dk/hostahus/), would all own Internet of Things devices.
They're already putting them to use. They're willing to participate in a focus group
session where I ask them questions about the study challenge and they know very little
about it beforehand. Researchers gathered information in the following ways, depending
on the nature of the study questions being asked:

In the first question (Q 1), we use a literature review as a starting point to describe and
explain IoT systems, their architecture, the technologies they use, and how they work.
The objective was to identify the most pressing threats to security and privacy caused by
the Internet of Things.

The residents of my block in Valby, Copenhagen, were the subjects of in-depth

interviews for Question 2 (Q2).

To discover the appropriate response to question 3 (Q3), we looked into reputable web
sources, including important IT, business, and industrial periodicals, journals, essays,
research papers, theses, and the perspectives of industry leaders.

According to the methodology chapter's introductory paragraph, primary data will be

gathered using semi-structured interviews conducted during a focus group session
mediated by the researcher. Below, I've detailed my process for leading both individual
interviews and group discussions. How are these two techniques used to gather
information?

Semi structured open end interview

Semi-structured open-ended interviews are a type of qualitative research method where

the interviewer has a flexible guide of questions to ask but allows for open-ended
responses from the interviewee. This approach provides a balance between structured
interviews with predetermined questions and fully unstructured interviews.

In a semi-structured open-ended interview, the interviewer typically starts with a few

key questions or topics to guide the conversation. These questions are designed to elicit
detailed and descriptive responses from the interviewee.

The survey's primary purpose was to gauge the level of familiarity its respondents had
with IoT; specifically, with its advantages, downsides, hazards, and prospective
applications. The interviewer encourages the respondent to continue the dialogue
beyond a simple "yes" or "no" (Bhattacherjee, 2012). The researcher was successful in
eliciting the necessary data from the respondents thanks to the use of probing open-
ended questions (Kvale, 2006).

The researcher ensured that he had limited control over the dialogue, but at the same
time he prompted the participants to draw connections between their own lives and the
use of IoT-based smart home devices today and in the future (Patton, 2002). The
researcher's epistemology and thesis goals should guide their decision to use semi-
structured interviews as a data gathering approach (Burgess, 1982). Researchers
employing a constructivist perspective on social reality and related design studies within
an interpretive research paradigm (Denzin, 1989; Robertson & Boyle, 1984) have been
found to use semi-structured interviews.

Analysis of Data

I will use a grounded theory with an inductive approach to my collected data to derive
new points from the data and to emphasise recurring themes in order to comprehend
what the data is saying, as indicated by the theoretical framework, research technique,
and thesis advisor.

Theories with solid foundations

To better grasp the dynamics of grounded theory and how to get meaningful insights out
of it, Glaser (1992) suggests using it on the data itself, rather than thinking of it as a
theory. When there are no preexisting theories in the field of study, grounded theory can
be especially helpful, as pointed out by Urquhart and Fernández (2016). For the
purposes of my thesis, the problems with the privacy and security of the internet of
things (IoT) and smart gadgets cannot be reduced to a single theory. According to
Orlikowski (1993), grounded theory is ideally suited for looking into processes and
enhancements. According to Wiesche et al. (2017), researchers in the field of
information systems frequently employ grounded theory to probe the intersection of
technological innovation and socio-technical activity in fresh fields of study.
Researchers also discovered that factors such as the location and duration of a study
greatly influence the viability of a grounded theory approach. Since grounded theory
puts data and analysis close to each other for inductive discoveries, it is well suited to
the interpretative approach (Hughes and Jones, 2003). The adaptability and flexibility of
grounded theory, as argued by Birks et al. (2013), are its most valuable properties.
However, researchers need to proceed with caution when dealing with the flexibility
factor, as a novice or inexperienced researcher may struggle to implement it and obtain
the necessary conclusions. I decided against axial coding in favour of open coding due
to this consideration. Later, connections will be made between them to form overarching
classes. Focus group interview responses will be easier to comprehend if they are
organised in these ways. Also, I can use these to better spot and interpret trends in the
data I collect. After that, we can move on to theory or new ideas based on chosen codes.
The next step in grounded theory is the inductive approach, which is a way of thinking
about analysis first proposed by (Strauss, 1991). Researchers taking an inductive
approach often employ free-form techniques to generate hypotheses and test them. So,
to use the inductive method effectively, we need to keep an open mind about the data,
dive deep into it, look for patterns, identify key factors, and gradually build up
convincing explanations of our findings. According to Glaser (1992), the focus of
grounded theory is not on the type of data collected but on the methodology used to
draw conclusions from that data. Therefore, the data to be examined could be either
qualitative or quantitative (Glaser, 1992; Glaser and Strauss, 1967) or a hybrid of the
two.

Interview questions

Questions about what happens and how individuals communicate and understand are at
the heart of most grounded theory investigations. Like with grounded theory research, I
began my interviews with semi-structured, open-ended questions on the respondent's
demographics (name, address, gender, phone number, etc.) and their views on
technology. At this point, I have only assumed that I am completely ignorant of the
possible interpretations that can affect the actions of the players.
Chapter 4

Data analysis

4.1 Data Collection from Interviews

20 residents from my area were interviewed during a group session to gauge the general
public's familiarity with and thoughts on Internet of Things (IoT) technology. The
outcomes are detailed below:

Table 1

Age?
Age No of
Respondents
30y- 4
35y
35y- 4
40y
40y- 4
 45y
45y- 4
50y
50y- 2
55y
55y- 2
60y

Twenty people took part in the study, as listed in the table above. There were four in the
30-35 age range, four in the 35-40 range, four in the 40-45 range, and two in each of the
50-55 and 55-60 ranges.
Table 2

Gender?
Male Female
14 6

14 men and 6 women made up the 20 people that took part.

Table 3

How much interest in technology?

Very Little No Interest
Intere Interested
sted
12 4 4

Only 12 of the 20 respondents showed a genuine enthusiasm for the incorporation of

technology into their daily routines and household appliances. They range in age
from 30 to 45, making it clear that younger individuals, on the whole, are more
enthusiastic about cutting-edge electronics. While 4 of the older respondents were
 uninterested in technology, 4 of the younger respondents were mildly interested.

Table 4

heard about term smart homes or

smart home device ?
Yes No
18 2

With the exception of one elderly lady who neither had an interest in technology nor had
heard of these terms, almost everyone had heard of smart homes and smart home
gadgets.

Table 5

If yes, what comes into your

mind ...?
Usability No of
Respondents
Smart heating 2
0
Intelligent virtual assistants (Alexa, Google 12
assistant etc.)
Smart lighting 12
Useful information (weather, traffic) 14
Alarms 14
Smart appliances (fridge, speakers, Tv) 14
Health & fitness gadgets 14

Because heating systems were installed in their brand-new homes, all respondents had
some familiarity with them. The virtual assistants Alexa, Google Assistant, and others
were known to twelve respondents. Only 8 out of 100 were aware of intelligent digital
assistants.

There were 12 people that have experience with smart lighting solutions like Philips
Hue and Lifx. 14 of them agreed that knowing the local weather and traffic conditions is
important for preparing for outdoor activities and getting about safely. After that, we
have smart devices like TVs, refrigerators, vacuum cleaners and stereos. There was also
a respectable amount of chatter about installing home security systems and alarms. Only
14 persons, mostly young responders, knew about the connection between smart phones
and health/fitness gear.

Table 6

How many smart devices do you have at

home...?
Responde No of Devices
nts
30y-35y 8
35y-40y 8
40y-45y 6
45y-50y 6
50y-55y 2
55y-60y 2

The data in the table above shows that younger generations are more likely to own
multiple electronic gadgets and appliances than older generations. Between the ages of
30 and 45, the average person makes use of four different types of technology.
Respondents in the middle age and older brackets had routers and a few other devices,
but they lacked the technical expertise to use them.
 Table 7

Do you have Alexa, Siri, Google Assistant or other

virtual assistants at home...?
Virtual Assistants No of
Respond
ents
Alexa 6
Google Assistant 6
Siri 4
Cortana 3
Bixby 0
Respondents reported using a variety of different virtual assistants. Three respondents
used a virtual assistant, and the two most popular were Amazon's Alexa and Google's
assistant. Both Microsoft's Cortana and Samsung's Bixby fared poorly with respondents.

Table 8

What services or functions, you use from your IoT

devices...?
Functions No of
Respond
ents
Energy savings 20
Ambiance lighting 16
Listening music 18
Weather updates 20
Smart locks 14
Setting alarms 12
Maximizing home 14
security
Health & fitness 10
 updates

Participants were surveyed about their expectations for convenience and features from
their Internet of Things and smart home gadgets. The vast differences in responses were
indicative of the age ranges being represented. Almost everyone who took part wanted
to save money on their monthly energy expenses. Playing music and controlling lighting
with virtual assistants like (Alexa, Google, etc.) ended up being the second most
common use. Weather and traffic reports were also of great interest to the participants,
as this information is crucial to daily life in Scandinavia.

Respondent 5 (age range: 45-50): "minimising my heating bill, which is somewhat high
in Denmark. I have a system of smart locks that I can operate from my phone.
Person 6 (aged 50-55) in the surveyWhat's most important to me is finding ways to
spend less money on these necessities while still providing necessary conveniences.
These "listen to me" smart home speakers are a joy to operate.
Respondent 4 (age range: 35-40): "When I go out, I listen to music and check the
weather and traffic conditions on Alexa."
Teenager No. 3 (aged 30–35): "better quality of life," "more health and fitness
conscious," "simpler and easier everyday life," and "smart home appliances."
Person 9 (aged 55-59): "I have a few smart functions in my fridge, a smart TV and a
remote hoover cleaner."

Nearly 14 out of 20 respondents highlighted home security or remote home security as a

top priority. Smartphone-operated home security systems, smart door locks, and remote
Wi-Fi cameras were of particular interest. Many people also use Apple, Samsung, and
Huawei smartwatches to monitor their vitals and exercise progress.

Table 9

Do you have a router at

 home...?
Yes No
20 0

All 20 respondents have routers at home, as shown in the table. Multiple varieties of
routers are represented here. Typically, through the use of a gigabit-capable router.
"Mesh networks" were used by the majority of responders. Unexpectedly, even
respondents in the centre of the age range or older were utilising them. However, they
did note that family members assisted in the network setup.

Table10

Do you update your

router setting
regularly...?
Yes No
14 6

Fourteen out of ten respondents indicated they alter their router's configuration
whenever prompted, either manually or automatically. Only 3% of participants update
their profiles often, and those who do tend to be older. Simply put, they were either too
lazy or too preoccupied to come up with a secure password.

A majority of participants, especially those between the ages of 40 and 60, did not
realise that hackers may acquire access to their social media, banking, and email
accounts if their router password was weak. And they should be aware of the danger of
identity theft.

Female (45-50) Response #5: "I use a typical password." I have no interest in making
regular updates. Respondent 6 (aged 50-55): "I use standard passwords." But I rarely
make any changes to them. To keep track of my various passphrases, I utilise a central
software.
#4 (Age Range: 35-39)Strong passwords that I update often are a must for me. Third
(thirty to 35 year old): "I use strong passwords and normally update them periodically."
9 (a person between the ages of 55 and 59): "I use a very standard one because I find it
difficult to remember a difficult one."

Table 11

Password of router
questions?
Questi No of
ons Respondents
Have you changed the default 20
password
We often change default password 16
Didn’t change default password 0
Took help to change default password 6
Change default password every 3 6
months
Change default password every 6 14
months
We use strong password for router 14
We use weak password for router 6
When I questioned them about router security. The variety and depth of their responses
was fascinating. No one had kept their device's factory-issued password after receiving
it; everyone had altered it. Sixteen users choose to alter their previous passwords with
new ones. Twelve of the sixteen frequently updated their passwords and used the
provided password guidelines to establish secure passwords. Due to the complexity of
the application, two users, both of whom are middle-aged or older, sought assistance in
order to update their passwords. Finally, we found that 6 people --  people -- mostly
younger responders -- are extra vigilant about keeping their passwords secure by
changing them every three months. Password-protecting "password vaults" are used by
these people; these are apps that various businesses offer.

Table 15

Reason of pur hasing smart device ?

Reaso No of
ns Respondents
build in (smart floor heating) 20
To bring comfort in daily life 18
to follow technology trend 14
positive feedback from friends & 16
relatives
to give home a modern look 10
security purposes (alarms) 12
to follow more healthy lifestyle 10
to reduces light & heating bills 18
no specific reason 2

The response to this question was essential in illuminating people's attitudes and
motivations for purchasing Internet of Things (IoT) or smart devices. Twenty out of
twenty respondents had some form of smart gadget in their houses thanks to the fact that
they resided in a relatively new and cutting-edge area with cutting-edge amenities like
(smart floor heating, smart climate control, smart lighting, etc.). 18 participants said it
would significantly enhance their typical activities. 14 justify their inaction by saying
they are simply following the latest technological trends. 16 felt compelled to buy after
hearing rave reviews from their social networks (i.e., friends, family, and coworkers).
Eighteen felt this would help them save money and cut down on energy use. Ten of
those surveyed felt that using a smart watch or a smartphone app to track their health
would be beneficial. Two people, both of them elderly, were apathetic and gave no
explanation for their stance.

Table 16

How much marketing & advertising Effected

your decision...?
to great to some not
extent extent at all
16 4 0
Consumers were polled on who motivated them to purchase IoT devices and how much
advertising and marketing had a role in their purchasing decisions. In response, close
friends and relatives

turned proven to be the primary drivers of the smart home technology market. Five to
eight people per age group reported that they or a close relative already used smart home
appliances/devices and gushed over their conveniences and efficacy. However, they
were compelled to consider buying or utilising these devices by advertising and
marketing on various social media sites like Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, YouTube,
and blogs.

Almost everyone who took part in the study stated they create cookies on social media
sites in order to keep track of the adverts for smart home devices they click on, whether
on purpose or by accident. And then, after a set amount of time, they were inundated
with the same advertisements. causing consumers to feel compelled to purchase those
gadgets.

In the words of Respondent 5 (aged 45–50): "a close family member forced me to buy
something intelligent." Respondent 6 (aged 50-55): "I got it as a gift to make my life a
bit more comfortable."

Respondent #8 (aged 35-39) The advertisements on my Facebook wall are constant.

Three (age range: 30-35) and Four (age range: 35-40) Friends gave me rave
recommendations, I was heavily affected by social media (almost forced), I was
convinced to buy one by television commercials, and the magazine I routinely read for
advertisements ultimately swayed my decision.

Answering for herself, Respondent 9 (between the ages of 55 and 60) said, "I was not
affected by these things; few things were already in my flat when I moved in."

Upgrades from older systems and the availability of pre-installed smart features in
homes were both identified as incentives for adopting IoT technology in the home. In
addition, 8 individuals stated that technological advancements are inevitable, and that
social media has opened up new lines of communication with various device producers
and marketers, facilitating their decision-making processes.

Table 17

How difficult or complicated these devices are to use

...?
quite little bit complicated not at all
complicated
12 6 0

Twelve persons out of twenty found using these IoT devices to be relatively difficult.
Each age range was represented among these 12. Six people found them simple to grasp
and apply. The average age of the group was 30. Two respondents, both of whom were
employed in the information technology sector, said they were simple to use.
Table 18
 Are you aware about the security & privacy risks associated with IoT
devices...?
Yes, we Yes, but don’t know No idea
know exactly what
risks
8 10 2
There are risks linked with smart and IoT devices, and 10 individuals are aware of this
fact, but they don't know what those risks are. (whether it's identity theft, theft of private
information, theft of banking information, or something else).Eight persons had a little
better grasp of the dangers, but they were still missing key details. While 2 people were
completely clueless about it.
In general, participants were cognizant of the security and privacy risks inherent in the
IoT. However, they were unsure of the extent to which these gadgets, or the wrong
individuals using these gadgets, could invade their privacy and hack their personal,
financial, and other sensitive information including their likes and dislikes, daily
routines, etc. Participants between the ages of 30 and 50 who were aware of privacy and
security threats tended to be less confident that they would be seriously affected by them
(10-12 on average).

Those in the study who were 50 to 60 years old virtually completely lacked awareness
of the danger. A digital fingerprint is sent from each connected device in the home to the
router whenever it is used, a fact that many people don't realise leaves them vulnerable
to hackers and other criminals. hackers who infiltrate their routers can gain access to
sensitive information such as their daily schedule, personal photos, and even floor plans
of their homes.

Participants who were alert to the possibility of hacking used terms like "online
hacking," "information in the wrong hands," "information theft," and "criminals may try
to take control" when discussing privacy and security breaches. Even so, they have not
raised any major concerns about the gadget manufacturers' commercial exploitation of
their data.
Participants' answers did not deviate from what they had already given when asked to
identify potential threats to their privacy and security; rather, they expanded upon their
prior reflections and perspective on privacy and security in the context of general
threats.

Fifth respondent (aged 45–50): "I know privacy and security is an issue but don't know
how much". Respondent 6 (aged 50-55): "Sometimes I fear my personal information can
be leaked or hacked because I don't know how to properly use it."
A fourth respondent (aged 35-39)I agree that privacy and security are major concerns,
but I don't know how much data these gadgets can actually steal.
Response #3 (aged 30-35): "It is a serious issue, but I can't say how much". In the words
of Respondent 9 (aged 55-59), "I have no idea".

Table 19

Do you know IoT devices collect info

about you ...? (address, phone no,
email, passwords, location)
Yes No No idea
12 6 2

Six of the respondents admitted they were aware that smart gadgets were collecting data
on them, but they had no idea how much data was being gathered or what kind of data
was being collected. Only three were aware of the potential for data collection, and one
of those was an older individual.

Table 20

Do you know, your IoT devices can record your daily routine, likes/dislikes,
choices etc...?
 Yes No Didn’t think
about it
4 14 2

Fourteen people were polled, and none of them suspected that their smart devices could
be used to spy on them. can keep tabs on anything from what they eat to how often they
drive. One individual didn't even consider it, and only four tech-savvy people were
aware of it.
Table 21

Do you know, your IoT devices can spy

on you...? (by microphones,
cameras, sensors)
Yes No Didn’t think
about it
2 14 4
I found that 14 persons were unsure whether or not they were aware that their home
appliances and electronics may be used to spy on them when I asked them about the
specifics. Only one of the four IT guys really understood it, and the other three didn't
give it much thought because of their hectic schedules.

Table 22

Do you know, your personal information can go in

wrong hands...?
Yes No Didn’t think
about it
4 12 4

There were 12 people who were in the dark. According to the testimony of four
individuals. They certainly were aware of it. Four people didn't even consider it.

Table 23
 What information can go in wrong
hands...?
Informat No of
ion Respondents
financial 4
info
personal 12
info
location 4

The majority of respondents expressed concern over their private data falling into the
wrong hands. four of them were dissatisfied with the fact that their location data was
shared with third parties and may be exploited. Four were worried about the privacy of
their financial information being compromised.

Fear of being secretly recorded, social media snooping, access to financial information,
devices storing, transmitting, and using personal data without permission, devices doing
things they weren't supposed to, gathering voice and image data, obtaining credit card
information, whereabouts (e.g., whether a person is at home or not, what time a person
comes/leaves), and medical/health data were also cited as concerns by the participants.

Table 24

Have you ever been hacked, accidently downloaded malware or installed

new software without consent...?
Yes No Don’t Know
12 4 4

There were six people who thought they were victims of these cyberattacks. Two were
safe from serious dangers. Neither of the other two gave it much consideration.
People between the ages of 30 and 45 have complained that they accidentally installed
browsers when they downloaded free software (one user used the example of CCleaner,
noting that when he installed free software for PC cleaning, his browser was also
installed without his knowledge). A few others admitted to being fallen for fraudulent
emails purportedly coming from Mali, Nigeria, or South Africa. One participant
reported receiving a phone call from India from someone requesting remote access to
his laptop under the pretence that Microsoft was responsible for his computer and that
urgent Windows upgrades were required.

Table 25

Did you read the purchase agreement or privacy policy when buying these
devices...?
Yes No Didn’t think
about it
2 12 6

Six people didn't give it any thought while buying their smart watches, TVs, or virtual
assistants. Two IT professionals were wary of signing on the dotted line until they
verified exactly what information they would have access to while using the device.
There were just six people who didn't take it seriously since they didn't care.

Table 26

Are you willing to provide more personal data if you are offered things in
return e.g. special deals, discounts etc...?
Yes No Didn’t think
about it
4 14 2

14 out of 20 people said no when asked. They weren't persuaded by the marketing
gimmicks, while two were open to sharing some information and one completely
disregarded the request.

When asked whether they would be prepared to share personal data with device
manufacturers or third-party vendors in exchange for a discount on regular service
or to receive other benefits like value-added services, free content, and additional
features, participants elaborated on whether or not they would be happy to do so.
Only the more senior members of the group were interested in sharing their
information for these agreements. Only about 4 or 6 people out of 20 noticed
potential privacy and security issues with data acquisition by third parties. The
majority of participants are concerned about attacks like hacking and information
leaks. It's interesting that no one seriously worried about how companies or their
government would exploit the information they provided.

5th Respondent (aged 45–50): "I won't share my data for marketing and advertising
purposes." Sixth respondent (aged 50–55): "I am willing to share some information
in exchange for financial compensation, such as a discount." Fourth respondent (4,
age range 35–40): "No, this does not appeal to me."
'In reality, I regard it as a security issue,' said Respondent 3 (30–35 y/o). Millennial
9 (between the ages of 55 and 60): "I don't know" or "didn't think about it"

A fine line was drawn by participants between protecting personal information and
allowing for certain types of data to be shared. One respondent mentioned smart
lighting as an example of a technology used by corporations to collect data. It's
impossible to determine how long the light has been on without collecting data. In
this case, he had no problem with data collecting, but he would object if the
producer of the gadget intended to utilise the information for personalised
advertising or shared it with any other parties. Results show that there is a grey area
between data collecting and privacy invasion. Participants wished for improved ease
of use and comfort but were disregarded because doing so would compromise their
right to remain anonymous or private.
Table 27

Have you changed the password of your IoT devices/gadgets in past 6

months...?
Yes No Didn’t think
about it
6 10 4

When it comes to Wi-Fi passwords, only the younger age group of 30-45 yrs. were
using strong passwords and updating them every six months or when prompted by
the device itself. They were using "password vault" apps like NordPass, 1 password,
and Last pass to store their passwords.
Five people didn’t change their passwords that often on their smart devices. Only
three did, and two didn’t think about it so seriously.

Table 28

Do you use the same password for all devices and

gadgets...?
Yes No Didn’t think
about it
6 14 0

14 respondents were using different passwords for their different devices, but as it is
difficult to remember so many passwords simultaneously, They were using
"password vaults" offered by different companies to keep all of their passwords in
the same place. They were using one master password to access that vault. 6 people
used the same password for all of their devices, including the elderly.
14 respondents reported using unique passwords for each of their devices; however,
given the difficulty in remembering so many unique passwords at once, these users were
making use of "password vaults" provided by a variety of organisations. To get into the
safe, they would use a single master password. The elderly were among the 6 people
who consistently used the same password across all of their gadgets.

Table 29

Do you promptly install new software versions for

your devices when prompted
Yes No Didn’t think
about it
2 12 6
12 individuals either didn't update at all, or only updated when it was required. They
said that if you don't upgrade when prompted, you'll lose access to some functions or
start receiving problem messages. Customers need to install updates so they can
continue using the product. They didn't care because they didn't have the time or
interest. The one among us who knows how to use technology well makes sure that
everything is always up to date. However, 6 of the participants were uninterested.

Table 30

Suggestions for improving the safety of everyday devices.

Ans No of Respondents
wers
Ask permission before giving info to 16
3rd party
More secure back end data solutions 6
Clearly define what information will be 12
kept
Clearly define data policy 14
 Product or service improvements 14
Regular updates 12
Good customer service 18
Easy installation 16
User friendly 20
More secure devices 20

20 people out of 20 agreed that ease of use and security are the most important features
of these smart devices and gadgets. Users of all skill levels and levels of familiarity with
technology and their gadgets stressed the importance of being able to utilise these
devices effectively.

Customer satisfaction ranked second in importance, thus having a helpful staff on hand
to answer questions and resolve issues is crucial. Individuals were also thinking about
the fate of their data, or how it would be stored and utilised. They didn't want it to be
shared on social media, emailed, or mailed to potential customers. Ethical issues in
product marketing and sales were likewise highly valued by respondents. Therefore,
there must be no fine print involved.

Table 31

Are you satisfied with the products offered by

manufacturers...?
Yes No Didn’t think
about it
14 4 2

Smart climate management, smart lighting, and virtual assistants were particularly well-
received among the respondents' smart home equipment. One person was dissatisfied
because he found it cumbersome to use. Whereas they didn't have strong feelings one
way or the other about what they had been through. data collection with the intention of
improving services but also data sharing with third parties. Internet behemoths like
Facebook, Microsoft, and Google have extensive personal data on you. Is Alexa
recording my conversations for Amazon's marketing purposes? How much more about
us does Google know than we do? Ten out of twenty respondents raised these worries.
These replies show that people are cognizant of the responsibility that device
manufacturers have in ensuring the security and privacy of user information. However,
there was still some confusion among the group members.
Table 32

Based on your experience so far , would you like to buy a smart device
again ...?
Yes No Didn’t think
about it
4 4 2

Participants identified efficiency, reduced power expenses, convenience, comfort,

intelligence, virtual assistants, home alarms, and the ability to customise lighting based
on need as reasons for purchasing and using smart home devices/IoT gadgets.

In terms of functionality and ease of use, most respondents were pleased with the items
and services they were provided. Many respondents shared this optimistic view of the
future. However, the gadget makers' information/data security policies left much to be
desired. Because they had no idea what data was being collected, stored, and used by
private businesses, public agencies, and other parties. One customer expressed doubt
regarding whether or not he would make a repeat purchase. The overwhelming majority
of respondents who answered "yes" to this question indicated that they would purchase
these items again.
.
Chapter 5

Dsicussions

This chapter's goal was to reflect the thesis's learning outcomes by critically examining
the findings in light of the discussion in the preceding chapters (introduction, literature
review, methodology, and empirical findings). The significance of my research was laid
forth in the Discussion section.

It was easy to get the conclusion that the Internet of Things (IoT) phenomenon was
more abstract by comparing responses to different questions and analysing talks during
the focus group session. At the same time, a smart home gadget was seen as something
more real and tangible that might actually add value.

In addition, the empirical analysis of interviews revealed that, unexpectedly, nearly all
participants had more than one IoT-based smart gadget in their homes, making IoT
saturation close to 100%.

The level of participants' technological literacy, awareness, and familiarity was high.
People between the ages of 30 and 44 were the most enthusiastic, tech-savvy, and
inquisitive about emerging technology. They were enthusiastic adopters of smart home
technology, and many of them were already making use of health and fitness apps on
their smartphones and smart watches to get in better shape.

People in their fifties and sixties, as could be predicted, exhibited less familiarity with
and interest in technological possibilities than those younger or older.

The advantages of Internet of Things devices have already been discussed; these include
a higher level of convenience thanks to technological advancements, lower expenses,
virtual assistants, enhanced health and fitness, and safer living conditions.
The benefits of using smart home devices, appliances, or gadgets were discussed, and
participants also mentioned features they would want to see implemented in future
versions of these products.

Turning lights on and off, playing music, commanding gadgets with your voice, having
anything from smart home alarms and remote home climate control systems to Wi-Fi
home cameras and robot hoover cleaners controlled from a centralised remote or app,
etc.

It turned out that one of the primary negatives of smart devices was that people didn't
pay enough attention to the security and privacy concerns that come along with them.
The participants did not understand what data was collected, how it was collected, or to
what degree it was collected. They don't understand the terms of the purchase agreement
or the privacy policies. A majority of respondents felt uneasy about giving their personal
information to outside businesses.

In the United States, 56.4 percent of IoT-based smart devices leak personal data, while
in the United Kingdom, 83.84 percent do so. According to www.cyware.com, the most
prevalent sorts of information provided by these devices are location data and IP
addresses. Smart TVs, virtual assistants, smart speakers, doorbells, and appliances all
communicate user data to third parties like Netflix, Spotify, Microsoft, Akamai, and
Google, according to previous studies. The researcher's findings from questions 20–27
were supported by this line of reasoning.

When discussing smart home gadgets, almost everyone brought up the possibility of
engagement from outside parties. They advised that we, as consumers and producers,
find a happy medium among data protection, online safety, public confidence, and
product utility. Then there's that dude in his thirties or forties who's a tech whiz. age
range brought up a social media reference regarding a cybercrime involving smart home
gadgets and the unwitting breach of people's trust.
The following trends were found in the data when it was analysed in light of the
empirical findings:

5.1 Experience with Internet of Things and Smart Houses

Initial data analysis revealed that the intended audiences had a good understanding of
the principles behind smart homes and a passing acquaintance with the Internet of
Things (IoT).

5.2 The employment of electronic gadgetry

Participant knowledge of technology and the use of smart home gadgets was another
consistent finding. The ten people involved all had some form of technological device,
from a refrigerator to a smartwatch, in their houses.

5.3 Internet-of-Things devices as a boon to living standards

There was also widespread agreement that technological advancements and smart home
devices contribute to enhancing people's quality of life and reducing stress. All age
groups cited the desire to save time, money, and effort as motivations for purchasing
these devices and gadgets. Outing planning, smart lighting and heating controls, mobile-
controlled smart locks, playing favourite music, and storing certain preferences in
virtual assistants to be acted upon upon return from work or vacation are all examples.

5.4 Resilience in Commonplace Security

Knowledge of and resilience in the face of fundamental security measures was another
intriguing and rather surprising common trait. Users routinely alter their router's
password. complied with standard recommendations for password strength (quite robust
passwords). Even those of advanced age participated

passwords, although they don't do it very often. To keep their passwords organised and
safe, participants were employing "password vaults" and unlocking them with a master
password.
5.5 Not having a firm grasp of security and privacy concerns
People were diligent about changing their router's passphrase, but less so about changing
the passphrases on their other smart home devices. The unknown severity of the
potential for data or information leaks, abuse, and misuse was the main source of
concern. All participants were found to have average levels of knowledge and awareness
of the extent to which they were at risk, the types of risks they faced, and the possible
outcomes in the event that a risk materialised.

5.6 Involvement of a Third Party

Another major problem was the secretive collecting and use, or even sale, of people's
personal information. Companies that make electronic devices also gather information
on their customers. Smart home gadgets, websites, social media networks, polls, and
various subscriptions are all examples of third-party data sources. This information is
then sold to advertising and marketing firms for use in targeted campaigns, customised
advertising, etc. The extent to which participants' personal information was shared with
regional and national governments as well as regional and national businesses was often
unknown. The vast majority of these instances occurred when participants gave no
consent.

Are you ready to go out and buy more smart home technology?
One more unifying theme was that people wanted to and were willing to acquire smart
home gadgets again. Most people who used the devices were pleased with how well
they worked and what they were able to accomplish. Respondents portrayed them as
ubiquitous in the future and a symbol of cutting-edge technology. They are confident
that this technology will advance and that the rollout of 5G will open up countless
possibilities for use in smart homes.

The aspects of authentication, authorization, trust, privacy, confidentiality, third-party

data, and access control are all intimately related to the categories and conclusions
outlined above.
There are a variety of approaches that can be used to deal with them. Digital signatures
and certifications are very useful for Internet of Things gadgets. Authentication can also
be achieved through the use of session keys and tokens (Skarmeta, Ramos, & Moreno,
2014). If you're using a certificate or a signature to prove your identity, you should
realise that most systems rely on a trusted third party, such a certificate authority, to
back up your claims. Password strength and regular password rotation, as detailed in
subsections 4.1 and 4.2, are also crucial.

It is challenging to immediately deploy complex IoT based solutions due to the fact that
the average person is not particularly tech knowledgeable (Anggorojati, 2015).
Therefore, it is clear that consumers need at least some elementary to intermediate
technical abilities to effectively manage accounts, access all data, and command smart
home gadgets. The capability-based approach for individuals using IoT devices is
emphasised by academic researchers (Gusmeroli, Piccione, & Rotondi, 2013).

People also worried about the security and privacy of their data. They had no idea what
information was being collected or from which device. To understand how their Internet
of Things product operates and makes use of their home network and other resources,
consumers should read the product description carefully. People should check the
encryption options available on their gadget. Most importantly,

The use of encryption and other cryptographic processes is a reliable means of

protecting users' privacy and the security of their smart home gadgets. are two common
approaches of protecting sensitive information from prying eyes. Both are applicable to
IoT gadgets. It was clear from the empirical findings of section 5.1 that people were
only interested in ease of use and what comfort it would bring, and that they were least
interested in knowing about the security mechanisms behind their devices, despite the
fact that each scheme has its own set of benefits and drawbacks (Bafandehkar, Yasin,
Mahmod, and Hanap, 2013).

Empirical data showed that people between the ages of 18 and 34 were the most tech
savvy, suggesting that these age groups would be interested in and actively seek out
devices that provide logins and entrance to devices via digital signatures and hash
functions (Gallagher and Kerry, 2013) to protect the security of their smart watches,
smart music systems, smart virtual assistants, smart lighting, and smart heating.

The sheer number of devices can leave consumers feeling bewildered and overwhelmed,
making it difficult to translate their needs into the appropriate smart device and building
trust in them before they've even made a purchase. The problem of trusting a man acting
as an agent arises here.

With the help of the Internet, smart devices may be accessed from any location at any
time thanks to the IoT. These gadgets rely on one another for communication, therefore
they have to be able to trust each other through an insecure Internet connection and use
protocols that introduce new security risks. There is a strong correlation between the IoT
architectural type and the trust-building process. People in Valby were using IVAs like
Alexa and Google to do things like set reminders, order food, control their lights with
Philips Hue, play music, and create shopping lists, but they didn't know what kind of
security risks they were taking. Learning how to establish and maintain trust in a
connected home setting is essential.

When consumers have faith in a product, it tends to sell better. Therefore, it is important
for people to learn about and enhance the ways in which smart home gadgets
communicate with one another and generate trust not just among themselves but also
with users (Pavlidis, 2011). Assumptions of trustworthiness should be avoided at all
costs.

Empirical data analysis revealed that all respondents utilised internet routers, with all
having modified their default passwords. In truth, they were making use of password
storage vaults, but they still weren't worried about the safety of the network that linked
their devices to the router. Most of them were only familiar with the router's built-in
firewalls and had no idea how crucial their home network was. People need to be made
aware of the issue, and it's not hard to set up stringent security measures for wireless
networks in the house.

The capacity to determine whether or not a device can be trusted over a network is
crucial from a security perspective (Bao et al., 2013) in IoT ecosystems, which often
consist of a large number of devices. Securing smart home devices over a home network
can be as easy as taking a few precautions. Some examples of these precautions include
using a separate network just for smart home devices, altering the router's default
company name, and using strong passwords and encryption. Make sure your wifi and
smart home gadgets are always up to date and that any unused features are turned off.
People place a high value on reducing their energy consumption. As the number of IoT
devices proliferates, however, they will need to appreciate the value of flexibility and
autonomy.

being sent out into the world and hooked up to the internet is continually growing. The
vast majority of existing security solutions and frameworks use a static approach to
protecting IoT devices, meaning that they always enforce the same technique regardless
of the environment in which the device is operating. However, this approach is limited
in scope and cannot prioritise security over energy savings (Hamdi and Abie, 2014).

Participants in the study who were middle-aged or older did not make optimal use of
their IoT devices. Those who were more interested in high-tech gadgets tended to be
younger. This may be the case because the advantages of using IoT devices are not
always well understood or are not always accurately reflected in their utilisation.
Therefore, for some demographics, the smart home IoT devices' subjective added value
remains unclear. Through a combination of research and analysis, we've learnt that
ensuring compatibility across devices made by different companies introduces
unpredictability and requires choosing between adaptability and deployment simplicity.
Because of the difficulty in establishing connections between IoT devices made by
various companies, their features often go unused.
Concerns about the participation of third parties in the collection and use of individuals'
personal data were validated. Only to a certain extent did people know that their smart
home devices were collecting data about them.

People of middle age and older were aware that Amazon and Google were constantly
monitoring their smart home devices in order to better their services. Third parties buy
this data for the purposes of advertising and sales. In other words, without any input
from the users of their intelligent virtual assistants (IVAs), Amazon and Google would
know when their gadget users are at home, when they go to sleep, and even what TV
stations they watch and when they watch them. The produced data would be reported in
real time, giving marketing and consumer goods firms insight into consumer habits and
preferences.

People generally don't worry much about keeping their smart device usage secure, even
if they have some basic security resiliency. Furthermore, high acquisition costs appear to
represent an additional obstacle for few of them, as does worry regarding the devices'
future security, especially in the context of rapid technical advancement.

1. "Google goes bilingual, Facebook fleshes out translation and TensorFlow is dope
~ And, Microsoft is assisting fish farmers in Japan". The Register.)

2. ( "Monitoring apps: How the Internet of Things can turn your boat into a smart
boat". Yachting World. 9 March 2020.)
3. ( H. Hosseinian and H. Damghani, “Smart home energy management, using IoT
system,” in 5th Conference on Knowledge Based Engineering and Innovation
(KBEI), IEEE, 2019.)
4. ( L. Damghani, H. Damghani, H. Hosseinian, H. Mohammadnezhad Shourkaei,
“Analytics in Internet of Things and BigData,” in 4th International Conference
on Combinatorics, Cryptography, Computer Science and Computation,
November 2019)
5. ( Mizokami, Kyle (7 July 2022). "This AI-Enabled Tech Allows Troops to See
Through Walls". Popular Mechanics. Retrieved 18 April 2023.111110
6. ( Prabadevi, B., N. Jeyanthi. Distributed denial of service attacks and its effects
on cloud environment: A survey. The 2014 International Symposium on
Networks, Computer and Communications, June 17– 19, 2014, Hammamet,
Tunisia, IEEE.)

7. ( Qinglin, Cao. Review of research on the Internet of Things. Software Guide,

2010, 9(5): 6–7. )( Rodrigo Roman, Jianying Zhou, Javier Lopez. On the features
and challenge of security and privacy in distributed Internet of Things. Computer
Networks, 2013, 57: 2266–2279. 255)
8. ( Qinglin, Cao. Review of research on the Internet of Things. Software Guide,
2010, 9(5))( Rodrigo Roman, Jianying Zhou, Javier Lopez. On the features and
challenge of security and privacy in distributed Internet of Things. Computer
Networks, 2013, 57: 2266–2279. 255)
9. ( Rodrigo Roman, Jianying Zhou, Javier Lopez. On the features and challenge of
security and privacy in distributed Internet of Things. Computer Networks, 2013,
57: 2266–2279.)
10. ( Sicari, S., Rizzardi, A., Grieco, L.A., Coen-Porisini, A. Security, privacy and
trust in Internet of Things: The road ahead. Computer Networks, 2015, 76: 146–
164)
11. ( Wang, Y.F., Lin, W.M., Zhang, T., Ma, Y.Y. Research on application and
security protection of Internet of Things in smart grid, Information IET
International Conference on Science and Control Engineering 2012 (ICISCE
2012), 2012, pp. 1–5, Shenzhen, China.)
12. ( Xingmei, Xu, Zhou Jing, Wang He. Research on the basic characteristics, the
key technologies, the network architecture and security problems of the Internet
of Things. 3rd International Conference on Computer Science and Network
Technology (ICCSNT), 2013, pp. 825–828.)( K. Naito, “A Survey on the
Internet-of-Things: Standards, Challenges, and Future Prospects,” Journal of
Information Processing, vol. 25, pp. 23–31, Jan 2017.)
13. ( "Internet of Battlefield Things (IOBT)". CCDC Army Research Laboratory.
Retrieved 31 October 2019.)
14. ( Alleven, Monica. "Sigfox launches IoT network in 10 UK cities". Fierce
Wireless Tech. Retrieved 13 May 2015.)
15. ( Chui, Michael; Löffler, Markus; Roberts, Roger. "The Internet of
Things". McKinsey Quarterly. McKinsey & Company. Archived from the
original on 14 March 2015. Retrieved 10 July 2014.)
16. ( Ujaley, Mohd (25 July 2018). "Cisco To Invest in Fiber Grid, IoT, Smart Cities
in Andhra Pradesh". ProQuest 1774166769.)
17. ("Army Takes on Wicked Problems With the Internet of Battlefield
Things". MeriTalk. 30 January 2018. Retrieved 31 October 2019.)
18. ("Connecting with consumers: The benefits - and dangers - of smart packaging
for the F&B industry". foodnavigator-asia.com. Retrieved 28 April 2020.)
19. ("DARPA Floats a Proposal for the Ocean of Things". MeriTalk. 3 January
2018. Retrieved 31 October 2019.)

20. ("Everything You Need to Know About IoT & Industrial Internet of Things".
Retrieved 5 July 2022)
21. ("San Jose Implements Intel Technology for a Smarter City". Intel Newsroom.
Retrieved 11 July 2014.)
22. ("Smart Trash". Postscapes. Retrieved 10 July 2014.)
23. ("STE Security Innovation Awards Honorable Mention: The End of the
Disconnect". securityinfowatch.com. Retrieved 12 August 2015.)
24. ("Western Singapore becomes test-bed for smart city solutions". Coconuts
Singapore. 19 June 2014. Retrieved 11 July 2014.)
25. ("What is HIE? | HealthIT.gov". www.healthit.gov. Reieved 21
January 2020). (Amiot, Emmanuel. "The Internet of Things. Disrupting
Traditional Business Models" (PDF). Oliver Wyman. Retrieved 14
October 2018.)
26. ("Which smart packaging technologies are readily available in 2018"
27. (^"FarmBeats: AI, Edge & IoT for Agriculture". Microsoft Research.
Retrieved 28 June 2021.)
28. (^"Molluscan eye". Archived from the original on 12 November 2016.
Retrieved 26 June 2015)
29. (“Shen Attack Cyber Risk Scenario: up to $110 billion at risk from maritime
malware attack,” University of Cambridge Center for Risk Studies, October
2019.)
30. (A vision for a city today, a city of vision tomorrow". Sino-Singapore
Guangzhou Knowledge City. Retrieved 11 July 2014.)
31. (Davies, Nicola. "How the Internet of Things will enable 'smart
buildings'". Extreme Tech.)
32. (Fitchard, Kevin (20 May 2014). "Sigfox brings its internet of things network to
San Francisco". Gigaom. Retrieved 15 May 2015.)
33. (Freeman, Mike (9 September 2015). "On-Ramp Wireless becomes Ingenu,
launches nationwide IoT network". SanDiegoUnionTribune.com. Retrieved 8
June 2019.)
34. (Gudeman, Kim (6 October 2017). "Next-Generation Internet of Battle things
(IoBT) Aims to Help Keep Troops and Civilians Safe". ECE Illinois.
Retrieved 31 October 2019.)
35. (H. Damghani and L. Damghani, “Security improvement of Common
Scrambling Algorithm (CSA) using the encryption extension technique,” in 16th
Iran Media Technology Exhibition & Conference (IMTEC2019), IEEE,
November 2019.)

36. (H. Damghani, “RFID Technology: Benefits and Applications,” Monthly Journal
of Transportation and Development, vol. 36, pp. 70–73, August 2010.)
37. (H. Damghani, H. Hosseinian, and L. Damghani, “Investigating attacks to
improve security and privacy in RFID systems using the security bit method,” in
5th Conference on Knowledge Based Engineering and Innovation (KBEI), IEEE,
2019.)
38. (H. Damghani, H. Hosseinian, and L. Damghani, “Investigating attacks to
improve security and privacy in RFID systems using the security bit method,” in
5th Conference on Knowledge Based Engineering and Innovation (KBEI), IEEE,
2019)
39. (H. Damghani, H. Hosseinian, and L. Damghani, “Overview of security aspects
for LTE and LTE-A networks,” in 14th Media Technology Conference, Islamic
Republic of Iran Broadcasting, Tehran, Iran, December 2017.)
40. (Higginbotham, Stacey. "A group of wireless execs aim to build a nationwide
network for the Internet of things". Fortune.com. Retrieved 8 June 2019.)
41. (How to make smart packaging even smarter". Packaging Digest. 4 June 2018.
Retrieved 28 April 2020.)
42. (https://www.globaltrademag.com/7-iot-and-ot-cyber-risks-in-the-transportation-
industry/)

43. (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/272943881)
44. (https://www.teletracnavman.com/fleet-management-software/telematics/
resources/iot-in-transportation-logistics-the-ultimate-guide#:~:text=IoT%20in
%20the%20transport%20and,platform%20via%20secure%20cellular
%20networks.)

45. (Lipsky, Jessica. "IoT Clash Over 900 MHz Options". EETimes. Retrieved 15

May 2015.)

46. (Muniyandy, Elangovan & B., Yuvan & R, Govindram & R., Vigneshwar.
(2021). Weapon Detection System in Remotely Operated ASV. International
Research Journal on Advanced Science Hub. 3. 34-37.
10.47392/irjash.2021.246.)
47. (Parello, J.; Claise, B.; Schoening, B.; Quittek, J. (28 April 2014). "Energy
Management Framework". IETF.)
48. (Peng, Xi, Zheng Wu, Debao Xiao, Yang Yu. Study on security management
architecture for sensor network based on intrusion detection. 2009 International
Conference on Networks Security, Wireless Communications and Trusted
Computing, IEEE, New York.)

49. (Qazi Mamoon Ashraf, Mohamed Hadi Habaebi. Autonomic schemes for threat
mitigation in Internet of Things. Journal of Network and Computer Applications,
2015, 49: 112–127)
50. (Rolf H. Weber. Internet of Things—New security and privacy challenges.
Computer Law and Security Review, 2010, 26: 23–30.)
51. (Rolf H. Weber. Internet of Things—New security and privacy challenges.
Computer Law and Security Review, 2010, 26: 23–30. )(H. Damghani, “RFID
Technology: Benefits and Applications,” Monthly Journal of Transportation and
Development, vol. 36, pp. 70–73, August 2010.)
52. (Severi, S.; Abreu, G.; Sottile, F.; Pastrone, C.; Spirito, M.; Berens, F. (23–26
June 2014). "M2M Technologies: Enablers for a Pervasive Internet of
Things". The European Conference on Networks and Communications
(EUCNC2014).^"Industrialized Construction in Academia" (PDF). Autodesk.)
53. (Sicari, S., Rizzardi, A., Grieco, L.A., Coen-Porisini, A. Security, privacy and
trust in Internet of Things: The road ahead. Computer Networks, 2015, 76: 146–
164. )

54. (Vasisht, Deepak; Kapetanovic, Zerina; Won, Jongho; Jin, Xinxin; Chandra,
Ranveer; Sinha, Sudipta; Kapoor, Ashish; Sudarshan, Madhusudhan; Stratman,
Sean (2017). FarmBeats: An IoT Platform for Data-Driven Agriculture. pp. 515–
529. ISBN 978-1-931971-37-9).
55. ^ Xie, Xiao-Feng; Wang, Zun-Jing (2017). "Integrated in-vehicle decision
support system for driving at signalized intersections: A prototype of smart IoT
in transportation". Transportation Research Board (TRB) Annual Meeting,
Washington, DC, USA.
56. ^"Key Applications of the Smart IoT to Transform Transportation". 20
September 2016.
57. Aburukba, R., Al-Ali, A. R., Kandil, N., & AbuDamis, D. (2016). Configurable
ZigBee-based control system for people with multiple disabilities in smart
homes. 2016 International Conference on Industrial Informatics and Computer
Systems (CIICS), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCSII.2016.7462435

58. Bhattacherjee, A. 2012. Social science research: Principles, methods, and

practices.

59. Borgohain, T., Kumar, U. And Sanyal, S. 2015. Survey of security and
 privacy issues of internet of things, Xiv:1501.02211.
60. Burgess, R.G. 1982. In the Field: An Introduction to Field Research. London:
Unwin Hyman.
61. Chen, C., Li, M., Ferreira, A., Huang, J., & Cai, R. (2020). A Copy-Proof
Scheme Based on the Spectral and Spatial Barcoding Channel Models. IEEE
Transactions on Information Forensics and Security, 15, 1056–1071.
https://doi.org/10.1109/TIFS.2019.2934861
62. Creswell, J. W. 2017. Research Design – Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed
Methods Approaches (4th ed). [e-book] London: SAGE, 273 pages.
63. da Costa, C. A., Pasluosta, C. F., Eskofier, B., da Silva, D. B., & da Rosa Righi,
R. (2018). Internet of Health Things: Toward intelligent vital signs monitoring in
hospital wards. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, 89, 61–69.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artmed.2018.05.005
64. De Villiers, M.R. 2005. ”Three approaches as pillars for interpretive information
systems research: development research, action research and grounded theory.”
In Proceedings of the 2005 annual research conference of the South African
institute of computer scientists and information technologists on IT research in
developing countries (pp. 142-151).
65. Demiris, G., & Hensel, B. K. (2008). Technologies for an Aging Society: A
Systematic Review of “Smart Home” Applications. Yearbook of Medical
Informatics, 17(01), 33–40. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0038-1638580
66. Dey, N., Hassanien, A. E., Bhatt, C., Ashour, A. S., & Satapathy, S. C. (Eds.).
(2018). Internet of Things and Big Data Analytics Toward Next-Generation
Intelligence (Vol. 30). Springer International Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60435-0
67. Dincer, C., Bruch, R., Kling, A., Dittrich, P. S., & Urban, G. A. (2017).
Multiplexed Point-of-Care Testing – xPOCT. Trends in Biotechnology, 35(8),
728–742. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibtech.2017.03.013
68. Doshi, K., Yilmaz, Y., & Uludag, S. (2021). Timely Detection and Mitigation of
Stealthy DDoS Attacks via IoT Networks. IEEE Transactions on Dependable and
Secure Computing, 1–1. https://doi.org/10.1109/TDSC.2021.3049942
69. Engineer, A., Sternberg, E. M., & Najafi, B. (2018a). Designing Interiors to
Mitigate Physical and Cognitive Deficits Related to Aging and to Promote
Longevity in Older Adults: A Review. Gerontology, 64(6), 612–622.
https://doi.org/10.1159/000491488
70. Engineer, A., Sternberg, E. M., & Najafi, B. (2018b). Designing Interiors to
Mitigate Physical and Cognitive Deficits Related to Aging and to Promote
Longevity in Older Adults: A Review. Gerontology, 64(6), 612–622.
https://doi.org/10.1159/000491488
71. Gatouillat, A., Badr, Y., Massot, B., & Sejdic, E. (2018). Internet of Medical
Things: A Review of Recent Contributions Dealing With Cyber-Physical
Systems in Medicine. IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 5(5), 3810–3822.
https://doi.org/10.1109/JIOT.2018.2849014
72. Goyal, P., Sahoo, A. K., Sharma, T. K., & Singh, P. K. (2021). Internet of Things:
Applications, security and privacy: A survey. Materials Today: Proceedings, 34,
752–759. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.04.737
73. Grell, M., Dincer, C., Le, T., Lauri, A., Nunez Bajo, E., Kasimatis, M.,
Barandun, G., Maier, S. A., Cass, A. E. G., & Güder, F. (2019). Autocatalytic
Metallization of Fabrics Using Si Ink, for Biosensors, Batteries and Energy
Harvesting. Advanced Functional Materials, 29(1), 1804798.
https://doi.org/10.1002/adfm.201804798
74. Guba, Egon, G., Lincoln, and Yvonna, S. 1998. Competing paradigms in
qualitative research. In Norman K. Denzin & Yvonna S. Lincoln (Eds.), The
landscape of qualitative research (pp.195-220). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
75. Gubbi, J., Buyya, R., Marusic, S., & Palaniswami, M. (2013). Internet of Things
(IoT): A vision, architectural elements, and future directions. Future Generation
Computer Systems, 29(7), 1645–1660.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2013.01.010
76. Haase, J., Alahmad, M., Nishi, H., Ploennigs, J., & Tsang, K. F. (2016). The IOT
mediated built environment: A brief survey. 2016 IEEE 14th International
Conference on Industrial Informatics (INDIN), 1065–1068.
https://doi.org/10.1109/INDIN.2016.7819322
77. Harling, K. 2002. An Overview of Case Study. Agricultural Economics, 4, 1-7.

78. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_of_things#cite_note-Linux_Things-1
79. Hughes-Wilson, J. (2017). The Secret State. Simon and Schuster.
80. Istepanian, R. S. H., Hu, S., Philip, N. Y., & Sungoor, A. (2011a). The potential
of Internet of m-health Things “m-IoT” for non-invasive
glucose level sensing. 2011 Annual International Conference of the IEEE
Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, 5264–5266.
https://doi.org/10.1109/IEMBS.2011.6091302

81. Istepanian, R. S. H., Hu, S., Philip, N. Y., & Sungoor, A. (2011b). The potential
of Internet of m-health Things “m-IoT” for non-invasive
glucose level sensing. 2011 Annual International Conference of the IEEE
Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, 5264–5266.
https://doi.org/10.1109/IEMBS.2011.6091302
82. Kang, W. M., Moon, S. Y., & Park, J. H. (2017). An enhanced security
framework for home appliances in smart home. Human-Centric Computing and
Information Sciences, 7(1), 6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13673-017-0087-4
83. Karlgren, J., Fahlén, L. E., Wallberg, A., Hansson, P., Ståhl, O., Söderberg, J., &
Åkesson, K.-P. (n.d.). Socially Intelligent Interfaces for Increased Energy
Awareness in the Home. In The Internet of Things (pp. 263–275). Springer
Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-78731-0_17
84. Kricka, L. J. (2019). History of disruptions in laboratory medicine: what have we
learned from predictions? Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM),
57(3), 308–311. https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2018-0518
85. Kvale, S. 2006. Dominance through interviews and dialogues. Qualitative
inquiry, 12(3), pp.480-500
86. Laplante, P. A., Kassab, M., Laplante, N. L., & Voas, J. M. (2018). Building
Caring Healthcare Systems in the Internet of Things. IEEE Systems Journal,
12(3), 3030–3037. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSYST.2017.2662602
87. Lee and Liebenau. 1997. Information Systems and Qualitative Research. ©
Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1997
88. Li, S., Wang, H., Xu, T., & Zhou, G. (2011). Application Study on Internet of
Things in Environment Protection Field (pp. 99–106).
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-25992-0_13
89. Li, Y., & Liu, Q. (2021). A comprehensive review study of cyber-attacks and
cyber security; Emerging trends and recent developments. Energy Reports, 7,
8176–8186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2021.08.126
90. Lu Tan, & Neng Wang. (2010). Future internet: The Internet of Things. 2010 3rd
International Conference on Advanced Computer Theory and
Engineering(ICACTE), V5-376-V5-380.
https://doi.org/10.1109/ICACTE.2010.5579543
91. Lv, W., Meng, F., Zhang, C., Lv, Y., Cao, N., & Jiang, J. (2017). A General
Architecture of IoT System. 22017 IEEE International Conference on
Computational Science and Engineering (CSE) and IEEE International
Conference on Embedded and Ubiquitous Computing (EUC), 659–664.
https://doi.org/10.1109/CSE-EUC.2017.124
92. Mahmud, K., Town, G. E., Morsalin, S., & Hossain, M. J. (2018a). Integration of
electric vehicles and management in the internet of energy. Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews, 82, 4179–4203.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.11.004
93. Mahmud, K., Town, G. E., Morsalin, S., & Hossain, M. J. (2018b). Integration of
electric vehicles and management in the internet of energy. Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews, 82, 4179–4203.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.11.004
94. Mattern, F., & Flörkemeier, C. (2010). Vom Internet der Computer zum Internet
der Dinge. Informatik-Spektrum, 33(2), 107–121.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00287-010-0417-7
95. Meola, A. (20 December 2016). "Why IoT, big data & smart farming are the
future of agriculture". Business Insider. Insider, Inc. Retrieved 26 July 2018.
96. Mishra, A., Alzoubi, Y. I., Gill, A. Q., & Anwar, M. J. (2022). Cybersecurity
Enterprises Policies: A Comparative Study. Sensors, 22(2), 538.
https://doi.org/10.3390/s22020538
97. Mulvenna, M., Hutton, A., Coates, V., Martin, S., Todd, S., Bond, R., &
Moorhead, A. (2017). Views of Caregivers on the Ethics of Assistive Technology
Used for Home Surveillance of People Living with Dementia. Neuroethics,
10(2), 255–266. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-017-9305-z
98. Nguyen, K. T., Laurent, M., & Oualha, N. (2015). Survey on secure
communication protocols for the Internet of Things. Ad Hoc Networks, 32, 17–
31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adhoc.2015.01.006
99. of things – Need for a new legal environment? Computer Law & Security
Review, 25(6), 522–527. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2009.09.002
100. Patton, M., Gross, E., Chinn, R., Forbis, S., Walker, L. and Chen, H.
2014. Uninvited connections: A study of vulnerable devices on the internet of
things (iot), _ in Intelligence and Security Informatics Conference (JISIC), IEEE
Joint. IEEE, 2014, pp. 232_235.
101. Reference
102. Scuotto, V., Ferraris, A., & Bresciani, S. (2016). Internet of Things.
Business Process Management Journal, 22(2), 357–367.
https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-05-2015-0074
103. Shafiq, M., Gu, Z., Cheikhrouhou, O., Alhakami, W., & Hamam, H.
(2022). The Rise of “Internet of Things”: Review and Open Research Issues
Related to Detection and Prevention of IoT-Based Security Attacks. Wireless
Communications and Mobile Computing, 2022, 1–12.
https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/8669348
104. Strauss, A. 1991. A personal history of the development of grounded
theory. Qualitative Family Research5(2) (1991).1–2
105. Swa Borgohain, T., Kumar, U. And Sanyal, S. 2015. Survey of security
and privacy issues of internet of things, Xiv:1501.02211.n, M. (2012). Sensor
Mania! The Internet of Things, Wearable Computing, Objective Metrics, and the
Quantified Self 2.0. Journal of Sensor and Actuator Networks, 1(3), 217–253.
https://doi.org/10.3390/jsan1030217
106. Weber, R. H. (2009). Internet Borgohain, T., Kumar, U. And Sanyal, S.
2015. Survey of security and privacy issues of internet o Borgohain, T., Kumar,
 U. And Sanyal, S. 2015. Survey of security and privacy issues of internet of
things, Xiv:1501.02211.f things, Xiv:1501.02211.
107. Weiser, M. (1999). The computer for the 21 st
century. ACM
SIGMOBILE Mobile Computing and Communications Review, 3(3), 3–11.
https://doi.org/10.1145/329124.329126
108. Zhang, Q. (2015). Precision Agriculture Technology for Crop Farming.
CRC Press. pp. 249–58. ISBN 9781482251081
109. (“All four of the world’s largest shipping companies have now been hit
by cyber-attacks,” ZDNet, September 2020.)
110. Gubbi, J. Buyya, R. Marusic, S. Palaniswami, M. 2013. Internet of Things (IoT):
A vision, architectural elements, and future direction. Future Generation Computer
Systems, 29(7 Sept. 2013), pp. 1645-60.
111. (Vulnerability and resilience of transportation systems: A recent ....
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378437121005082.)
112. (Top IoT security issues and challenges (2022) – Thales.
https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/markets/digital-identity-and-security/iot/
magazine/internet-threats.)
113. ( A Vulnerability Assessment Approach for Transportation Networks ... -
MDPI. https://www.mdpi.com/1999-5903/15/3/100.)( Internet of Things Based
Solutions for Transport Network Vulnerability ....
https://www.techscience.com/cmc/v65n3/40184.)
114. (High-Tech Highways - Security News - Trend Micro.
https://www.trendmicro.com/vinfo/us/security/news/internet-of-things/high-tech-
highways-securing-the-future-of-transportation.)(Internet of Things: An
Opportunity in Transportation Industry
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/357631576_Internet_of_Things_An_O
pportunity_in_Transportation_Industry.)
115. (https://www.techtarget.com/searchsecurity/definition/cybersecurity
116. (https://www.cm-alliance.com/cybersecurity-blog/iot-security-5-cyber-
attacks-caused-by-iot-security-vulnerabilities)
117. Soullie, A. 2014. "Industrial control systems: Pentesting PLCs 101", BlackHat
Europe.
118. Perera, C., Ranjan, R., Wang, L., Khan, S.U. and Zomaya, A.Y. 2015. Big data
privacy in the internet of things era. IT Professional, 17(3), pp.32-39.
119. Al-Fuqaha, A., Guizani, M., Mohammadi, M., Aledhari, M. and Ayyash, M. 2015.
Internet of Things: a survey on enabling technologies, protocols, and applications. IEEE
Communications Surveys & Tutorials, 17(4), pp.2347-2376.

120.