Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

A neutrosophic AHP-based computational technique for security management in a fog computing network

  • Published:
The Journal of Supercomputing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Internet-enabled devices are deployed by individuals for almost every task. The concept of cloud computing has proven to be beneficial for users as the processing, storage and analysis of data are performed at the cloud level. However, in the case of latency-sensitive applications, the notion is called-off as the overall response time is high. In this situation, fog computing outperforms the cloud. With fog computing, the necessary computations are performed at the edge of the network, and thus, latency is highly reduced. In parallel, the increase in smart devices around the globe has led to a considerable increase in sensitive user data across the Web, which needs to be secured. Furthermore, multidimensional security depends on various factors whose prioritization plays an important role in addressing security issues. In this context, the authors identify various fog computing security factors and their corresponding subfactors. The identified factors are evaluated for their impact on security at the fog level through the neutrosophic-analytical hierarchy process. Moreover, to corroborate the effectiveness of the proposed technique, the results obtained are compared to the results from conventional approaches such as Fuzzy-AHP and Classical-AHP and are found to be statistically correlated. The proposed mechanism can be used by security practitioners to systematically manage fog computing security factors.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

Data availability

Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.

References

  1. “IDC: Analyze the Future”. Available online at: https://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerld prUS45213219 [Accessed: 25/06/2021]

  2. Mouradian C, Naboulsi D, Yangui S, Glitho RH, Morrow MJ, Polakos PA (2017) A comprehensive survey on fog computing state-of-the-art and research challenges. IEEE Commun Surv Tutorials 20(1):416–464

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bonomi F, Milito R, Zhu J, Addepalli S (2012) Fog computing and its role in the internet of things. In: Proceedings of the first edition of the MCC workshop on mobile cloud computing pp 13–16

  4. Puthal D, Obaidat MS, Nanda P, Prasad M, Mohanty SP, Zomaya AY (2018) Secure and sustainable load balancing of edge data centers in fog computing. IEEE Commun Mag 56(5):60–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Verma R, Chandra S (2019) Security and privacy Issues in fog driven IoT Environment. Int J Comput Sci Eng 7(5):367–370

    Google Scholar 

  6. Verma R, Chandra S (2020) A systematic survey on fog steered IoT: architecture, prevalent threats and trust models. Int J Wirel Inform Netw. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10776-020-00499-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Kaur J, Agrawal A, Khan RA (2020) Security issues in fog environment: a systematic literature review. Int J Wirel Inf Networks 27:467483

    Google Scholar 

  8. Choo KKR, Lu R, Chen L, Yi X (2018) A foggy research future: advances and future opportunities in fog computing research. Future Gener Comput Syst. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2017.09.014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Kaur J, Agrawal A, Khan RA (2020) Security assessment in foggy era through analytical hierarchy process. In: 2020 11th International Conference on Computing, Communication and Networking Technologies (ICCCNT) pp 1–6. IEEE

  10. Pei S, Radovanovi M, Ivanovi M, Badica C, Toi M, Ikovi O, Bokovi D (2019) CAAVI-RICS model for analyzing the security of fog computing systems. International symposium on intelligent and distributed computing. Springer, Cham, pp 23–34

    Google Scholar 

  11. Ogundoyin SO, Kamil IA (2020) A Fuzzy-AHP based prioritization of trust criteria in fog computing services. Appl Soft Comput 97:106789

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Singh V, Pandey D, Sahu K, Khan MW (2020) Optimizing the impact of security attributes in requirement elicitation techniques using FAHP. Communications 14:15

    Google Scholar 

  13. Alenei M, Pandey AK, Verma R, Faizan M, Chandra S, Agrawal A, Kumar R, Khan RA (2021) Evaluating the impact of software security tactics: a design perspective. CMC-Comput Mater Continua 66(3):2283–2299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Al-Zahrani FA (2020) Evaluating the usable-security of healthcare software through unified technique of fuzzy logic, ANP and TOPSIS. IEEE Access 8:109905–109916

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Zadeh LA (1965) Fuzzy sets. Inform Control 8(3):338–353

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Abdullah L (2013) Fuzzy multi criteria decision making and its applications: a brief review of category. Procedia Soc Behav Sci 97:131–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Lupiez FG (2017) On neutrosophic sets and topology. Procodia Comput Sci 120:975–982

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Radwan NM, Senousy MB, Alaa El Din MR (2016) Neutrosophic AHP multi criteria decision making method applied on the selection of learning management system. Infinite Study

  19. Nabeeh NA, Abdel-Basset M, El-Ghareeb HA, Aboelfetouh A (2019) Neutrosophic multi-criteria decision-making approach for iot-based enterprises. IEEE Access 7:59559–59574

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kahraman C, Otay-stayi B, Onar S (2019) An integrated AHP & DEA methodology with neutrosophic sets. Fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making using neutrosophic sets. Springer, Cham, pp 623–645

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Alava MV, Delgado Figueron SP, Blum Aleivar HM, Loyva Vazquez MY (2018) Single valued neutrosophic numbers and analytic hierarchy process for project selection. Neutrosophic Sets and Systems 21(1):13

    Google Scholar 

  22. Abdel-Basset M, Mohamed M, Zhou Y, Hezam L (2017) Multi-criteria group decision making based on neutrosophic analytic hierarchy process. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 33(6):4055–4066

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Edge computing vs. fog computing: Definitions and enterprise uses. Available online at: https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/enterprise-networks/edge-compating.html [Accessed: 28/07/2021]

  24. Mukherjee M, Matam R, Shu L, Maglaras L, Ferrag MA, Choudhury N, Kumar V (2017) Security and privacy in fog computing: challenges. IEEE Access 5:19293–19304

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Ni J, Zhang K, Lin X, Shen XS (2017) Securing fog computing for internet of things applications: challenges and solutions. IEEE Commun Surv Tutor 20(1):601–628

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Singh SP, Nayyar A, Kumar R, Sharma A (2019) Fog computing: from architecture to edge computing and big data processing. J Supercomput 75(4):2070–2105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Zhang P, Zhou M, Fortino G (2018) Security and trust issues in fog computing A survey. Futur Gener Comput Syst 88:16–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Kaur J, Verma R, Alharbe NR, Agrawal A, Khan RA (2020) Importance of fog computing in healthcare 4.0.7. In: Fog computing for healthcare 4.0 environments. Springer, Cham pp 79–101

  29. Erdoan M, Karaan A, Kaya Budak A, olak M (2019) A fuzzy based MCDM methodology for risk evaluation of cyber security technologies. In: International Conference on Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems. Springer, Cham, pp 1042–1049

  30. Hinduja A, Pandey M (2020) An ANP-GRA-based evaluation model for security features of loT systems. Intelligent communication, control and devices. Springer, Singapore, pp 243–253

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  31. Turkis Z, Goranin N, Nurusheva A, Boranbayev S (2019) Information security risk assessment in critical infrastructure: a hybrid MCDM approach. Informatica 30(1):187–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Oh J, Lee U, Lee K (2019) Usability evaluation model for biometric system considering privacy concern based on MCDM model. Secur Commun Netw. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/8715264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Kaušpadienė L, Ramanauskaitė S, Čenys A (2019) Information security management framework suitability estimation for small and medium enterprise. Infinite Study

  34. Bhol SG, Mohanty JR, Pattoaik PK (2120) Cyber security metrics evaluation using multi-criteria decision-making approach in smart intelligent computing and applications. Springer, Singapore, pp 665–675

  35. Sahin R, Yüder M (2014) A multi-criteria neutrosophic group decision making method based TOPSIS for supplier selection arXiv preprint arXiv:1112.5077

  36. Biswas P, Pramatok S, Gin BC (2016) TOPSIS method for multi-attribute group decision-making under singh-valond neutrosophie environment. Neural Comput Appl 27(3):727–737

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Abdel-Basset M, Mohamed M, Smarandache F (2018) An extension of neutrosophic AHPSWOT analysis for strategic planning and decision-making. Symmetry 10(4):116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Abdel-Basset M, Manogaran G, Mohamed M, Chilamkurti N (2018) Three-way decisions based on neutrosophic sets and AHP-QFD framework for supplier selection problem. Futur Gener Comput Syst 89:19–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Tey DJY, Gan YF, Selvachandran G, Quek SG, Smarandache F, Abdel-Basset M, Long HV (2019) A novel neutrosophic data analytic hierarchy process for multi-criteria decision-making method: a case study in Kuala Lumpur stock exchange. IEEE Access 7:53687–53697

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Kahraman C, Oztaysi B, Cevik Onar S (2020) Single & interval-valued neutrosophic AHP methods: Performance analysis of outsourcing law firms. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 38(1):749–759

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Abdel-Basset M, Manogaran G, Mohamed M (2019) A neutrosophic theory-based security approach for fog and mobile-edge computing. Comput Netw 157:122–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. "Digital trends 2022: Every single stat you need to know about the Internet". Available online at: https://datareportal.com/reporta/digital-2022-global-overview-report [Accessed: 22/05/2022]

  43. Xue K, Hong J, Ma Y, Wel DS, Hong P, Yu N (2018) Fog-aided verifiable privacy preserving access control for latency-sensitive data sharing in vehicular cloud computing. IEEE Network 32(3):7–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Fan K, Xu H, Gao L, Li H, Yang Y (2019) Efficient and privacy preserving access control scheme for fog-enabled loT. Futur Gener Comput Syst 99:134–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Alazeb A, Panda B (2019) Ensuring data integrity in fog computing based health care systems. In: International Conference on Security, Privacy and Anonymity in Com putation, Communication and Storage. Springer, Cham, pp 63–77

  46. Dang TD, Hoang D (2017) A data protection model for fog computing. In: 2017 Second International Conference on Fog and Mobile Edge Computing (FMÉC) pp 32–38. IEEE

  47. Mukherjee M, Ferrag MA, Maglaras L, Derhab A, Anzam M (2020) Security and privacy issues and solutions for fog. In: Fog and fogonomics: challenges and practices of fog computing, communication, networking, strategy, and economics

  48. Almogren AS (2020) Intrusion detection in edge-of-things computing. J Parallel Distrib Comput 137:259–265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Smarandache F (1998) Neutrosophy: neutrosophic probability, set, and logic: analytic synthesis & synthetic analysis

  50. Ye J (2014) A multicriteria decision-making method using aggregation operators for simplified neutrosophic sets. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems 26(5):2459–2466

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  51. Sahin R, Yigider M (2014) "A Multi-criteria neutrosophic group decision making method based TOPSIS for supplier selection" arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.5077

  52. Ye J (2015) An extended TOPSIS method for multiple attribute group decision making based on single valued neutrosophic linguistic numbers. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 28(1):247–255

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  53. Correlation (Pearson, Kendall. Spearman Available online https://www.statisticssolutions.com/correlation-pearson-kendall-spearman/ (Accessed on: 09/08/2021)

  54. Kline P (1999) The handbook of psychological testing, 2nd edn. Routledge, London, England

    Google Scholar 

  55. Alexa and Google Home Devices Have Been Eavesdropping on Us, Again! Available on line at: https://www.pentasecurity.com/blog/top-5-shocking-lot-security-breaches-2019/ (Accessed: 15/07/2021)

  56. Hackers can Steal Your Identity and Bank Details from a Coffee Machine. Available online at: http://www.cisomag.com/10-iot-security incidents-that-make-you-feel-less-secure/ (Accessed: 15/07/2021)

  57. Wang H, Smarandache F, Zhang Y, Sunderraman R (2010) Single valued neutrosophic sets. Infinite study

  58. Kaur J, Agrawal A, Khan RA (2022) A fuzzy AHP approach for prioritizing fog computing security parameters. In: Proceedings of First International Conference on Computational Electronics for Wireless Communications. Springer, Singapore, pp 535–543

  59. Kaur J, Agrawal A, Khan RA (2022) Encryfuscation: a model for preserving data and location privacy in Fog based IoT scenario. J King Saud Univ-Comput Inform Sci. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jksuci.2022.03.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Information Technology, Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar University (A Central University), Lucknow, India

    Jasleen Kaur, Alka Agrawal & Raees Ahmad Khan

  2. Centre for Innovation and Technology, Administrative Staff College of India, Hyderabad, India

    Rajeev Kumar

Authors
  1. Jasleen Kaur
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rajeev Kumar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alka Agrawal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Raees Ahmad Khan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jasleen Kaur.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there lies no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kaur, J., Kumar, R., Agrawal, A. et al. A neutrosophic AHP-based computational technique for security management in a fog computing network. J Supercomput 79, 295–320 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-022-04674-2

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-022-04674-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation