Blockchain for IoT Security and Privacy: Smart Home

Shivam Taneja, Ishita Rana, Divyansh Gupta, Vardaan Kapahi

Abstract – The security and privacy of the Internet of Things (IoT) remains a major
challenge, due to the large scale and widespread nature of IoT networks. While blockchain-
based methods offer extended security and privacy, they come at a high cost in terms of
power, latency, and computational overhead, making them unsuitable for most IoT-
compressed devices. The key features and functions of the smart home tier are described in
this paper. Each smart home is equipped with a "miner," a high-performance device that stays
online and handles all communications inside and outside the home. In addition, the miner
keeps BC secret and secure in order to control and monitor communications.

1. INTRODUCTION
Of all the available data security and privacy technologies, the blockchain is the most
efficient due to its architecture such as durability and retrieval. Blockchain is not compatible
with data modification [1]. Internet of Things (IoT) contains tools that generate, process, and
exchange large amounts of valuable data and security data and sensitive information, and that
is why they are attractive targets for various cyber attacks [2].
Blockchain is a distributed, flexible ledger that enables recorded transactions and tracking of
assets. In a blockchain network, virtually anything with value can be tracked and sold,
reducing risk and reducing costs for all victims.
Traditional security methods are often more expensive for IoT in terms of power
consumption and overhead processing. In addition, many high-level security frameworks are
located in the same location and therefore do not qualify for IoT due to the complexity of the
scale, multiple environments in one traffic, and one point of failure [3].
Blockchain uses both a separate and distributed structure as well as cryptographic structures,
making it work in a unique way. Blockchain technology is appealing where security and
confidentiality of information is a priority for the network. In IoT, access control can be
effectively achieved through blockchain [4].
The shared ledger provided by Blockchain to record Bitcoin transactions can be used to
record any transaction and track the movement of any asset, whether physical, intangible, or
digital. Blockchain, for example, allows securities to be resolved in minutes rather than days.
It is also used to assist businesses in controlling the delivery of goods and related payments,
as well as to allow manufacturers to share production logs with OEMs and regulators to
reduce product memory.
Each node can receive or send a function to other nodes, and the data is synced as it travels
across the network. Because it eliminates duplication of effort and eliminates the need for
intermediaries, the blockchain network is expensive and efficient. And it is less dangerous
because it verifies data using compatible models. Jobs are safe, secure, and guaranteed. Both
transaction systems have the same participants. What is different now is that the work record
is shared and accessible to all stakeholders.
The following are the key features of a blockchain network:
»Consensus: For the work to work, all stakeholders must agree on your legitimacy.
»Example: Participants know where the property came from and how ownership has changed
over time.
»Consistency: No participant may interfere with the action after the recording of the book. If
the action is incorrect, the new function should be used to undo the error, and then both
actions will be detected.
»Lastly: One book, assigned provides one destination to determine property ownership or
termination of employment.

The network of mobile devices, automobiles, household appliances, and other embedded
electronic devices, software, sensors, and connections to allow them to connect and exchange
data is called Internet of Things (IoT).
Today, blockchain technology is gaining the attention of researchers and scientists for a
variety of reasons, including access control, data security, privacy, and wireless
segmentation. While the blockchain offers a number of benefits such as peer-to-peer
technology, anonymity, volume boost, and improved security, its consistent design is the
main reason for its popularity. Due to its distributed nature, the blockchain can be used as an
important technology to eliminate the role of a trusted third party within connected networks.
The most popular blockchain platforms are presented by IBM Blockchain, Ethereum, and
multichain. The aforementioned review paper describes and analyzes blockchain-based
security measures to control IoT access, automotive ad networks, health care, and supply
chain management. An in-depth study of blockchain use cases will serve as a complex tool
for researchers looking to conduct advanced research in the field of blockchain technology.

The basic principle of operation behind these algorithms is given below:

i. Proof of Work (PoW) In PoW, additional computer nodes control the network.
ii. Stack Proof (PoS) In PoS, high-density nodes control a network.
iii. Proof of Authority (PoA) In PoA, the randomly selected nodes control the network.
iv. Proof of the Elapsed Time (PoET) In PoET, nodes complete a waiting period that control
the network.
v. Delegated Proof of Stake(DPoS) In DPoS, Nodes are chosen by voting messengers who
control the network.

Fig 1 Most Popular Consensus Algorithms

 Fig 2 General workflow of Blockchain
The growing popularity of communication and network technology has led to significant
growth in IoT research. Connecting different smart devices online offers many benefits such
as data sharing, easy access, and remote monitoring [5].
One of the major problems IoT faces is its central client-server model. Lack of trust between
different participating devices may result in failure of all network operations, so a reliable
solution is needed to avoid this problem. In recent years, a number of methods have been
proposed, in which the blockchain gains popularity due to its structural features such as
isolation, security, and flexibility.

2. PROPOSED SOLUTION FOR SMART HOME SECURITY

IoT research has exploded due to the proliferation of growing objects in communications and
networking technology. Connecting different smart devices over the Internet has many
advantages, including data sharing, ease of access, and remote monitoring.
The centralized structure of IoT, which is based on the client–server model, is one of the most
serious issues. Because a lack of trust among participating devices can cause the entire
network to fail, a dependable solution is needed to avoid this issue. In recent years, several
approaches have been proposed, with blockchain gaining traction due to its decentralized
structure, security, and immutability.
The contribution of this paper is to provide an in-depth discussion of the details of the smart
home category in our design. We first outline how IoT devices are developed and then
explain how transactions work. Local and private Blockchain are used to provide secure
access control over IoT devices and their data.

Fig 3 Overview of the proposed BC-based architecture discussed in more details in [6].
 Fig 4 Overview of Smart Home: The smart home consists of IoT Devices, local storage, the
miner, and the local Blockchain.
Design security comes from a variety of factors including: (1) indirectly accessible devices;
and (2) the various functional structures of a smart home and overlay. To achieve lightweight
security, symmetric encryption is used on smart home devices. We provide relevant
arguments to show how the smart home class achieves privacy, integrity, and accessibility
and also discusses how important security attacks such as interconnected attacks [7] and
Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) are thwarted.
The main smart home components as shown in the Figure 4 are as follows -
A. Transactions –
Communications between local devices or overlay nodes are known as transactions.
There are different transactions in the BC-based smart home each designed for a
specific function. Store transaction is generated by devices to store data. Lightweight
hashing [9] is employed to detect any change in transactions’ content during
transmission. All transactions to or from the smart home are stored in a local private
Blockchain (BC).

B. Local Blockchain –
In each smart home, there is a local private BC that keeps track of transactions and
has a policy header to enforce users’ policy for incoming and outgoing transactions.
Starting from the genesis transaction, each device’s transactions are chained together
as an immutable ledger in the BC. Each block in the local BC contains two headers
that are block header and policy header as shown at the top of Figure 4. The block
header has the hash of the previous block to keep the BC immutable. The policy
header is used for authorizing devices and enforcing owner’s control policy over his
home. As shown in the top right corner of Figure 4, the policy header has four
parameters. The” Requester” parameter refers to the requester PK in the received
overlay transaction. For local devices, this field is equal to the” Device ID” as shown
in the fourth row of the proposed policy header in Figure 4.

C. Local Storage –

Local storage is a storing device e.g. backup drive that is used by devices to store data
locally. This storage can be integrated with the miner or it can be a separate device.
The storage uses a First-in-First-out (FIFO) method to store data and stores each
devices’ data as a ledger chained to the device’s starting point.

Let’s discuss about the initialization steps, transactions handling, and shared overlay.

A. Initialisation –
The miner generates a birth sale by participating a crucial with the device using
generalized Diffie-Hellman. The Participated key between the miner and thus the
device is stored within the birth sale. The miner uses the policy title within the
rearmost block in BC.
 B. Transaction Handling –
The smart bias may communicate directly with each other or with realities external to
the smart home. Each device inside the house may request data from another internal
device to offer certain services. To allocate the key, the miner The pall storehouse
could also be moreover possessed and managed by the home proprietor (e.g.
Dropbox) within the former case.

C. Shared Overlay –
The shared overlay consists of a minimum of two smart homes that are managed
centrally as one home by a participated miner. Bias that are within the same home
with the miner experience no change, while for bias in other homes a Virtual Private
Network (VPN) connection is established between the web gateway in each home and
thus the miner.

3. RESULT AND DISCUSSION

There are three main security requirements that need to be considered by any security design,
namely: Privacy, Integrity, and Accessibility, known as the CIA [8].
Confidentiality ensures that only authorized users can read the message. Integrity ensures that
the sent message is received at your destination without any change, and availability means
that each service or data is available to the user when needed.
Increasing the availability of smart devices protected from malicious programs. This is
achieved by limiting the accepted functions in those businesses where each device has
created a shared key. Overlay work is authorized by the miner before transferring it to
devices.
Moreover, it can be argued that our BC-based framework only brings a slight increase in
processing delays compared to existing smart home products. There is also an additional one-
time delay during the initial production and distribution of shared keys. In short, additional
delays are unnecessary and do not affect the availability of smart home devices.

Table 1 SECURITY REQUIREMENT EVALUATION.

4. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE SCOPE

Both academics and industry pay close attention to IoT security these days. Due to high
power consumption and high processing, existing security solutions are not at all suitable for
IoT. Because you are always connected to the Internet, you are at risk of being attacked by
the Internet and a malicious program. Security improvements will be important in the future.
Customers are also willing to pay less for extra security.
Here are some of the key market predictions for IoT and Security Services that will emerge in
the coming years:
1. IoT for cars
2. IoT technology
3. 5G infrastructure
4. Cybersecurity Smart Home
This study is the first project aimed at developing BC in the context of smart homes.

Fig 5 Evaluation of time overhead.

 Fig 6 Evaluation of energy consumption in different traffic flows.

REFERENCES
[1] Christidis, K., & Devetsikiotis, M. (2016). Blockchains and smart contracts for the
internet of things. IEEE Access, 4(1), 2292–2303.
[2] S. Sicari, A. Rizzardi, L. A. Grieco, and A. Coen-Porisini, “Security, privacy and trust in
internet of things: The road ahead,” Computer Networks, vol. 76, pp. 146–164, 2015.
[3] R. Roman, J. Zhou, and J. Lopez, “On the features and challenges of security and privacy
in distributed internet of things,” Computer Networks, vol. 57, no. 10, pp. 2266–2279, 2013.
[4] Fernandez-Carames, T. M., & Fraga-Lamas, P. (2018). A review on the use of blockchain
for the internet of things. IEEE Access, 6(1), 32979–33001
[5] Kumar, N. M., & Mallic, P. K. (2018). Blockchain technology for security issues and
challenges in IoT. Procedia Computer Science, 132(1), 1815–1823 Hwang, D., Choi, J., &
Kim, K. (2018). Dynamic access control scheme for IoT devices using blockchain.
[6] A. Dorri, S. S. Kanhere, and R. Jurdak, “Blockchain in internet of things: Challenges and
solutions,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1608.05187, 2016.
[7] A. Narayanan, J. Bonneau, E. Felten, A. Miller, and S. Goldfeder, Bitcoin and
cryptocurrency technologies. Princeton University Pres, 2016.
[8] N. Komninos, E. Philippou, and A. Pitsillides, “Survey in smart grid and smart home
security: Issues, challenges and countermeasures,” IEEE Communications Surveys &
Tutorials, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 1933–1954, 2014.
[9] A. Bogdanov, M. Knezevi ˇ c, G. Leander, D. Toz, K. Varıcı, and I. Ver- ´ bauwhede,
spongent: A Lightweight Hash Function. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg,
2011, pp. 312–325.