Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

An analysis and evaluation of lightweight hash functions for blockchain-based IoT devices

  • Published:
Cluster Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Blockchain is among the most promising new technologies due to its unique features, encompassing security, privacy, data integrity, and immutability. Blockchain applications include cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin. Recently, many other applications have begun to deploy blockchain in their systems. These applications include internet of things (IoT) environments. Although deploying blockchain in IoT architecture has yielded numerous advantages, issues and challenges have arisen that require further research. Most IoT devices and platforms have limited storage capacity, low battery power, and limited hardware resources for computation and network communication. Thus, energy efficiency is a critical factor in these devices. On the other hand, blockchain requires extensive resources and high computational capabilities for mining and communication processes. Balancing computation complexity and IoT resources is a fundamental design challenge in implementing blockchain functions, including the hash function, which is crucial to blockchain design for the mining process. In this study, we present a literature review on the common hash functions used in blockchain-based applications, in addition to the lightweight hash functions available in literature. We evaluate and test the common lightweight hash functions (SPONGENT, PHOTON, and QUARK) on FPGA platforms to determine which is most suitable for blockchain-IoT devices. Moreover, we assess lightweight hash functions in terms of area, power, energy, security, and throughput. The results show tradeoffs between these hash functions. SPONGENT performs best on security and throughput. QUARK consumes the least power and energy but has the lowest security parameters. PHOTON utilizes less area and offers a balance between multiple performance metrics (area, energy, and security), rendering it the most suitable lightweight hash function.

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
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Code availability

The authors declare that the code is available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

  1. Nakamoto, S., Bitcoin, A.: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system. Bitcoin. URL: https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf, pp. 1–9 (2008)

  2. Ferrag, M.A., Derdour, M., Mukherjee, M., Derhab, A., Maglaras, L., Janicke, H.: Blockchain technologies for the internet of things: Research issues and challenges. IEEE Internet Things J. 6(2), 2188–2204 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. “Ethereum white paper.” https://cryptorating.eu/whitepapers/Ethereum/Ethereum_white_paper.pdf

  4. Wood, G.: Ethereum: a secure decentralised generalised transaction ledger. Ethereum Project Yellow Paper 151(2014), 1–32 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Soulsby, M.: The benefits of the Ethereum Blockchain. (2018). https://medium.com/plutus-it/the-benefits-of-the-ethereum-blockchain-f332e62f7659

  6. Kosba, A., Shi, M.E., Wen, Z., Papamanthou, C : 2016 Hawk: the blockchain model of cryptography and privacy-preserving smart contracts, In: IEEE symposium on security and privacy (SP), pp. 839–858 (2016)

  7. Wu, M., Wang, K., Cai, X., Guo, S., Guo, M., Rong, C.: A comprehensive survey of blockchain: from theory to IoT applications and beyond. IEEE Internet Things J. 6(5), 8114–8154 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Xia, F., Yang, L.T., Wang, L., Vinel, A.: Internet of things. Int. J. Commun Syst 25(9), 1101 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Stallings, W.: The internet of things: network and security architecture. Internet Protoc. J 18(4), 2–24 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Ali, A., Latif, S., Qadir, J., Kanhere, S., Singh, J., Crowcroft, J.: Blockchain and the future of the internet: a comprehensive review. arXiv preprint arXiv:1904.00733, pp. 1–21, (2019)

  11. Mehmood, Y., Ahmad, F., Yaqoob, I., Adnane, A., Imran, M., Guizani, S.: Internet-of-things-based smart cities: Recent advances and challenges. IEEE Commun. Mag. 55(9), 16–24 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Sultan, A., Mushtaq, M.A, Abubakar, M.: IOT security issues via blockchain: a review paper. In: Proceedings of the 2019 International Conference on Blockchain Technology, pp. 60–65 (2019)

  13. Ahmed, A.W., Ahmed, M.M., Khan, O.A., Shah, M.A.: A comprehensive analysis on the security threats and their countermeasures of IoT. Int. J. Adv. Comput. Sci. Appl. 8(7), 489–501 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Oravec, J.A.: Emerging ‘cyber hygiene’ practices for the Internet of Things (IoT): professional issues in consulting clients and educating users on IoT privacy and security. In: IEEE Int Professional Communication Conference (ProComm), pp. 1–5 (2017)

  15. Fernández-Caramés, T.M., Fraga-Lamas, P.: A review on the use of blockchain for the internet of things. IEEE Access 6, 32979–33001 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Mohd, B.J., Hayajneh, T., Vasilakos, A.V.: A survey on lightweight block ciphers for low-resource devices: comparative study and open issues. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 58, 73–93 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Internet of Things (IoT) connected devices installed base worldwide from 2015 to 2025. https://www.statista.com/statistics/471264/iot-number-of-connected-devices-worldwide/. By 2015, forecasts suggest that there will be, the internet and can “communicate” with each other

  18. Dai, H.-N., Zheng, Z., Zhang, Y.: Blockchain for internet of things: a survey. IEEE Internet Things J. 6(5), 8076–8094 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. “IoT and Blockchain Convergence: Benefits and Challenges.” https://iot.ieee.org/newsletter/january-2017/iot-and-blockchain-convergence-benefits-and-challenges.html

  20. Li, N., Liu, D., Nepal, S.: Lightweight mutual authentication for IoT and its applications. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Comput. 2(4), 359–370 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Suárez-Albela, M., Fernández-Caramés, T.M., Fraga-Lamas, P., Castedo, L.: A practical evaluation of a high-security energy-efficient gateway for IoT fog computing applications. Sensors 17(9), 1978 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Suárez-Albela, M., Fraga-Lamas, P., Fernández-Caramés, T.M.: A practical evaluation on RSA and ECC-based cipher suites for IoT high-security energy-efficient fog and mist computing devices. Sensors 18(11), 3868 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Ramachandran, G.S., Krishnamachari, B.: Blockchain for the IoT: opportunities and challenges. arXiv preprint arXiv:1805.02818 (2018)

  24. Ometov, A., et al.: Feasibility characterization of cryptographic primitives for constrained (wearable) IoT devices., In: IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communication Workshops (PerCom Workshops), pp. 1–6 (2016)

  25. Lunardi, R.C., Michelin, R.A., Neu, C.V., Zorzo, A.F.: Distributed access control on iot ledger-based architecture. In: NOMS 2018–2018 IEEE/IFIP Network Operations and Management Symposium, pp. 1–7 (2018)

  26. Feldhofer, M., Rechberger, C.: A case against currently used hash functions in RFID protocols. In: OTM Confederated International Conferences. On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems, pp. 372–381 (2006)

  27. Degnan, B., Rose, E., Durgin, G., Maeda, S.: A modified simon cipher 4-block key schedule as a hash. IEEE J. Radio Freq. Identif 1(1), 85–89 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Hirose, S., Ideguchi, K., Kuwakado, H., Owada, T., Preneel, B., Yoshida, H.: An AES based 256-bit hash function for lightweight applications: Lesamnta-LW. IEICE Trans. Fundam. Electron. Commun. Comput. Sci. 95(1), 89–99 (2012)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. “Original Scrypt Function for Tarsnap.” http://www.tarsnap.com/scrypt.html

  30. “X11 Official Documentation for Dash,” [Online]. Available: https://dashpay.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/DOC/pages/1146918/X11

  31. Aumasson, J.-P., Henzen, L., Meier, W., Phan, R.C.-W.: Sha-3 proposal blake. Submission to NIST 229, 230 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  32. “Myriad.” http://myriadcoin.org/

  33. Seok, B., Park, J., Park, J.H.: A lightweight hash-based blockchain architecture for industrial IoT. Appl. Sci. 9(18), 3740 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Abdulqadder, I.H., Zhou, S., Zou, D., Aziz, I.T., Akber, S.M.A.: Bloc-sec: blockchain-based lightweight security architecture for 5G/B5G enabled SDN/NFV cloud of IoT. In: 2020 IEEE 20th International Conference on Communication Technology (ICCT), pp. 499–507 (2020)

  35. Guruprakash, J., Koppu, S.: EC-ElGamal and Genetic algorithm-based enhancement for lightweight scalable blockchain in IoT domain. IEEE Access 8, 141269–141281 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Liu, Y., Wang, K., Lin, Y., Xu, W.: $\mathsf LightChain $: A lightweight blockchain system for industrial internet of things. IEEE Trans. Industr. Inf. 15(6), 3571–3581 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Puthal, D., Mohanty, S.P., Yanambaka, V. P., Kougianos, E.: Poah: a novel consensus algorithm for fast scalable private blockchain for large-scale iot frameworks. arXiv preprint arXiv:2001.07297, pp. 1–26 (2020)

  38. Finlow-Bates, K.: A lightweight blockchain consensus protocol. In: Computer Security Resource Center. Available at https://www.chainfrog.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/consensus.pdf. Accessed 8 July 2018 (2017)

  39. Khalid, U., Asim, M., Baker, T., Hung, P.C.K., Tariq, M.A., Rafferty, L.: A decentralized lightweight blockchain-based authentication mechanism for IoT systems. Clust. Comput. 15, 1–21 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Wang, D., Zhong, D., Souri, A.: Energy management solutions in the internet of things applications: technical analysis and new research directions. Cognit Syst Res. 67, 33–49 (2021)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Sisi, Z., Souri, A.: Blockchain technology for energy‐aware mobile crowd sensing approaches in Internet of Things. In: Transactions on Emerging Telecommunications Technologies, p. e4217.

  42. Li, D., Deng, L., Cai, Z., Souri, A.: Blockchain as a service models in the Internet of Things management: systematic review. In: Transactions on Emerging Telecommunications Technologies, p. e4139 (2020)

  43. Rogaway, P., Shrimpton, T.: Cryptographic hash-function basics: definitions, implications, and separations for preimage resistance, second-preimage resistance, and collision resistance. In: International workshop on fast software encryption, pp. 371–388 (2004)

  44. Taylor, M.B.: The evolution of bitcoin hardware. Computer 50(9), 58–66 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Magaki, I., Khazraee, M., Gutierrez, L.V., Taylor, M.B.: Asic clouds: Specializing the datacentre. In: 2016 ACM/IEEE 43rd Annual International Symposium on Computer Architecture (ISCA), pp. 178–190 (2016)

  46. Mohd, B.J., Hayajneh, T., Khalaf, Z.A., Yousef, K.M.A.: Modeling and optimization of the lightweight HIGHT block cipher design with FPGA implementation. Secur. Commun. Netw. 9(13), 2200–2216 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Wollinger, T., Guajardo, J., Paar, C.: Security on FPGAs: state-of-the-art implementations and attacks. ACM Trans. Embed. Comput. Syst. (TECS) 3(3), 534–574 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Kasgar, A.K., Agrawal, J., Shahu, S.: New modified 256-bit MD 5 algorithm with SHA compression function. Int. J. Comput. Appl. 42(12), 15 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  49. Van Assche, G., Van Keer, R., Bertoni, G., Daemen, J., Hoffert, S., Peeters, M., “Team Keccak.” https://keccak.team/

  50. “Ethereum. Ethash.” https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/Ethash

  51. Kavun, E.B., Yalcin, T.: A lightweight implementation of keccak hash function for radio-frequency identification applications. In: International Workshop on Radio Frequency Identification: Security and Privacy Issues, pp. 258–269 (2010)

  52. Percival, C.: Stronger key derivation via sequential memory-hard functions. BSDCan, pp. 1–16, (2009)

  53. Ferdous, M.S., Chowdhury, M.J.M., Hoque, M.A., Colman, A.: Blockchain consensus algorithms: a survey. pp. 1–39 (2020)

  54. “Cryptocurrency Algorithms.” https://cryptorival.com/algorithms

  55. Aumasson, J.-P., Henzen, L., Meier, W., Naya-Plasencia, M.: Quark: a lightweight hash. In: International Workshop on Cryptographic Hardware and Embedded Systems, pp. 1–15, (2010)

  56. “X13”. https://www.hashgains.com/algorithms/x13

  57. Seigen, M.J., Nieminen, T.: Neocortex, and AM Juarez,‘CryptoNight hash function. (2013)

  58. Doering, J.: Neoscrypt, a strong memory intensive key derivation function. (2014)

  59. Biryukov, A., Khovratovich, D.: Equihash: asymmetric proof-of-work based on the generalized birthday problem. Ledger 2, 1–30 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. “Xevan Algorithm” https://coinguides.org/xevan-coins/

  61. “Lightweight Hash Functions” https://www.cryptolux.org/index.php/Lightweight_Hash_Functions#SPN-Hash

  62. Rao, V., Prema, K.V.: Light-weight hashing method for user authentication in Internet-of-Things. Ad Hoc Netw. 89, 97–106 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Balasch, J. et al.: Compact implementation and performance evaluation of hash functions in attiny devices. In: International Conference on Smart Card Research and Advanced Applications, pp. 158–172 (2012)

  64. Patrick, C., Schaumont, P.: The role of energy in the lightweight cryptographic profile. (2016)

  65. Dhanda, S.S., Singh, B., Jindal, P.: Lightweight cryptography: a solution to secure IoT. In: Wireless Personal Communications, pp. 1–34 (2020)

  66. Buchanan, W.J., Li, S., Asif, R.: Lightweight cryptography methods. J. Cyber Secur. Technol. 1(3–4), 187–201 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Hammad, B.T., Jamil, N., Rusli, M.E., Raba, M.R., Ahmed, I.T.: Implementation of lightweight cryptographic primitives. J. Theor. Appl. Inform. Technol. 95(19), 5126–5141 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  68. Mikami, S., Watanabe, D., Sakiyama, K.: A performance evaluation of cryptographic algorithms on FPGA and ASIC on RFID design flow. In: 2016 4th International Conference on Information and Communication Technology (ICoICT), pp. 1–6 (2016)

  69. Jungk, B., Lima, L.R., Hiller, M.: A systematic study of lightweight hash functions on FPGAs. In: 2014 International Conference on ReConFigurable Computing and FPGAs (ReConFig14), pp. 1–6 (2014)

  70. Lara-Nino, C.A., Morales-Sandoval, M., Diaz-Perez, A.: Small lightweight hash functions in FPGA. In: 2018 IEEE 9th Latin American Symposium on Circuits & Systems (LASCAS), pp. 1–4, (2018)

  71. Anandakumar, N.N., Peyrin, T., Poschmann, A.: A very compact FPGA implementation of LED and PHOTON. In: International Conference on Cryptology in India, pp. 304–321 (2014)

  72. Meuser, T., Schmidt, L., Wiesmaier, A.: Comparing lightweight hash functions–PHOTON & quark. (2015)

  73. Yang, Y., Wu, L., Yin, G., Li, L., Zhao, H.: A survey on security and privacy issues in Internet-of-Things. IEEE Internet Things J. 4(5), 1250–1258 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Zhou, Z. et al.: EEP2P: an energy-efficient and economy-efficient P2P network protocol. In: International Green Computing Conference, pp. 1–6 (2014)

  75. Sharifi, L., Rameshan, N., Freitag, F., Veiga, L.: Energy efficiency dilemma: P2p-cloud vs. datacentre. In: 2014 IEEE 6th International Conference on Cloud Computing Technology and Science, pp. 611–619 (2014)

  76. “Litecoins.” https://litecoin.com/en/

  77. Jungk, B.: FPGA-based evaluation of cryptographic algorithms. Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, pp. 1–280 (2016)

  78. Bertoni, G., Daemen, J., Peeters, M., Van Assche, G.: On the in differentiability of the sponge construction. In: Annual International Conference on the Theory and Applications of Cryptographic Techniques, pp. 181–197 (2008)

  79. Hammad, B.T., Jamil, N., Rusli, M.E., Reza, M.Z.: A survey of lightweight cryptographic hash function. Inter. J. Sci. Eng. Res 8, 806–814 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  80. Bogdanov, A., Knežević, M., Leander, G., Toz, D., Varıcı, K., Verbauwhede, I.: SPONGENT: a lightweight hash function. In: International Workshop on Cryptographic Hardware and Embedded Systems, pp. 312–325 (2011)

  81. Bogdanov, A. et al.: PRESENT: an ultra-lightweight block cipher. In: International workshop on cryptographic hardware and embedded systems, pp. 450–466 (2007)

  82. Guo, J., Peyrin, T., Poschmann, A.: The PHOTON family of lightweight hash functions. In: Annual Cryptology Conference, pp. 222–239 (2011)

  83. Hell, M., Johansson, T., Meier, W.: Grain: a stream cipher for constrained environments. Int. J. Wireless Mobile Comput. 2(1), 86–93 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. De Canniere, C., Dunkelman, O., Knežević, M.: KATAN and KTANTAN—a family of small and efficient hardware-oriented block ciphers. In: International Workshop on Cryptographic Hardware and Embedded Systems, pp. 272–288 (2009)

  85. Mikami, S., Watanabe, D., Sakiyama, K.: A comparative study of stream ciphers and hash functions for RFID authentications. In: RFIDSec Asia, pp. 83–94 (2013)

  86. Mohd, B.J., Hayajneh, T., Yousef, K.M.A., Khalaf, Z.A., Bhuiyan, M.Z.A.: Hardware design and modeling of lightweight block ciphers for secure communications. Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst. 83, 510–521 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Abed, S., Jaffal, R., Mohd, B.J., Alshayeji, M.: FPGA modeling and optimization of a SIMON lightweight block cipher. Sensors (Switzerland) 19(4), 1–28 (2019). https://doi.org/10.3390/s19040913

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. Abed, S., Jaffal, R., Mohd, B.J., Alshayeji, M.: Performance evaluation of the SM4 cipher based on field-programmable gate array implementation. IET Circuits Devices Syst. 15, 121–135 (2021)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Guo, R., Shi, H., Zhao, Q., Zheng, D.: Secure attribute-based signature scheme with multiple authorities for blockchain in electronic health records systems. IEEE Access 6, 11676–11686 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. Esposito, C., De. Santis, A., Tortora, G., Chang, H., Choo, K.-K.R.: Blockchain: a panacea for healthcare cloud-based data security and privacy? IEEE Cloud Comput. 5(1), 31–37 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  91. Tseng, L., Yao, X., Otoum, S., Aloqaily, M., Jararweh, Y.: Blockchain-based database in an IoT environment: challenges, opportunities, and analysis. Clust. Comput. 23(3), 2151–2165 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  92. Dandala, T.T., Krishnamurthy, V., Alwan, R.: Internet of Vehicles (IoV) for traffic management. In: 2017 International conference on computer, communication and signal processing (ICCCSP), pp. 1–4 (2017)

  93. Butt, T.A., Iqbal, R., Salah, K., Aloqaily, M., Jararweh, Y.: Privacy management in social internet of vehicles: review, challenges and blockchain based solutions. IEEE Access 7, 79694–79713 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  94. Li, L., et al.: Creditcoin: a privacy-preserving blockchain-based incentive announcement network for communications of smart vehicles. IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst. 19(7), 2204–2220 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. Huang, X., Xu, C., Wang, P., Liu, H.: LNSC: A security model for electric vehicle and charging pile management based on blockchain ecosystem. IEEE Access 6, 13565–13574 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  96. “Positive 5G Outlook Post COVID-19: What does it mean for avid gamers?”

  97. Fan, K., Ren, Y., Wang, Y., Li, H., Yang, Y.: Blockchain-based efficient privacy preserving and data sharing scheme of content-centric network in 5G. IET Commun. 12(5), 527–532 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  98. Al-Ridhawi, I., Otoum, S., Aloqaily, M., Jararweh, Y., Baker, T.: Providing secure and reliable communication for next generation networks in smart cities. Sustain. Cities Soc. 56, 102080 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  99. Ashik, M.H., Maswood, M.M.S., Alharbi, A.G.: Designing a Fog-Cloud architecture using blockchain and analyzing security improvements. In: 2020 International Conference on Electrical, Communication, and Computer Engineering (ICECCE), pp. 1–6 (2020)

  100. Wang, J., Li, M., He, Y., Li, H., Xiao, K., Wang, C.: A blockchain based privacy-preserving incentive mechanism in crowdsensing applications. IEEE Access 6, 17545–17556 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  101. Aghili, S.F., Mala, H., Schindelhauer, C., Shojafar, M., Tafazolli, R.: Closed-loop and open-loop authentication protocols for blockchain-based IoT systems. Inform. Process.Manag. 58(4), 102568 (2021)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  102. Chen, F., Xiao, Z., Cui, L., Lin, Q., Li, J., Yu, S.: Blockchain for Internet of things applications: a review and open issues. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 45, 102839 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  103. Bhushan, B., Sahoo, C., Sinha, P., Khamparia, A.: Unification of Blockchain and Internet of Things (BIoT): requirements, working model, challenges and future directions. Wireless Netw. 27(1), 55–90 (2021)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  104. Li, C., Zhang, J., Yang, X., Youlong, L.: “Lightweight blockchain consensus mechanism and storage optimization for resource-constrained IoT devices. Inform. Process. Manag. 58(4), 102602 (2021)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  105. Khan, S., Lee, W.-K., Hwang, S.O.: AEchain: a lightweight blockchain for IoT applications. IEEE Consumer Electron. Mag. (2021). https://doi.org/10.1109/MCE.2021.3060373

    Article  Google Scholar 

  106. Khan, M.A., Salah, K.: IoT security: review, blockchain solutions, and open challenges. Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst. 82, 395–411 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The authors declare that they have no sources of funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Computer Engineering Department, College of Engineering and Petroleum, Kuwait University, P. O. Box 5969, Safat, 13060, Kuwait

    Sa’ed Abed, Reem Jaffal & Mohammad Al-Shayeji

  2. Computer Engineering Department, College of Engineering, The Hashemite University, P.O. Box 330127, Zarqa, 13133, Jordan

    Bassam J. Mohd

Authors
  1. Sa’ed Abed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Reem Jaffal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  3. Bassam J. Mohd
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mohammad Al-Shayeji
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

SA proposed the methodology of the research, analysed and interpreted the results and was a major contributor in writing the manuscript. RJ did the literature review, was a major contributor in the experimental results and in writing the manuscript. BJM revised the work, analysed and interpreted the results. MA revised the work and analysed the results. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sa’ed Abed.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

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

Abed, S., Jaffal, R., Mohd, B.J. et al. An analysis and evaluation of lightweight hash functions for blockchain-based IoT devices. Cluster Comput 24, 3065–3084 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10586-021-03324-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10586-021-03324-1

Keywords