research-article

IoT Notary: Attestable Sensor Data Capture in IoT Environments

Authors:
Nisha Panwar

Augusta University, Augusta, GA, USA

Augusta University, Augusta, GA, USA
View Profile

,
Shantanu Sharma

New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, NJ, USA

New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, NJ, USA
View Profile

,
Guoxi Wang

University of California, Irvine, CA, USA

University of California, Irvine, CA, USA
View Profile

,
Sharad Mehrotra

University of California, Irvine, CA, USA

University of California, Irvine, CA, USA
View Profile

,
Nalini Venkatasubramanian

University of California, Irvine, CA, USA

University of California, Irvine, CA, USA
View Profile

,
Mamadou H. Diallo

Naval Information Warfare Center Pacific, San Diego, USA

Naval Information Warfare Center Pacific, San Diego, USA
View Profile

,
Ardalan Amiri Sani

University of California, Irvine, CA, USA

University of California, Irvine, CA, USA
View Profile

Authors Info & Claims

ACM Transactions on Internet of Things Volume 3 Issue 1Article No.: 3pp 1–30https://doi.org/10.1145/3478290

Published:27 October 2021Publication History

ACM Transactions on Internet of Things

Abstract

Contemporary IoT environments, such as smart buildings, require end-users to trust data-capturing rules published by the systems. There are several reasons why such a trust is misplaced—IoT systems may violate the rules deliberately or IoT devices may transfer user data to a malicious third-party due to cyberattacks, leading to the loss of individuals’ privacy or service integrity. To address such concerns, we propose IoT Notary, a framework to ensure trust in IoT systems and applications. IoT Notary provides secure log sealing on live sensor data to produce a verifiable “proof-of-integrity,” based on which a verifier can attest that captured sensor data adhere to the published data-capturing rules. IoT Notary is an integral part of TIPPERS, a smart space system that has been deployed at the University of California, Irvine to provide various real-time location-based services on the campus. We present extensive experiments over real-time WiFi connectivity data to evaluate IoT Notary, and the results show that IoT Notary imposes nominal overheads. The secure logs only take 21% more storage, while users can verify their one day’s data in less than 2 s even using a resource-limited device.

REFERENCES

[1] [n.d.]. Retrieved from https://newsroom.intel.com/newsroom/wp-content/uploads/sites/11/2017/09/8th-gen-intel-core-product-brief.pdf.Google Scholar
[2] [n.d.]. Filecoin: A Decentralized Storage Network by Protocol Labs. Retrieved from https://filecoin.io/filecoin.pdf.Google Scholar
[3] Aditya Paarijaat et al. 2016. I-Pic: A platform for privacy-compliant image capture. In MobiSys. 235–248. Google ScholarDigital Library
[4] Aikins Stephen Kwamena. 2016. Connectivity of smart devices: Addressing the security challenges of the Internet of Things. In Connectivity Frameworks for Smart Devices: The Internet of Things from a Distributed Computing Perspective.Google Scholar
[5] Ambrosin Moreno et al. 2016. SANA: Secure and scalable aggregate network attestation. In CCS. 731–742. Google ScholarDigital Library
[6] Asokan N. et al. 2015. SEDA: Scalable embedded device attestation. In CCS. 964–975. Google ScholarDigital Library
[7] Ben-Sasson Eli et al. 2013. SNARKs for C: Verifying program executions succinctly and in zero knowledge. In CRYPTO, Vol. 8043.Google Scholar
[8] Beresford Alastair R. et al. 2004. Mix zones: User privacy in location-aware services. In PerCom. 127–131. Google ScholarDigital Library
[9] Boussada Rihab et al. 2019. Privacy-preserving aware data transmission for IoT-based e-health. Comput. Netw. 162 (2019).Google Scholar
[10] Boyle Elette et al. 2015. Function secret sharing. In EUROCRYPT. 337–367.Google Scholar
[11] Carpent X. et al. 2018. Remote attestation of IoT devices via SMARM: Shuffled measurements against roving malware. In HOST. 9–16.Google Scholar
[12] Chakraborty Supriyo et al. 2014. ipShield: A framework for enforcing context-aware privacy. In NSDI. 143–156. Google ScholarDigital Library
[13] Conti Mauro et al. 2019. RADIS: Remote attestation of distributed IoT services. In SDS. 25–32.Google Scholar
[14] Costan Victor et al. 2016. Intel SGX explained. IACR Cryptology ePrint Archive 2016 (2016), 86.Google Scholar
[15] Crabtree Andy et al. 2018. Building accountability into the Internet of Things: the IoT Databox model. J. Reliab. Intell. Environ. 4, 1 (2018), 39–55.Google ScholarCross Ref
[16] Crosby Scott A. et al. 2009. Efficient data structures for tamper-evident logging. In USENIX. 317–334. Google ScholarDigital Library
[17] Davies Nigel et al. 2016. Privacy mediators: Helping IoT cross the chasm. In HotMobile. 39–44. Google ScholarDigital Library
[18] Montjoye Yves-Alexandre De et al. 2014. openpds: Protecting the privacy of metadata through safeanswers. PLoS One 9, 7 (2014), e98790.Google Scholar
[19] Diffie Whitfield et al. 1976. New directions in cryptography. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 22, 6 (1976), 644–654. Google ScholarDigital Library
[20] Du Yuefeng et al. 2021. Enabling secure and efficient decentralized storage auditing with blockchain. IEEE Trans. Depend. Sec. Comput. (2021).Google Scholar
[21] Eskandarian Saba et al. 2017. Certificate transparency with privacy. Proc. Priv. Enhanc. Technol 2017, 4 (2017), 329–344.Google ScholarCross Ref
[22] Fernandes Earlence et al. 2017. Security implications of permission models in smart-home application frameworks. IEEE Secur. Priv. 15, 2 (2017), 24–30. Google ScholarDigital Library
[23] Frankle Jonathan et al. 2018. Practical accountability of secret processes. In USENIX. 657–674. Google ScholarDigital Library
[24] Gubbi Jayavardhana et al. 2013. Internet of Things (IoT): A vision, architectural elements, and future directions. Fut. Gen. Compu. Syst.7 (2013), 1645–1660. Google ScholarDigital Library
[25] Ibrahim Ahmad et al. 2016. DARPA: Device attestation resilient to physical attacks. In WiSec. 171–182. Google ScholarDigital Library
[26] Ibrahim Ahmad et al. 2018. AID: Autonomous attestation of IoT devices. In SRDS. 21–30.Google Scholar
[27] Jiang Wei et al. 2008. Transforming semi-honest protocols to ensure accountability. Data Knowl. Eng. 65, 1 (2008), 57–74. Google ScholarDigital Library
[28] Keoh Sye Loong et al. 2014. Securing the Internet of Things: A standardization perspective. IoT J. 1, 3 (2014), 265–275.Google Scholar
[29] Krawczyk Hugo. 2003. SIGMA: The ‘SIGn-and-MAc’ approach to authenticated diffie-hellman and its use in the IKE protocols. In CRYPTO. 400–425.Google Scholar
[30] Madakam Somayya et al. 2016. Security mechanisms for connectivity of smart devices in the Internet of Things. In Connectivity Frameworks for Smart Devices. 23–41.Google Scholar
[31] Mehrotra Sharad et al. 2016. TIPPERS: A privacy cognizant IoT environment. In PerCom Workshops. 1–6.Google Scholar
[32] Mun Min Y. et al. 2010. Personal data vaults: A locus of control for personal data streams. In CoNEXT. 17. Google ScholarDigital Library
[33] Myles G. et al. 2003. Preserving privacy in environments with location-based applications. IEEE Perv. Comput. 2, 1 (2003), 56–64. Google ScholarDigital Library
[34] Narula Neha et al. 2018. zkLedger: Privacy-preserving auditing for distributed ledgers. In NSDI. 65–80. Google ScholarDigital Library
[35] Parno Bryan et al. [n.d.]. Pinocchio: Nearly practical verifiable computation. In IEEE SP. 238–252. Google ScholarDigital Library
[36] Rao Ashwini et al. 2016. Expecting the unexpected: Understanding mismatched privacy expectations online. In SOUPS. 77–96. Google ScholarDigital Library
[37] Rashidi Yasmeen et al. [n.d.]. “You don’t want to be the next meme”: College Students’ workarounds to manage privacy in the era of pervasive photography. In SOUPS. 143–157. Google ScholarDigital Library
[38] Roesner Franziska et al. 2014. World-driven access control for continuous sensing. In CCS. 1169–1181. Google ScholarDigital Library
[39] Shu Jiayu et al. 2018. Cardea: Context-aware visual privacy protection for photo taking and sharing. In MMSys. 304–315. Google ScholarDigital Library
[40] Tang Wenjuan et al. 2019. Secure data aggregation of lightweight E-healthcare IoT devices with fair incentives. IEEE IoT J. 6, 5 (2019), 8714–8726.Google Scholar
[41] Vorick David et al. 2014. SIA: Simple decentralized storage. Retrieved May (2014), 2018.Google Scholar
[42] Wang Junjue et al. 2017. A scalable and privacy-aware IoT service for live video analytics. In MMSys. ACM, 38–49. Google ScholarDigital Library
[43] Wang J. et al. 2018. Enabling security-enhanced attestation with Intel SGX for remote terminal and IoT. TCDICS 37, 1 (2018), 88–96.Google Scholar
[44] Wang Wenhao et al. 2017. Leaky cauldron on the dark land: Understanding memory side-channel hazards in SGX. In CCS. 2421–2434. Google ScholarDigital Library
[45] Waters Brent R. et al. 2004. Building an encrypted and searchable audit log. In NDSS, Vol. 4. 5–6.Google Scholar
[46] Xu Zhi et al. 2015. SemaDroid: A privacy-aware sensor management framework for smartphones. In CODASPY. 61–72. Google ScholarDigital Library
[47] Yang Yang et al. 2018. Privacy-preserving fusion of IoT and big data for e-health. Fut. Gener. Comput. Syst. 86 (2018), 1437–1455.Google ScholarDigital Library
[48] Zarepour E. et al. 2016. A context-based privacy preserving framework for wearable visual lifeloggers. In PerCom Workshops. IEEE Computer Society, 1–4.Google Scholar
[49] Zawoad Shams et al. 2016. Towards building forensics enabled cloud through secure logging-as-a-service. IEEE Trans. Depend. Sec. Comput. 13 (2016), 148–162. Google ScholarDigital Library
[50] Zhang Yupeng et al. 2017. vSQL: Verifying arbitrary SQL queries over dynamic outsourced databases. In IEEE SP. 863–880.Google Scholar

Index Terms

IoT Notary: Attestable Sensor Data Capture in IoT Environments
1. Security and privacy

Recommendations

Verifiable Round-Robin Scheme for Smart Homes
CODASPY '19: Proceedings of the Ninth ACM Conference on Data and Application Security and Privacy

Advances in sensing, networking, and actuation technologies have resulted in the IoT wave that is expected to revolutionize all aspects of modern society. This paper focuses on the new challenges of privacy that arise in IoT in the context of smart ...
Read More
Customized blockchain-based architecture for secure smart home for lightweight IoT
Highlights
- A novel Blockchain-based solution for secure smart home systems, using a combined hyperledger fabric and hyperledger composer.
Abstract
Safeguarding security and privacy remains a major challenge with regards to the Internet of Things (IoT) primarily due to the large scale and distribution of IoT networks. The information systems in Smart Homes are mainly based on ...
Read More
Managing Context Information for Adaptive Security in IoT Environments
WAINA '15: Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE 29th International Conference on Advanced Information Networking and Applications Workshops

Pervasive computing is becoming a reality due to the rise of the so-called Internet of Things (IoT). In this paradigm, everyday and physical objects are being equipped with capabilities to detect and communicate information they receive from their ...
Read More

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Article

Published in
ACM Transactions on Internet of Things Volume 3, Issue 1
February 2022
201 pages
EISSN:2577-6207
DOI:10.1145/3492447
Editors:
Schahram Dustdar
TU Wien, Austria
,
Gian Pietro Picco
University of Trento, Italy
Issue’s Table of Contents
ACM acknowledges that this contribution was authored or co-authored by an employee, contractor, or affiliate of the United States government. As such, the United States government retains a nonexclusive, royalty-free right to publish or reproduce this article, or to allow others to do so, for government purposes only.
Sponsors
In-Cooperation
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States

Journal Family
ACM Journals for the Design of Smart and Connected Systems
Publication History
- Published: 27 October 2021
- Revised: 1 July 2021
- Accepted: 1 July 2021
- Received: 1 May 2020
Published in tiot Volume 3, Issue 1

Permissions
Request permissions about this article.
Request Permissions

Check for updates
Author Tags
Internet of Things
smart homes
user privacy
channel and device activity
inference attacks
Qualifiers
- research-article
- Refereed
Conference
Funding Sources
Other Metrics
View Article Metrics

Article Metrics
- 1
  Total Citations
  View Citations
- 502
  Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)134
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)13
Other Metrics
View Author Metrics
Cited By
View all

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Full Text

View this article in Full Text.

View Full Text

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format .

View HTML Format

IoT Notary: Attestable Sensor Data Capture in IoT Environments

ACM Transactions on Internet of Things

Abstract

REFERENCES

Cited By

Index Terms

Recommendations

Verifiable Round-Robin Scheme for Smart Homes

Customized blockchain-based architecture for secure smart home for lightweight IoT

Managing Context Information for Adaptive Security in IoT Environments