Making IoT Services Accountable: A Solution Based on Blockchain and Physically Unclonable Functions

  • Carmelo FelicettiEmail author
  • Angelo FurfaroEmail author
  • Domenico Saccà
  • Massimo Vatalaro
  • Marco Lanuzza
  • Felice Crupi
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11874)


Nowadays, an important issue in the IoT landscape consists of enabling the dynamic instauration of interactions among two or more objects, operating autonomously in a distributed and heterogeneous environment, which participate in the enactment of accountable cross-organization business processes. In order to achieve the above goal, a decentralized and reliable approach is needed. Here, we propose a solution based on physical unclonable function (PUF) and blockchain technologies that represent the building blocks of the devised IT infrastructure. The core of the authentication process is based on a purposely designed circuit for the PUF bitcell, implemented in a 65 nm CMOS technology. One of the most important aspects of this work is represented by the concept of accountability node, an element inspired to a blockchain 3.0 masternode. This is the key element of the proposed architecture, acting as the main interface for cooperating services and IoT objects which relieve the users/objects from the burden of having to directly interact with the blockchain.


Accountability services Blockchain PUFs IoT 


  1. 1.
    Ryan, P.J., Watson, R.B.: Research challenges for the internet of things: what role can or play? Systems 5(1), 24 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zhu, X., Badr, Y.: Identity management systems for the internet of things: a survey towards blockchain solutions. Sensors 18, 4215 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lou, W., Ren, K.: Security, privacy, and accountability in wireless access networks. IEEE Wirel. Commun. 16(4), 80–87 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nakamoto, S.: Bitcoin: a peer-to-peer electronic cash system. White Paper (2008).
  5. 5.
    Fortino, G., Messina, F., Rosaci, D., Sarne, G.M.L.: Using blockchain in a reputation-based model for grouping agents in the internet of things. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manage., 1–13 (2019, in press).
  6. 6.
    Weber, R.H.: Accountability in the internet of things. Comput. Law Secur. Rev. 27(2), 133–138 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    AgID - Agenzia per l’Italia Digitale: Spid – regole tecniche (2017).
  8. 8.
    Frustaci, M., Pace, P., Aloi, G., Fortino, G.: Evaluating critical security issues of the IoT world: present and future challenges. IEEE Internet Things J. 5(4), 2483–2495 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jani, S.: An overview of ethereum & its comparison with bitcoin (2018)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ackermann, J., Meier, M.: Blockchain 3.0 - the next generation of blockchain systems (2018)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Di Martino, B., Esposito, A., Nacchia, S., Maisto, S.A.: Towards an integrated internet of things: current approaches and challenges. In: Di Martino, B., Li, K.-C., Yang, L.T., Esposito, A. (eds.) Internet of Everything. IT, pp. 13–33. Springer, Singapore (2018). Scholar
  12. 12.
    Halak, B.: Physically Unclonable Functions From Basic Design Principles to Advanced Hardware Security Applications. Springer, Southampton (2018). Scholar
  13. 13.
    Herder, C., Yu, M., Koushanfar, F., Devadas, S.: Physical unclonable functions and applications: a tutorial. Proc. IEEE 102, 1126–1141 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    De Rose, R.: A physical unclonable function based on a 2-transistor subthreshold voltage divider. Int. J. Circ. Theory Appl. 45, 260–273 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Furfaro, A., Argento, L., Saccà, D., Angiulli, F., Fassetti, F.: An infrastructure for service accountability based on digital identity and blockchain 3.0. In: CRYBLOCK 2019: INFOCOM Workshop - 2nd Workshop on Cryptocurrencies and Blockchains for Distributed Systems, Paris (2019)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kum, S.W., Kang, M., Park, J.I.: IoT delegate: smart home framework for heterogeneous IoT service collaboration. KSII Trans. Internet Inform. Syst. 10, 3958–3971 (2016)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wohlgemuth, S., Umezawa, K., Mishina, Y., Takaragi, K.: Competitive compliance with blockchain. In: IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops (PerCom Workshops), Kyoto, Japan, pp. 967–972 (2019)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.DIMES - University of CalabriaRendeItaly

Personalised recommendations