Advertisement

Data Sharing and Privacy for Patient IoT Devices Using Blockchain

  • Gautam SrivastavaEmail author
  • Reza M. Parizi
  • Ali Dehghantanha
  • Kim-Kwang Raymond Choo
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 1122)

Abstract

Once a fitness fad, wearable and other related Internet of Things (IoT) devices are fast becoming common place in many different smart city applications such as healthcare. However, IoT devices, particularly inexpensive devices, often trade security and privacy for usability. One solution to protect privacy in the healthcare domain which has begun to be explored is blockchain-based technology. However, there are a number of limitations underpinning the use of blockchain, which limits its adoption particularly in applications that require low energy and computational footprints. In this paper, we present a transactional protocol for remote patient monitoring using directed acyclic graphs. We use a newer blockchain protocol called GHOSTDAG in both a public blockchain and a private blockchain. Our novel proposed solution aims to resolve known security issues for healthcare, without affecting scalability (a feature of classic blockchain architecture).

Keywords

Blockchain Internet of Things Privacy Medical device Smart cities Healthcare 

References

  1. 1.
    Amiri, W.A., Baza, M., Banawan, K., Mahmoud, M.M.E.A., Alasmary, W., Akkaya, K.: Privacy-preserving smart parking system using blockchain and private information retrieval. CoRR abs/1904.09703 (2019). http://arxiv.org/abs/1904.09703
  2. 2.
    Azaria, A., Ekblaw, A., Vieira, T., Lippman, A.: MedRec: using blockchain for medical data access and permission management. In: 2016 2nd International Conference on Open and Big Data (OBD), pp. 25–30, August 2016.  https://doi.org/10.1109/OBD.2016.11
  3. 3.
    Bayern, M.: Why 70% of healthcare orgs have suffered data breaches (2019). https://www.techrepublic.com/article/why-70-of-healthcare-orgs-have-suffered-data-breaches/. Accessed 17 July 2019
  4. 4.
    Baza, M., Lasla, N., Mahmoud, M., Abdallah, M.M.: B-ride: ride sharing with privacy-preservation, trust and fair payment atop public blockchain. CoRR abs/1906.09968 (2019). http://arxiv.org/abs/1906.09968
  5. 5.
    Beninger, P., Ibara, M.A.: Pharmacovigilance and biomedical informatics: a model for future development. Clin. Ther. 38(12), 2514–2525 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
  7. 7.
    Dwivedi, A.D., Malina, L., Dzurenda, P., Srivastava, G.: Optimized blockchain model for internet of things based healthcare applications. In: 42nd International Conference on Telecommunications and Signal Processing, TSP 2019, Budapest, Hungary, 1–3 July 2019, pp. 135–139 (2019).  https://doi.org/10.1109/TSP.2019.8769060
  8. 8.
    Dwivedi, A.D., Srivastava, G., Dhar, S., Singh, R.: A decentralized privacy-preserving healthcare blockchain for IoT. Sensors 19(2), 326 (2019).  https://doi.org/10.3390/s19020326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Homayoun, S., Dehghantanha, A., Parizi, R.M., Choo, K.R.: A blockchain-based framework for detecting malicious mobile applications in app stores. In: 32nd IEEE Canadian Conference of Electrical and Computer Engineering (IEEE CCECE 2019) (2019)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kumar, P., Lee, S.G., Lee, H.J.: E-sap: efficient-strong authentication protocol for healthcare applications using wireless medical sensor networks. Sensors 12(2), 1625–1647 (2012).  https://doi.org/10.3390/s120201625. https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/12/2/1625CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Liu, V., Musen, M.A., Chou, T.: Data breaches of protected health information in the united states. JAMA 313(14), 1471–1473 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mahajan, M., Nimbhorkar, P., Varadarajan, K.: The planar k-means problem is NP-hard. In: Das, S., Uehara, R. (eds.) WALCOM 2009. LNCS, vol. 5431, pp. 274–285. Springer, Heidelberg (2009).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-00202-1_24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Malina, L., Srivastava, G., Dzurenda, P., Hajny, J., Fujdiak, R.: A secure publish/subscribe protocol for internet of things. IACR Cryptology ePrint Archive 2019, 740 (2019). https://eprint.iacr.org/2019/740
  14. 14.
    Malina, L., Srivastava, G., Dzurenda, P., Hajny, J., Fujdiak, R.: A secure publish/subscribe protocol for internet of things. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security, ARES 2019, Canterbury, UK, 26–29 August 2019, pp. 75:1–75:10 (2019).  https://doi.org/10.1145/3339252.3340503
  15. 15.
    Mettler, M.: Blockchain technology in healthcare: the revolution starts here. In: 2016 IEEE 18th International Conference on e-Health Networking, Applications and Services (Healthcom), pp. 1–3. IEEE (2016)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nakamoto, S.: Bitcoin: a peer-to-peer electronic cash system (2008)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Parizi, R.M., Dehghantanha, A., Choo, K.R., Singh, A.: Empirical vulnerability analysis of automated smart contracts security testing on blockchains. In: Proceedings of the 28th Annual International Conference on Computer Science and Software Engineering, CASCON 2018, Markham, Ontario, Canada, 29–31 October 2018, pp. 103–113 (2018). https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=3291303
  18. 18.
    Parizi, R.M., Homayoun, S., Yazdinejad, A., Dehghantanha, A., Choo, K.R.: Integrating privacy enhancing techniques into blockchains using sidechains. In: 32nd IEEE Canadian Conference of Electrical and Computer Engineering (IEEE CCECE 2019) (2019)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pennic, F.: Healthcare Blockchain Startup BurstIQ Secures \$5M Investment (2018). https://hitconsultant.net/2018/02/23/healthcare-blockchain-startup-burstiq-secures-5m. Accessed 17 July 2019
  20. 20.
    Sompolinsky, Y., Zohar, A.: PHANTOM, GHOSTDAG: two scalable blockDAG protocols. IACR Cryptology ePrint Archive 2018, 104 (2018)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Srivastava, G., Dwivedi, A.D., Singh, R.: Crypto-democracy: a decentralized voting scheme using blockchain technology. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Joint Conference on e-Business and Telecommunications, ICETE 2018. SECRYPT, Porto, Portugal, 26–28 July 2018, vol. 2, pp. 674–679 (2018).  https://doi.org/10.5220/0006881906740679
  22. 22.
    Srivastava, G., Dwivedi, A.D., Singh, R.: PHANTOM protocol as the new crypto-democracy. In: Computer Information Systems and Industrial Management - Proceedings of the 17th International Conference, CISIM 2018, Olomouc, Czech Republic, 27–29 September 2018, pp. 499–509 (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99954-8_41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sullivan, C., Burger, E.: E-residency and blockchain. Comput. Law Secur. Rev. 33(4), 470–481 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Taylor, P.J., Dargahi, T., Dehghantanha, A., Parizi, R.M., Choo, K.K.R.: A systematic literature review of blockchain cyber security. Digit. Commun. Netw. (2019) Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Vomiero, J.: Cybersecurity of medical devices under scrutiny after FDA recalls insulin pumps (2019). https://globalnews.ca/news/5446037/insulin-pump-medical-implant-cyber-attack-fda/. Accessed 17 July 2019
  26. 26.
    Yazdinejad, A., Parizi, R.M., Dehghantanha, A., Choo, K.R.: Blockchain-enabled authentication handover with efficient privacy protection in SDN-based 5G networks. IEEE Trans. Netw. Sci. Eng. 1–14 (2019).  https://doi.org/10.1109/TNSE.2019.2937481

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mathematics and Computer ScienceBrandon UniversityBrandonCanada
  2. 2.Research Center for Interneural ComputingChina Medical UniversityTaichungTaiwan, Republic of China
  3. 3.College of Computing and Software EngineeringKennesaw State UniversityKennesawUSA
  4. 4.Cyber Science Lab, School of Computer ScienceUniversity of GuelphGuelphCanada
  5. 5.Department of Information Systems and Cyber SecurityUniversity of Texas at San AntonioSan AntonioUSA

Personalised recommendations