Towards In-Network Generalized Trustworthy Data Collection for Trustworthy Cyber-Physical Systems

  • Hafiz ur Rahman
  • Guojun WangEmail author
  • Md Zakirul Alam Bhuiyan
  • Jianer Chen
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 1123)


Data trustworthiness (i.e., the data is free from error, up to date, and originate from a reputable source) is always preferred. However, due to environmental influence (i.e., equipment faults, noises, or security attacks) and technology limitation a wireless sensor/sensors module can neither store/process all raw data locally nor reliably forward the data to a destination in heterogeneous IoT environment. As a result, the sensing data collected by IoT/Cyber-Physical System (CPS) is inherently noisy, unreliable, and may trigger many false alarms. These false or misleading data can lead to wrong decisions once the data reaches end entities/cloud. Therefore, it is highly recommended and desirable to identify trustworthy data before data transmission, aggregation, and data storing at the end entities/cloud. In this paper, we propose an In-network Generalized Trustworthy Data Collection (IGTDC) framework for collaborative IoT environment. The key idea of IGTDC is to allow a sensor’s module to check whether or not the raw/sense data is reliable before routing to the sink/edge node. It also identifies whether the received data is trustworthy or not before aggregation at sink/edge node. Besides, IGTDC facilitates to identify a faulty sensor. For a reliable event detection in real-time without waiting for a trust report from the end entities/cloud, we use collaborative IoT, and gate-level modeling with Verilog User Defined Primitive (UDP) to make sure that the collected data/event information is reliable before sending to end entities/cloud. We use BCD 8421 (Binary Coded Decimal) in gate-level modeling as a flag which assists in identifying a faulty or compromise sensor. Through simulations with Verilog Icarus, we demonstrate that the collected data in IGTDC is trustworthy that can make trustworthy data aggregation for event detection and help to identify a faulty sensor.


Trustworthy data Event detection Cyber-Physical System Internet of Things 



This work was supported in part by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant 61632009 and 61872097, in part by the Guangdong Provincial Natural Science Foundation under Grant 2017A030308006, and in part by the High-Level Talents Program of Higher Education in Guangdong Province under Grant 2016ZJ01.


  1. 1.
    Cam-Winget, N., Sadeghi, A.-R., Jin, Y.: Can IoT be secured: emerging challenges in connecting the unconnected. In: Proceedings of 53rd ACM/EDAC/IEEE Design Automation Conference (DAC), pp. 1–6 (2016)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cisco, Internet of Things (IoT) - Cisco IoT Product Portfolio - Cisco. Accessed 23 May 2019
  3. 3.
    ur Rahman, H., Azzedin, F., Shawahna, A., Sajjad, F., Abdulrahman, A.S.: Performance evaluation of VDI environment. In: 2016 Sixth International Conference on Innovative Computing Technology (INTECH), pp. 104–109. IEEE, August 2016Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Manyika, J., Chui, M., Bughin, J., Dobbs, R., Bisson, P., Marrs, A.: Disruptive technologies: advances that will transform life, business, and the al economy, vol. 12. McKinsey Global Institute San Francisco, CA (2013)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Andrew, M.: How the Internet of Things will affect security and privacy (2016).
  6. 6.
    Makhdoom, I., et al.: Anatomy of threats to the internet of things. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutorials 21(2), 1636–1675 (2018)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    ur Rahman, H., Wang, G., Chen, J., Jiang, H.: Performance evaluation of hypervisors and the effect of virtual CPU on performance. In: 2018 IEEE SmartWorld, Ubiquitous Intelligence & Computing, Advanced & Trusted Computing, Scalable Computing & Communications, Cloud & Big Data Computing, Internet of People and Smart City Innovation (SmartWorld/SCALCOM/UIC/ATC/CBDCom/IOP/SCI), pp. 772–779. IEEE, October 2018Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Karkouch, A., Mousannif, H., Al Moatassime, H., Noel, T.: Data quality in internet of things: a state-of-the-art survey. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 73, 57–81 (2016)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bhuiyan, M.Z.A., Wu, J.: Trustworthy and protected data collection for event detection using networked sensing systems. In: 2016 IEEE 37th Sarnoff Symposium. IEEE (2016)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bhuiyan, M.Z.A., Wang, G., Choo, K.K.R.: Secured data collection for a cloud-enabled structural health monitoring system. In: 2016 IEEE 18th International Conference on High Performance Computing and Communications; IEEE 14th International Conference on Smart City; IEEE 2nd International Conference on Data Science and Systems (HPCC/SmartCity/DSS). IEEE (2016)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Javadpour, A., Abharian, S.K., Wang, G.: Feature selection and intrusion detection in cloud environment based on machine learning algorithms. In: 2017 IEEE International Symposium on Parallel and Distributed Processing with Applications and 2017 IEEE International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing and Communications (ISPA/IUCC), pp. 1417–1421. IEEE, December 2017Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Arif, M., Wang, G., Wang, T., Peng, T.: SDN-based secure VANETs communication with fog computing. In: Wang, G., Chen, J., Yang, L. (eds.) Security, Privacy, and Anonymity in Computation, Communication, and Storage. SpaCCS 2018. LNCS, vol. 11342, pp. 46–59. Springer, Cham (2018).
  13. 13.
    Elahi, H., Wang, G., Li, X.: Smartphone bloatware: an overlooked privacy problem. In: Wang, G., Atiquzzaman, M., Yan, Z., Choo, K.-K.R. (eds.) SpaCCS 2017. LNCS, vol. 10656, pp. 169–185. Springer, Cham (2017). Scholar
  14. 14.
    Li, J., Deng, H., Jiang, W.: Secure vibration control of flexible arms based on operators’ behaviors. In: Wang, G., Atiquzzaman, M., Yan, Z., Choo, K.-K.R. (eds.) SpaCCS 2017. LNCS, vol. 10656, pp. 420–431. Springer, Cham (2017). Scholar
  15. 15.
    Haron, N., Jaafar, J., Aziz, I.A., Hassan, M.H., Shapiai, M.I.: Data trustworthiness in internet of things: a taxonomy and future directions. In: 2017 IEEE Conference on Big Data and Analytics (ICBDA), pp. 25–30. Kuching (2017)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sharma, A.B., Golubchik, L., Govindan, R.: Sensor faults: detection methods and prevalence in real-world datasets. ACM Trans. Sens. Netw. (TOSN) 6(3), 23 (2010)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tolle, G., et al.: A macroscope in the redwoods. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems, pp. 51–63. ACM, November 2005Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kamal, A.R.M., Bleakley, C., Dobson, S.: Packet-level attestation (PLA): a framework for in-network sensor data reliability. ACM Trans. Sens. Netw. (TOSN) 9(2), 19 (2013)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Samuel, M.: Intel lab data, June 2004.
  20. 20.
    Li, W., Song, H., Zeng, F.: Policy-based secure and trustworthy sensing for internet of things in smart cities. IEEE Internet Things J. 5(2), 716–723 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tang, L.-A., et al.: Trustworthiness analysis of sensor data in cyber-physical systems. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 79(3), 383–401 (2013)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Tang, L.-A., et al.: Tru-alarm: trustworthiness analysis of sensor networks in cyber-physical systems. In: 2010 IEEE International Conference on Data Mining. IEEE (2010)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ciletti, M.D.: Modeling, Synthesis, and Rapid Prototyping with the Verilog HDL. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (1999)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Han, G., Jiang, J., Shu, L., Niu, J., Chao, H.-C.: Management and applications of trust in wireless sensor networks: a survey. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 80(3), 602–617 (2014)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Luo, T., Nagarajan, S.G.: Distributed anomaly detection using autoencoder neural networks in WSN for IoT. In: 2018 IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC). IEEE (2018)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Xie, M., Hu, J., Han, S., Chen, H.-H.: Scalable hypergrid k-NN based online anomaly detection in wireless sensor networks. IEEE Trans. Parallel Distrib. Syst. 24(8), 1661–1670 (2013)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Zhang, Y., Meratnia, N., Havinga, P.J.: Distributed online outlier detection in wireless sensor networks using ellipsoidal support vector machine. Ad hoc Netw. 11(3), 1062–1074 (2013)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bailey, D.L., et al.: Combined PET/MRI: global warming–summary report of the 6th International Workshop on PET/MRI, 27–29 March 2017, Tübingen, Germany. Mol. Imag. Biol. 20(1), 4–20 (2018)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Amazon rainforest fires, Everything we know and how you can help. Accessed 17 Aug 2019
  30. 30.
    Aguiar, A.P.D., et al.: Modeling the spatial and temporal heterogeneity of deforestation-driven carbon emissions: the INPE-EM framework applied to the Brazilian Amazon. Glob. Change Biol. 18(11), 3346–3366 (2012)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Saeed, F., et al.: IoT-based intelligent modeling of smart home environment for fire prevention and safety.’ J. Sens. Actuator Netw. 7(1), 11 (2018)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Adriano, D.B., Wahyu, A.C.B.: Iot-based integrated home security and monitoring system. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 1140(1), 012006 (2018)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Mehta, R., et al.: Delivering high performance result with efficient use of K-map. Int. J. Control Autom. 9(2), 307–312 (2016)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Gai-ning, H.A.N., Qing-lin, X.U., Qun, D.U.A.N.: Research and application of digital circuit base on Iverilog and GTKWave. J. Xianyang Normal Univ. 4, 58–61 (2009)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Yadav, P., Abdul Rajak, A.R., Fathima, A.: VLSI implementation of gold sequence by novel method. Int. J. Adv. Stud. Comput. Sci. Eng. 2(2), 32 (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Computer ScienceGuangzhou UniversityGuangzhouChina
  2. 2.Department of Computer and Information SciencesFordham UniversityNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations