Advertisement

Data Security and Privacy Functions in Fog Computing for Healthcare 4.0

  • A. Sivasangari
  • P. Ajitha
  • E. Brumancia
  • L. Sujihelen
  • G. Rajesh
Chapter
  • 21 Downloads
Part of the Signals and Communication Technology book series (SCT)

Abstract

Sensors play an essential role in different applications such as medicine, manufacturing, climate, smart transportation, and smart city. Wearable or implantable body sensors are necessary for the human body to collect patient information. Such tools produce a massive amount of data, and to collect useful information, it is more difficult to secure such data from intruders, process, and interpret it. In this chapter, we are improving such a big data health monitoring system by leveraging the fog computing principle at smart gateways, offering advanced network edge techniques and services. In particular, as a case study, we chose electrocardiogram (ECG), because it plays an important role in the diagnosis of many heart diseases. The experimental results show that fog computing helps to reduce the encrypt and decrypt time compared to other traditional algorithms, and the information will be transmitted more safely using the algorithm with less computational overhead.

Keywords

Enhanced TEA algorithm Optimized fully encryption algorithm 

References

  1. 1.
    Lu, R., Heung, K., Lashkari, A. H., Ghorbani, A. A. (2017). A Lightweight privacy-preserving data aggregation scheme for fog computing-enhanced IoT. IEEE Access Special Section On Security and Privacy In Applications and Services For Future Internet of Things, 5, 3302–3312.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Liu, X., Yang, Y., Choo, K.-K. R., & Wang, H. (2018). Security and privacy challenges for internet-of-things and fog computing. Hindawi Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing, 2018, 1–3.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Zhang, X., Yuan, Y., Zhou, Z., Li, S., Qi, L., & Puthal, D. (2019). Intrusion detection and prevention in cloud, fog, and internet of things. Hindawi Security and Communication Networks., 2019, 1–4.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Aliyua F., Sheltamia, T., Shakshukib, E. M. (2018). A detection and prevention technique for man in the middle attack in fog computing. The 9th International Conference on Emerging Ubiquitous Systems and Pervasive Networks EUSPN, pp. 24–31.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lee, K., Kimy, D., Ha, D., Rajput, U., Oh, H. (2015). On security and privacy issues of fog computing supported internet of things environment. 6th International Conference on the Network of the Future (NOF), IEEE.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Diro, A. A., Chilamkurti, N., & Kumar, N. (2017). Lightweight cybersecurity schemes using elliptic curve cryptography (Publish-Subscribe fog Computing) (Vol. 22, pp. 848–858). New York: Springer Science Business Media.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zhu, J., Hu, J., Zhang, M., Chen, Y., & Bi, S. (2019). A fog computing mode for implementing motion guide to visually impaired: Simulation modelling practice and theory. New York: Science Direct.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Diro, A. A., Chilamkurti, N., & Nam, Y. (2018). Analysis of lightweight encryption scheme for fog-to-things communication. IEEE Access Special Section on Real-Time Edge Analytics for Big Data in Internet of Things., 6, 26820–26830.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wang, Q., Chen, D., Zhang, N., Ding, Z., & Qin, Z. (2017). PCP: A privacy-preserving content-based publish–subscribe scheme with differential privacy in fog computing. IEEE Access, 5(2017), 17962–17974.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zhang, Y., Zhao, J., Dong, Z., Deng, K., Ren, F., Zheng, X., & Shu, J. (2018). Privacy-preserving data aggregation against false data injection attacks in fog computing. Sensors., 13, 1–16.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jia, X., He, D., Kumar, N., & Raymond, K.-K. (2019). Authenticated key agreement scheme for fog-driven IoT healthcare system. Wireless Networks Springer, 25, 4737–4750.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bhaskar, K., Jayashree R., Sathiyavathi R., Mary Gladence L., and Maria Anu V. (2017). A novel approach for securing data de-duplication methodology in hybrid cloud storage. In 2017 International Conference on Innovations in Information, Embedded and Communication Systems (ICIIECS), pp. 1–5. IEEEGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gope, P. (2019). LAAP: Lightweight anonymous authentication protocol for D2D-Aided fog computing paradigm. Computers & Security Science Direct, 86, 223–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Xiao, X., Hou, X., Liu, C., & Li, Y. (2019). Quantitative analysis for capabilities of vehicular fog computing. Information Sciences Science Direct, 501, 742–760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Raafat Aburukba, Mazin Ali Karar, Taha Landolsi, Khaled El-Fakih. (2019). Scheduling internet of things requests to minimize latency in hybrid Fog–Cloud computing. Future Generation Computer Systems, Science Direct.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Islam, S. U., Akhunzada, A., Boudjadar, J., Khattak, H. A., Din, I. U., & Rodrigues, J. J. P. C. (2019). Energy and performance aware fog computing: A case of DVFS and green renewable energy. Future Generation Computer Systems, 101, 1112–1121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pereira, J., Ricardo, L., Luís, M., Senna, C., & Sargento, S. (2019). Assessing the reliability of fog computing for smart mobility applications in VANETs. Future Generation Computer Systems., 94, 317–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Zhao, D., Sun, G., Liao, D., Xu, S., & Chang, V. (2019). Mobile-aware service function chain migration in cloud–fog computing. Future Generation Computer Systems, 96, 591–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tuli, S., Mahmud, R., Tuli, S., & Buyya, R. (2019). Fog Bus. A Blockchain-based lightweight framework for edge and fog computing. Journal of Systems and Software., 154(22–36).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Indira, K., & Christal, J. E. (2015). Energy Efficient IDS for Cluster-Based VANETS. Asian Journal of Information Technology., 14(1), 37–41.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Siva Sangari, A., Manickam, J. M. L., & Gomathi, R. M. (2016). RC6 based security. Wireless Body Area Network, 74, 31–34.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ajitha, S. A., & Indira, K. (2018). Predictive inter and intra parking system. International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology., 8, 354–357.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ajitha, N. H. (2019). An adaptive approach for dynamic resource allocation in cloud service. International Journal of Control Theory and Applications., 9(10), 4871–4878.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gomathi, R. M., & Manickam, J. M. L. (2019). Energy efficient static node selection in underwater acoustic wireless sensor network. Wireless Personal Communications, 107(2), 709–727.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gomathi, R. M., Martin Leo Manickam, J., & Sivasangari, A. (2016). A comparative study on routing strategies for underwater acoustic wireless sensor network. Contemporary Engineering Sciences., 9(1–4), 71–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Brumancia, E., Justin Samuel, S., Gomathi, M., & Mistica Dhas, Y. (2018). An effective study on data fusion models in wireless sensor networks. ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences., 13, 686–692.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Brumancia, E., & Sylvia, A. (2015). A profile based scheme for security in clustered wireless sensor networks. International Conference on Communications and Signal Processing (ICCSP) pp. 2–5.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kumari, A., Tanwar, S., Tyagi, S., & Kumar, N. (2018). Fog computing for healthcare 4.0 environment: Opportunities and challenges. Computers & Electrical Engineering., 72, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Tanwar, S., Tyagi, S., & Kumar, N. (Eds.) (2019). Multimedia Big Data computing for IoT applications: Concepts, paradigms and solutions. Intelligent Systems Reference Library (pp. 1–425). Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd., Singapore.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Mittal, M., Tanwar, S., Agarwal, B., & Goyal, L. M. (Eds.) (2019). Energy conservation for IoT Devices: Concepts, paradigms and solutions, studies in systems, decision and control (pp. 1–356). In Preparation, Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd., Singapore.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Mistry, I., Tanwar, S., Tyagi, S., & Kumar, N. (2020). Blockchain for 5G-enabled IoT for industrial automation: A systematic review. Solutions, and Challenges: Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 135, 1–19.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Vora, J., Tanwar, S., Verma, J. P., Tyagi, S., Kumar, N., Obaidat, M. S., & Rodrigues, Joel J. P. C. (2018). BHEEM: A Blockchain-based framework for securing electronic health records. IEEE Global Communications Conference (IEEE GLOBECOM-2018), Abu Dhabi, UAE, pp. 1–6.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Vora, J., Devmurari, P., Tanwar, S., Tyagi, S., Kumar, N., & Obaidat, M. S. (2018). Blind signatures based secured e-healthcare system. International Conference on Computer, Information and Telecommunication Systems (IEEE CITS-2018), Colmar, France, 11-13, 177–181.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Patel, D., Narmawala, Z., Tanwar, S., & Singh, P. K. (2018). A systematic review on scheduling public transport using IoT as tool. In B. Panigrahi, M. Trivedi, K. Mishra, S. Tiwari, & P. Singh (Eds.), Smart innovations in communication and computational sciences (Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing) (Vol. 670, pp. 39–48). Singapore: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Sivasangari, A., Bhowal, S., & Subhashini, R. (2019). Secure encryption in wireless body sensor networks. Emerging Technologies in Data Mining and Information Security, 3, 679–686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Kumari, A., Tanwar, S., Tyagi, S., & Kumar, N. (2019). Verification and validation techniques for streaming Big Data analytics in internet of things environment. IET Networks, 8, 155–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Kumari, A., Tanwar, S., Tyagi, S., Kumar, N., Maasberg, M., & Choo, K. K. R. (2018). Multimedia Big Data computing and internet of things applications: A taxonomy and process model. Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 124, 169–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Sujihelen, L., & Jayakumar, C. (2018). Inclusive elliptical curve cryptography (IECC) for wireless sensor network efficient operations. Wireless Personal Communication, 99, 893–914.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Sivasangari
    • 1
  • P. Ajitha
    • 1
  • E. Brumancia
    • 1
  • L. Sujihelen
    • 1
  • G. Rajesh
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Computing, Sathyabama Institute of Science and TechnologyChennaiIndia
  2. 2.Department of ITMIT campus, Anna UniversityChennaiIndia

Personalised recommendations