Advertisement

Social, Ethical, and Regulatory Issues of Fog Computing in Healthcare 4.0 Applications

  • Ratnesh Litoriya
  • Abhik Gulati
  • Murari Yadav
  • Ramveer S. Ghosh
  • Prateek Pandey
Chapter
  • 16 Downloads
Part of the Signals and Communication Technology book series (SCT)

Abstract

Fog computing is the upcoming face of the technology revolution that could shape the future of IoT devices. Fog computing though similar to the cloud, has a variety of contrasting features, as this technology transpires new security, and privacy questions also turn up along with those left by cloud computing. There exist several vulnerabilities in fog computing which directly or indirectly affect the lives of individuals, particularly in the healthcare domain. Implementation of a hacker fog node that pretends to be legal could breach the privacy of a user. For the given purpose, a trust and management scheme is required hence boycotting these types of nodes. Likewise, social issues also play a significant role in the implementation of fog computing. Geographical access rates create security as well as forensics problems, which were not discussed before in cloud security. Fog can be seen as a bridge between IoT deployment and the unprivileged population of a fast-growing country like India. Capital requirements to make this link come into play are also huge. In this chapter, we discuss the ethical, legal, and social issues arising with the growth of healthcare data and personal records. Apart from the location of the cloud servers and gateways that have been set up based on the industry 4.0 architecture, this chapter also provides an integrated model for the adoption of gateways, fog nodes, IoT devices in their respective areas, with a view of reducing the total installation cost, given maximum request capacity, latency time, devices in use, and reportage area.

Keywords

Cloud computing Fog computing IoT Security Healthcare 4.0 

References

  1. 1.
    Vora, J., Kaneriya, S., Tanwar, S., Tyagi, S., Kumar, N., & Obaidat, M. S. (2019). TILAA: Tactile internet-based ambient assistant living in fog environment. Future Generation Computer Systems, 98, 635–649.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hathaliya, J. J., Tanwar, S., Tyagi, S., & Kumar, N. (2019). Securing electronics healthcare records in Healthcare 4.0: A biometric-based approach. Computers & Electrical Engineering, 76, 398–410.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    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, 106382.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gia, T. N., Jiang, M., Rahmani, A.-M., Westerlund, T., Liljeberg, P., & Tenhunen, H. (2015). Fog computing in healthcare internet of things: A case study on ECG feature extraction. In 2015 IEEE International Conference on Computer and Information Technology; Ubiquitous Computing and Communications; Dependable, Autonomic and Secure Computing, Pervasive Intelligence and Computing (pp. 356–363).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Vora, J., DevMurari, P., Tanwar, S., Tyagi, S., Kumar, N., & Obaidat, M. S. (2018). Blind signatures based secured E-healthcare system. In 2018 International Conference on Computer, Information and Telecommunication Systems (CITS) (pp. 1–5).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Prateek, P., & Ratnesh, L. (2020). Securing and authenticating healthcare records through blockchain technology. Cryptologia, 2020, 1–16.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pandey, P., & Litoriya, R. (2020). Securing E-health networks from counterfeit medicine penetration using Blockchain. Wireless Personal Communications. New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Vora, J., et al. (2018). BHEEM: A blockchain-based framework for securing electronic health records. In 2018 IEEE Globecom Workshops (GC Workshops) (pp. 1–6).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tanwar, S., Parekh, K., & Evans, R. (Feb. 2020). Blockchain-based electronic healthcare record system for healthcare 4.0 applications. Journal of Information Security and Applications, 50, 102407.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gupta, R., Tanwar, S., Tyagi, S., Kumar, N., Obaidat, M. S., & Sadoun, B. (2019). HaBiTs: Blockchain-based telesurgery framework for healthcare 4.0. In 2019 International Conference on Computer, Information and Telecommunication Systems (CITS) (pp. 1–5).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bodkhe, U., Bhattacharya, P., Tanwar, S., Tyagi, S., Kumar, N., & Obaidat, M. S. (2019). BloHosT: Blockchain Enabled Smart Tourism and Hospitality Management. In 2019 International Conference on Computer, Information and Telecommunication Systems (CITS) (pp. 237–241).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kabra, N., Bhattacharya, P., Tanwar, S., & Tyagi, S. (Jan. 2020). MudraChain: Blockchain-based framework for automated cheque clearance in financial institutions. Future Generation Computer Systems, 102, 574–587.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tahir, S., Bakhsh, S. T., Abulkhair, M., & Alassafi, M. O. (2019). An energy-efficient fog-to-cloud Internet of Medical Things architecture. International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks, 15(5), 155014771985197.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    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.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tanwar, S., et al. (2020). Human arthritis analysis in fog computing environment using Bayesian network classifier and thread protocol. IEEE Consumer Electronics Magazine, 9(1), 88–94.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Prasad, V. K., Bhavsar, M. D., & Tanwar, S. (2019). Influence of monitoring: Fog and edge computing. Scalable Computing: Practice and Experience, 20(2), 365–376.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tanwar, S., Vora, J., Kaneriya, S., & Tyagi, S. (2017). Fog-based enhanced safety management system for miners. In 2017 3rd International Conference on Advances in Computing, Communication Automation (ICACCA) (Fall) (pp. 1–6).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Vora, J., Tanwar, S. T., Tyagi, S. T., Kumar, N. K., & Rodrigues, J. R. (2019). HRIDaaY: Ballistocardiogram-based heart rate monitoring using fog computing. In IEEE Global Communications Conference – GLOBECOM.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Vora, J., Tanwar, S., Tyagi, S., Kumar, N., & Rodrigues, J. J. P. C. (2017). FAAL: Fog computing-based patient monitoring system for ambient assisted living. In 2017 IEEE 19th International Conference on e-Health Networking, Applications and Services (Healthcom) (pp. 1–6).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pandey, P., & Litoriya, R. (2019). A predictive fuzzy expert system for crop disease diagnostic and decision support. In Fuzzy Expert Systems and Applications in Agricultural Diagnosis, IGI Global (pp. 175–194).Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Litoriya, R., & Kothari, A. (2013). An efficient approach for agile web based project estimation: AgileMOW. Journal of Software Engineering and Applications, 06(06), 297–303.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Litoriya, R., Sharma, N., & Kothari, A. (2012). Incorporating Cost driver substitution to improve the effort using Agile COCOMO II. In 2012 CSI Sixth International Conference on Software Engineering (CONSEG) (pp. 1–7).Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Tanwar, S., Tyagi, S., & Kumar, N. (2019). Security and privacy of electronics healthcare records. In IET Book Series on e-Health Technologies.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Winsystems. CLOUD, FOG AND EDGE COMPUTING – WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE? Retrieved November 1, 2019, from https://www.winsystems.com/cloud-fog-and-edge-computing-whats-the-difference/.
  25. 25.
    Tanwar, S., Tyagi, S., & Kumar, N. (2019). Multimedia big data computing for IoT applications: Concepts, paradigms and solutions. Singapore: Intelligent Systems Reference Library, Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Dash, S., Biswas, S., Banerjee, D., & Rahman, A. U. (2019). Edge and fog computing in healthcare – A review. Scalable Computing: Practice and Experience, 20(2), 191–206.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Pandey, P., & Litoriya, R. (2019). An activity vigilance system for elderly based on fuzzy probability transformations. Journal of Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems, 36(3), 2481–2494.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Pandey, P., & Litoriya, R. (2019). Elderly care through unusual behavior detection: A disaster management approach using IoT and intelligence. IBM Journal of Research and Development, 64(1), 1–11.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Pandey, P., & Litoriya, R. (2020). An IoT assisted system for generating emergency alerts using routine analysis. In Wireless Personal Communications.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Tanwar, S., Patel, P., Patel, K., Tyagi, S., Kumar, N., & Obaidat, M. S. (2017). An advanced internet of thing based security alert system for smart home. In 2017 International Conference on Computer, Information and Telecommunication Systems (CITS) (pp. 25–29).Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    RHI hub. (2019). Healthcare access in rural communities. Retrieved from https://www.ruralhealthinfo.org/topics/healthcare-access.
  32. 32.
  33. 33.
    Pandey, P., & Litoriya, R. (2020). Legal/regulatory issues for MMBD in IoT BT – multimedia big data computing for IoT applications: Concepts, paradigms and solutions. In S. Tanwar, S. Tyagi, & N. Kumar (Eds.), Multimedia big data computing for IoT applications (pp. 367–388). Singapore: Springer.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Mittal, M., Tanwar, S., Agrawal, B., & Goyal, L. M. (Eds.). (2019). Energy conservation for IoT devices concepts, paradigms and solutions. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Patel, D., Narmawala, Z., Tanwar, S., & Singh, P. K. (2019). A systematic review on scheduling public transport using IoT as tool (pp. 39–48). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Tanwar, S., Tyagi, S., & Kumar, S. (2018). The role of internet of things and smart grid for the development of a smart city (pp. 23–33). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Vora, J., Kaneriya, S., Tanwar, S., & Tyagi, S. (2018). Performance evaluation of SDN based virtualization for data center networks. In 2018 3rd International Conference On Internet of Things: Smart Innovation and Usages (IoT-SIU) (pp. 1–5).Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Pandey, P., Litoriya, R., & Tiwari, A. (2018). A framework for fuzzy modelling in agricultural diagnostics. Journal Européen des Systèmes Automatisés, 51, 203–223.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Pandey, M., Litoriya, R., & Pandey, P. (2019). Application of fuzzy dematel approach in analyzing mobile app issues. Programming and Computer Software, 45(5), 268–287.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Pandey, M., Litoriya, R., & Pandey, P. (2018). An ISM approach for modeling the issues and factors of mobile app development. International Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering, 28(07), 937–953.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Pandey, M., Litoriya, R., & Pandey, P. (2019). Identifying causal relationships in mobile app issues: An interval type-2 fuzzy DEMATEL approach. Wireless Personal Communications, 108, 683–710.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Pandey, M., Litoriya, R., & Pandey, P. (2019). Validation of existing software effort estimation techniques in context with mobile software applications. In Wireless Personal Communications.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Pandey, M., Litoriya, R., & Pandey, P. (2019). Novel approach for mobile based app development incorporating MAAF. Wireless Personal Communications, 107, 1687–1708.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Pandey, M., Litoriya, R., & Pandey, P. (2018). Mobile app development based on agility function. Ingénierie des systèmes d’information RSTI série ISI, 23(6), 19–44.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Litoriya, R., & Kothari, A. (2013). Cost estimation of web projects in context with agile paradigm: Improvements and validation. International Journal of Software Engineering, 6(2), 91–114.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Pandey, M., Litoriya, R., & Pandey, P. (2020). The applicability of machine learning methods on mobile app effort estimation: Validation and performance evaluation. International Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering, 30(1), 1–19.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Pandey, P., & Litoriya, R. (2019). Fuzzy AHP based identification model for efficient application development. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 2019, 1–12.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Prakash, P., Darshaun, K. G., Yaazhlene, P., Ganesh, M. V., & Vasudha, B. (2017). Fog computing: Issues, challenges and future directions. International Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering (IJECE), 7(6), 3669.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Constellation research. Latest blog & updates. 2015. Retrieved November 1, 2019, from https://www.constellationr.com/blog-news/forget-cloud-fog-tech-s-future-says-wall-street-journal-organizing-millions-iott.
  50. 50.
    Tanwar, S., Ramani, T., & Tyagi, S. (2018). Dimensionality reduction using PCA and SVD in big data: A comparative case study (pp. 116–125).Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Tanwar, S., Thakkar, K., Thakor, R., & Singh, P. K. (2018). M-Tesla-based security assessment in wireless sensor network. Procedia Computer Science, 132, 1154–1162.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Wilson, S. (2018). Current trends and emerging challenges in fog computing market. Retrieved November 1, 2019, from https://medium.com/@stephanwilson36/current-trends-and-emerging-challenges-in-fog-computing-market-9f3d7a0efd8e.
  53. 53.
    Kumari, A., Tanwar, S., Tyagi, S., Kumar, N., Maasberg, M., & Choo, K.-K. R. (Dec. 2018). Multimedia big data computing and Internet of Things applications: A taxonomy and process model. Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 124, 169–195.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Bresnick, J. (2019). How fog computing may power the healthcare internet of things. Retrieved November 1, 2019, from https://healthitanalytics.com/features/how-fog-computing-may-power-the-healthcare-internet-of-things.
  55. 55.
    Lam, M. (2008). Identifying success factors for developing web applications. NewYork, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Albert Bourla. (2018). 5 key trends for the future of healthcare. Retrieved November 1, 2019, from https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/01/this-is-what-the-future-of-healthcare-looks-like/.
  57. 57.
    Tanwar, S., Tyagi, S., Kumar, N., & Obaidat, M. S. (2019). Ethical, legal, and social implications of biometric technologies. In Biometric-based physical and cybersecurity systems (pp. 535–569). Cham: Springer International Publishing.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Allhoff, F., & Henschke, A. (Sep. 2018). The internet of things: Foundational ethical issues. Internet of Things, 1–2, 55–66.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Rouse, M. (2019). Near field communication (NFC). Retrieved November 1, 2019, from https://searchmobilecomputing.techtarget.com/definition/Near-Field-Communication.
  60. 60.
    Brady, Kevin. P., Holcomb, Lori., B., & Smith, Bethany, B. (2010). The use ofalternative social networking sites in higher educational settings: A case study of theE-Learning benefits of ning in education. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 9(2),151–170.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ratnesh Litoriya
    • 1
  • Abhik Gulati
    • 1
  • Murari Yadav
    • 1
  • Ramveer S. Ghosh
    • 1
  • Prateek Pandey
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of CSEJaypee University of Engineering & TechnologyGunaIndia

Personalised recommendations