Trust-Based Approaches Towards Enhancing IoT Security: A Systematic Literature Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The continuous rise in the adoption of emerging technologies such as Internet of Things (IoT) by businesses has brought unprecedented opportunities for innovation and growth. However, due to the distinct characteristics of these emerging IoT technologies like real-time data processing, Self-configuration, interoperability, and scalability, they have also introduced some unique cybersecurity challenges, such as malware attacks, advanced persistent threats (APTs), DoS /DDoS (Denial of Service & Distributed Denial of Service attacks) and insider threats. As a result of these challenges, there is an increased need for improved cybersecurity approaches and efficient management solutions to ensure the privacy and security of communication within IoT networks. One proposed security approach is the utilization of trust-based systems and is the focus of this study. This research paper presents a systematic literature review on the Trustbased cybersecurity security approaches for IoT. A total of 23 articles were identified that satisfy the review criteria. We highlighted the common trust-based mitigation techniques in existence for dealing with these threats and grouped them into three major categories, namely: Observation-Based, Knowledge-Based & Cluster-Based systems. Finally, several open issues were highlighted, and future research directions presented.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".