MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Analysis of NIST Lightweight Cryptographic Algorithms Performance in IoT Security Environments based on MQTT

2024· article· en· W4400276287 on OpenAlexaff
V.D. Voloshyn, Mohammad S. Khan, Gautam Srivastava, M. Darshan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTelecommunications and Broadcasting Technologies
Canadian institutionsBrandon University
FundersEast Tennessee State University
KeywordsNISTMQTTComputer scienceCryptographyCryptographic protocolInternet of ThingsCryptographic primitiveComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this vision paper, we analyze the protocols used in the Internet of Things (IoT), encryption methods, and their combination for exploitation. The Internet of Things (IoT) is an important paradigm of modern technology that connects physical objects and devices into a single network where they can exchange data and interact without direct human intervention. The Internet of Things is used in a variety of areas, from controlling household appliances to monitoring the condition of objects in industry and agriculture. The MQTT (Message Queuing Telemetry Transport) protocol was used in this work, which is a lightweight protocol for transmitting messages in IoT networks. It allows for efficient data exchange between devices, ensuring low energy consumption and minimizing bandwidth. The following ciphers were used to ensure the security of information in IoT networks: ASCON and Grain128-AEAD. ASCON is used to encrypt and authenticate data, ensuring its confidentiality and integrity. Grain128-AEAD is also used for data protection, providing a high level of security and encryption. This research work simulates an IoT environment based on the MQTT communication protocol and tests the performance of lightweight cryptographic algorithms. As evident from the results, encryption is an essential part of security for IoT -based communication systems and such lightweight algorithms could help in boosting the overall performance with low to none cases of failure. This paper looks to envision the suitability of these lightweight cryptographic (LWC) security and privacy solutions for IoT and Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS).

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.204 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTelecommunications and Broadcasting TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207