MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408992490 · doi:10.1016/j.cose.2025.104456

Security risk assessment in IoT environments: A taxonomy and survey

2025· article· en· W4408992490 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueComputers & Security · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIoT and Edge/Fog Computing
Canadian institutionsUniversité TÉLUQUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceTaxonomy (biology)Internet of ThingsComputer securityData scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Internet of Things (IoT) applications have become an integral part of our daily lives. However, due to the rising number of cybercrimes, ensuring cyberspace security has become essential. The security and privacy of IoT applications are fundamental as they are used in critical sectors, like healthcare, transportation systems, and energy production. As a result, many studies are focusing on the security and privacy of the IoT revolution. The need for assessing IoT security risks is increasing. This paper presents a survey and taxonomy of risk management, analysis, and evaluation methods applied to systems involving IoT devices. In particular, the paper reviews and categorizes existing IoT risk management and assessment frameworks, and the different assessments techniques, risk perspectives, and methodologies. The paper concludes with a deep analysis of these frameworks, solutions, and guidelines, and discusses future research directions.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.468
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.235 · 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