Internet of Things (IoT) systems and the corresponding network architectures are complex due to distributed services on many IoT internet of Things (IoT) systems and the corresponding network architectures are complex due to distributed services on many IoT devices collaboratively fulfilling common goals of IoT applications. System requirements for different types of IoT application domains are still not well-established. The life cycle view is one of the views used for system architecting, showing different stake holders’ concerns at every stage of the life cycle to derive system requirements. We employ the life cycle view to under-stand IoT systems in different IoT application domains. Our contribution is the definition of a generic life cycle model for IoT, which is specified by observations
Device Management and Network Connectivity of the IoT and IIoT
A number of challenges can hinder the successful deployment of an IoT system and its connected devices, including security, interoperability, power/processing capabilities, scalability and availability. Many of these can be addressed with IoT device management either by adopting standard protocols or using services offered by a vendor.
Device management helps companies integrate, organize, monitor and remotely manage internet-enabled devices at scale, offering features critical to maintaining the health, connectivity and security of the IoT devices along their entire lifecycles. Such features include:
• Device registration
• Device authentication/authorization
• Device configuration
• Device provisioning
• Device monitoring and diagnostics
• Device troubleshooting
Available standardized device management protocols include the Open Mobile Alliance’s Device Management (OMA DM) and Lightweight Machine-to-Machine (OMA LwM2M).
IoT device management services and software are also available from vendors including Amazon, Bosch Software Innovations GmbH, Microsoft, Software AG and Xively.
IoT device connectivity and networking
The networking, communication and connectivity protocols used with internet-enabled devices largely depend on the specific IoT application deployed. Just as there are many different IoT applications, there are many different connectivity and communications options.
Communications protocols include CoAP, DTLS and MQTT, among others. Wireless protocols include IPv6, LPWAN, Zigbee, Bluetooth Low Energy, Z-Wave, RFID and NFC. Cellular, satellite, Wi-Fi and Ethernet can also be used.
Each option has its tradeoffs in terms of power consumption, range and bandwidth, all of which must be considered when choosing connected devices and protocols for a particular IoT application.
To share the sensor data they collect, IoT devices connect to an IoT gateway or another edge device where data can either be analyzed locally or sent to the cloud for analysis.
IoT Device Security and Transmission of Data to Control board
The interconnection of traditionally dumb devices raises a number of questions in relation to security and privacy. As if often the case, IoT technology has moved more quickly than the mechanisms available to safeguard the devices and their users.
Researchers have already demonstrated remote hacks on pacemakers and cars, and, in October 2016, a large distributed denial-of-service attack dubbed Mirai affected DNS servers on the east coast of the United States, disrupting services worldwide — an issue traced back to hackers infiltrating networks through IoT devices, including wireless routers and connected cameras.
However, safeguarding IoT devices and the networks they connect to can be challenging due to the variety of devices and vendors, as well as the difficulty of adding security to resource-constrained devices. In the case of the Mirai botnet, the problem was traced back to the use of default passwords on the hacked devices. Strong passwords, authentication/authorization and identity management, network segmentation, encryption, and cryptography are all suggested IoT security measures.
Concerned by the dangers posed by the rapidly growing IoT attack surface, the FBI released the public service announcement FBI Alert Number I-091015-PSA in September 2015, which is a document outlining the risks of IoT devices, as well as protections and defense recommendations.
In August 2017, the U.S. Senate introduced the IoT Cybersecurity Improvement Act, a bill addressing security issues associated with IoT devices. While it is a start, the bill only requires internet-enabled devices purchased by the federal government to meet minimum requirements, not the industry as a whole. However, it is being viewed as a starting point which, if adopted across the board, could pave the way to better IoT security industry-wide.
Industries and organizations have been using various kinds of sensors for a long time but the invention of the Internet of Things has taken the evolutions of sensors to a completely different level.
IoT platforms function and deliver various kind of intelligence and data using a variety of sensors. They serve to collect data, pushing it and sharing it with a whole network of connected devices. All this collected data makes it possible for devices to autonomously function, and the whole ecosystem is becoming “smarter” every day.
By combining a set of sensors and a communication network, devices share information with one another and are improving their effectiveness and functionality.
Take Tesla vehicles as an example. All of the sensors on a car record their perception of the surroundings, uploading the information into a massive database. The data is then processed and all the important new pieces of information are sent to all other vehicles. This is an ongoing process, through which a whole fleet of Tesla vehicles is becoming smarter every day.