Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
169 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
45 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

A Review on Internet of Things for Defense and Public Safety (2402.03599v1)

Published 6 Feb 2024 in eess.SY, cs.CR, cs.CY, and cs.SY

Abstract: The Internet of Things (IoT) is undeniably transforming the way that organizations communicate and organize everyday businesses and industrial procedures. Its adoption has proven well suited for sectors that manage a large number of assets and coordinate complex and distributed processes. This survey analyzes the great potential for applying IoT technologies (i.e., data-driven applications or embedded automation and intelligent adaptive systems) to revolutionize modern warfare and provide benefits similar to those in industry. It identifies scenarios where Defense and Public Safety (PS) could leverage better commercial IoT capabilities to deliver greater survivability to the warfighter or first responders, while reducing costs and increasing operation efficiency and effectiveness. This article reviews the main tactical requirements and the architecture, examining gaps and shortcomings in existing IoT systems across the military field and mission-critical scenarios. The review characterizes the open challenges for a broad deployment and presents a research roadmap for enabling an affordable IoT for defense and PS.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (167)
  1. An energy management framework for smart factory based on context-awareness. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Advanced Communication Technology (ICACT), Pyeongchang, Korea, 31 January–2 February 2016; pp. 685–688.
  2. RFID data processing in supply chain management using a path encoding scheme. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 2011, 23, 742–758.
  3. The Internet of Things: Mapping the Value beyond the Hype; Technical Report; McKinsey Global Institute, 2015.
  4. Ericsson. Ericsson Mobility Report on the Pulse of the Networked Society; Technical Report; Ericsson: Stockholm, Sweden, November 2015.
  5. Business Insider (BI) Intelligence. The Internet of Things: Examining How the IoT Will Affect the World; Technical Report; Business Insider: New York, USA, November 2015.
  6. Internet of things for smart cities. IEEE Internet Things J. 2014, 1, 22–32.
  7. IoT—From Research and Innovation to Market Deployment; River Publishers: Aalborg, Denmark, 2014.
  8. Energy management with battery system for smart city. In Proceedings of the 33rd Chinese Control Conference (CCC), Nanjing, China, 28–30 July 2014; pp. 8200–8203.
  9. Toward social internet of vehicles: Concept, architecture, and applications. IEEE Access 2015, 3, 343–357.
  10. Leveraging the IoT for a more Efficient and Effective Military; Technical Report; Rowman & Littlefield: Lanham, MD, USA, 2015.
  11. Internet of things: A survey on enabling technologies, protocols, and applications. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 2015, 17, 2347–2376.
  12. Internet of things: Vision, applications and research challenges. Ad Hoc Netw. 2012, 10, 1497–1516.
  13. The internet of things: A survey. Comput. Netw. 2010, 54, 2787–2805.
  14. The Internet of nano-things. IEEE Wirel. Commun. 2010, 17, pp. 58–63.
  15. International Telecommunication Union Radiocommunication Sector (ITU-R). Radiocommunication Objectives and Requirements for Public Protection and Disaster Relief (PPDR); Technical Report ITU-R M.2377-0 (07/2015); ITU: Geneva, Switzerland, July 2015.
  16. TETRA Association. Public Safety Mobile Broadband and Spectrum Needs,16395-94, Analysis Mason; Technical Report; Analysis Mason Limited: London, UK, March 2010.
  17. TETRA Critical Communications Association (TCCA). The Strategic Case for Mission Critical Mobile Broadband: A Review of the Future Needs of the Users of Critical Communications; Technical Report; TCCA: Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK, December 2013.
  18. European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI). Emergency Communications (EMTEL); Requirements for Communications from Authorities/Organizations to Individuals, Groups or the General Public During Emergencies; Technical Report ETSI TS 102 182-V1.4.1; ETSI: Sophia Antipolis, France, July 2010.
  19. Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA). APCO Project 25 Statement of Requirements (P25 SoR); Technical Report; TIA: Arlington, United States, December 2013.
  20. Office of Emergency Communications. Fiscal Year 2016 SAFECOM Guidance on Emergency Communications Grants (SAFECOM Guidance); Technical Report; Department of Homeland Security: Washington , D.C., USA, 2016.
  21. Ran, Y. Considerations and suggestions on improvement of communication network disaster countermeasures after the Wenchuan earthquake. IEEE Commun. Mag. 2011, 49, 44–47.
  22. Salkintzis, A.K. Evolving public safety communication systems by integrating WLAN and TETRA networks. IEEE Commun. Mag. 2006, 44, 38–46.
  23. Public safety mobile broadband: A techno-economic perspective. IEEE Veh. Technol. Mag. 2013, 8, 28–36.
  24. Designing the joint tactical radio system (JTRS) handheld, manpack, and small form fit (HMS) radios for interoperable networking and waveform applications. In Proceedings of the IEEE Military Communications Conference, Orlando, FL, USA, 29–31 October 2007; pp. 1–6.
  25. Survey of wireless communication technologies for public safety. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 2014, 16, 619–641.
  26. Toward moving public safety networks. IEEE Commun. Mag. 2016, 54, 14–20.
  27. Public safety networks evolution toward broadband: Sharing infrastructures and spectrum with commercial systems. IEEE Commun. Mag. 2016, 54, 24–30.
  28. A software-defined device-to-device communication architecture for public safety applications in 5G networks. IEEE Access 2015, 3, 1649–1654.
  29. Fault-tolerant techniques for the Internet of Military Things. In Proceedings of the IEEE 2nd World Forum on Internet of Things (WF-IoT), Milan, Italy, 12–14 December 2015; pp. 496–501.
  30. Study on application modes of military Internet of Things (MIOT). In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Science and Automation Engineering (CSAE), Zhangjiajie, China, 25–27 May 2012; Voloum 3, pp. 630–634.
  31. Cloud-centric multi-level authentication as a service for secure public safety device networks. IEEE Commun. Mag. 2016, 54, 47–53.
  32. The Internet of Things for Defense; Technical Report; Wind River Systems: Alameda, CA, USA, 2015.
  33. Continuing the March: The Past, Present, and Future of the IoT in The Military; Technical Report; Deloitte University Press: Deloitte, UK, 2015.
  34. Analyzing the applicability of internet of things to the battlefield environment. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Military Communications and Information Systems (ICMCIS), Brussels, Belgium, 23–24 May 2016.
  35. Wrona, K. Securing the Internet of Things a military perspective. In Proceedings of the IEEE 2nd World Forum on Internet of Things (WF-IoT), Milan, Italy, 12–14 December 2015; pp. 502–507.
  36. Eom, J. Security threats recognition and countermeasures on smart battlefield environment based on IoT. Int. J. Secur. Appl. 2015, 9, 347–356.
  37. A taxonomy of security and privacy requirements for the Internet of Things (IoT). In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, Bandar Sunway, Malaysia, 9–12 December 2014; pp. 1244–1248.
  38. Tunnell, H.D. The U.S. Army and network-centric warfare a thematic analysis of the literature. In Proceedings of the Military Communications Conference, Tampa, FL, USA, 26–28 October 2015; pp. 889–894.
  39. Tunnell, H.D. Network-centric warfare and the data-information-knowledge-wisdom hierarchy. Mil. Rev. 2014, 92, 43–50.
  40. Telogis. Available online: \changeurlcolorblackhttps://www.telogis.com/gm\changeurlcolorblue (accessed on 12 September 2016).
  41. Fernández-Caramés, T.M. An intelligent power outlet system for the smart home of the Internet of Things. Int. J. Distrib. Sensor Netw. 2015, 2015, 1.
  42. Home Automation System Based on Intelligent Transducer Enablers. Sensors. 2016, 16, 1595.
  43. IoT based dynamic road traffic management for smart cities. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on High-Capacity Optical Networks and Enabling/Emerging Technologies (HONET), Islamabad, Pakistan, 21–23 December 2015; pp. 1–5.
  44. A system architecture to aggregate video surveillance data in Smart Cities. In Proceedings of the IEEE Global Communications Conference (GLOBECOM), San Diego, CA, USA, 6–10 December 2015; pp. 1–7.
  45. Optimal deployment of wireless sensor networks for air pollution monitoring. In Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Computer Communication and Networks (ICCCN), Las Vegas, NV, USA, 3–6 August 2015; pp. 1–7.
  46. RERUM: REliable, Resilient and SecUre IoT for sMart City Applications. Available online: \changeurlcolorblackhttps://ict-rerum.eu\changeurlcolorblue (accessed on 12 September 2016).
  47. RELYonIt: Research by Experimentation for Dependability on the Internet of Things. Available online: \changeurlcolorblackhttp://relyonit.eu\changeurlcolorblue (accessed on 12 September 2016).
  48. FIESTA-IoT: Federated Interoperable Semantic IoT Testbeds and Applications. Available online: \changeurlcolorblackhttp://fiesta-iot.eu\changeurlcolorblue (accessed on 12 September 2016).
  49. BIG IoT: Bridging the Interoperability Gap of the Internet of Things. Available online: \changeurlcolorblackhttp://big-iot.eu\changeurlcolorblue (accessed on 12 September 2016).
  50. BloTope: Building an IoT Open Innovation Ecosystem for Connected Smart Objects. Available online: \changeurlcolorblackhttp://biotope.cs.hut.fi/index.php/partners\changeurlcolorblue (accessed on 12 September 2016).
  51. METIS II. Available online: \changeurlcolorblackhttps://metis-ii.5g-ppp.eu/about-metis/\changeurlcolorblue (accessed on 12 September 2016).
  52. In Green in Software Engineering; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2015; pp. 83–104.
  53. Aegis Combat System. Available online: \changeurlcolorblackhttp://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/products/aegis.html\changeurlcolorblue (accessed on 12 September 2016).
  54. Tomahawk Land Attack Missile (TLAM). Available online: \changeurlcolorblackhttp://www.navair.navy.mil/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.display&key=F4E98B0F-33F5-413B-9FAE-8B8F7C5F0766\changeurlcolorblue (accessed on 12 September 2016).
  55. In Handbook of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2015; pp. 2443–2473.
  56. Technical Report; Morgan Stanley Research: New York, USA, 2014.
  57. Data security and threat modeling for smart city infrastructure. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Cyber Security of Smart Cities, Industrial Control System and Communications (SSIC), Shanghai, China, 5–7 August 2015; pp. 1–6.
  58. Wearable computing for the internet of things. IT Prof. 2015, 17, 35–41
  59. Subcutaneous body area networks: A SWOT analysis. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Technology and Society (ISTAS), Dublin, Ireland, 11–12 November 2015; pp. 1–8.
  60. Alderson, A. Sports tech—Fitness trackers. Eng. Technol. 2015, 10, 84–85.
  61. Shunk, D. Ethics and the enhanced soldier of the near future. Mil. Rev. 2015, 95, 91–98.
  62. Instrumented-Multiple Integrated Laser Engagement System (I-MILES). Available online: \changeurlcolorblackhttps://www.cubic.com/Global-Defense/Training-Systems-and-Solutions/Ground-Combat-Training/Multiple-Integrated-Laser-Engagement-System\changeurlcolorblue (accessed on 12 September 2016).
  63. Reasoning and resource allocation for sensor-mission assignment in a coalition context. In Proceedings of the IEEE Military Communications Conference, San Diego, CA, USA, 16–19 November 2008; pp. 1–7.
  64. Sensing as a service: Challenges, solutions and future directions. IEEE Sensors J. 2013, 13, 3733–3741.
  65. A survey of incentive techniques for mobile crowd sensing. IEEE Internet Things J. 2015, 2, pp. 370–380.
  66. Securing BYOD. IT Prof. 2014, 16, 9–11.
  67. Outlier detection techniques for wireless sensor networks: A survey. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 2010, 12 , 159–170.
  68. Trustworthy sensing for public safety in cloud-centric internet of things. IEEE Internet Things J. 2014, 1, pp. 360–368.
  69. U.S. Department of Defense. Annual Energy Management Report; Technical Report; Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Energy, Installations, and Environment) : Washington, D.C., USA, May 2015.
  70. Evolving military broadband wireless communication systems: WiMAX, LTE and WLAN. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Military Communications and Information Systems (ICMCIS), Brussels, Belgium, 23–24 May 2016; pp. 1–8.
  71. OMA Lightweight M2M. Available online: \changeurlcolorblackhttp://technical.openmobilealliance.org/Technical/technical-information/release-program/current-releases/oma-lightweightm2m-v1-0\changeurlcolorblue (accessed on 12 September 2016).
  72. Network configuration protocol for constrained devices (NETCONF Light). IETF Draft 2012.
  73. Fine-grained management of CoAP interactions with constrained IoT devices. In Proceedings of the IEEE Network Operations and Management Symposium (NOMS), Krakow, Poland, 5–8 May 2014; pp. 1–5.
  74. OMA Device Management Working Group. Available online: \changeurlcolorblackhttp://openmobilealliance.org/about-oma/work-program/device-management/\changeurlcolorblue (accessed on 12 September 2016).
  75. Program Executive Office Soldier, Portfolio 2014—The Soldier: Our Strength and Purpose. Available online: \changeurlcolorblackhttp://www.peosoldier.army.mil/portfolio/\changeurlcolorblue (accessed on 12 September 2016).
  76. U.S. Air Force: Programmers Earn Award for Innovative Tablet App. Available online: \changeurlcolorblackhttp://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/tabid/223/Article/518660/programmers-earn-award-for-innovative-tablet-app.aspx\changeurlcolorblue (accessed on 12 September 2016).
  77. Mitchell, P.T. Network Centric Warfare and Coalition Operations—The New Military Operating System, 1st ed.; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2009.
  78. Janes.com, U.S. Harris Corporation Readies New Tactical Radios for US Special Forces. Available online:\changeurlcolorblackhttp://www.janes.com/article/60812/harris-corporation-readies-new-tactical-radios-for-us-special-forces\changeurlcolorblue (accessed on 12 September 2016).
  79. Toward a software-based network: Integrating software defined networking and network function virtualization. IEEE Netw. 2015, 29, 36–41.
  80. Openstack. Available online: \changeurlcolorblackhttps://www.openstack.org\changeurlcolorblue (accessed on July 2016).
  81. The DARPA WNaN network architecture. In Proceedings of the Military Communications Conference, Baltimore, MD, USA, 7–10 November 2011; pp. 2258–2263.
  82. An architecture for secure interoperability between coalition tactical MANETs. In Proceedings of the Military Communications Conference, Tampa, FL, USA, 26–28 October 2015; pp. 37–42.
  83. Compressive and cooperative sensing in distributed mobile sensor networks. In Proceedings of the Military Communications Conference, Tampa, FL, USA, 26–28 October 2015; pp. 1033–1038.
  84. A cross-layer defense scheme for countering traffic analysis attacks in Wireless Sensor Networks. In Proceedings of the Military Communications Conference, Tampa, FL, USA, 26–28 October 2015; pp. 972–977.
  85. Network coding in military wireless ad hoc and sensor networks: Experimentation with GardiNet. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Military Communications and Information Systems (ICMCIS), Cracow, Poland, 18–19 May 2015; pp. 1–9.
  86. Opportunistic sensing in wireless sensor networks: Theory and application. IEEE Trans. Comput. 2014, 63, 2002–2010.
  87. Quake detection system using smartphone-based wireless sensor network for early warning. In Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops (PERCOM Workshops), Budapest, Hungary, 24–28 March 2014; pp. 297–302.
  88. Opportunistic sharing of airborne sensors. In Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Distributed Computing in Sensor Systems (DCOSS), Washington, DC, USA, 26–28 May 2016; pp. 25–32.
  89. Opportunities in mobile crowd sensing. IEEE Commun. Mag. 2014, 52, 29–35.
  90. A resource mobility scheme for service-continuity in the internet of things. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Green Computing and Communications (GreenCom), Besançon, France, 20–23 November 2012; pp. 261–264.
  91. Group mobility management for large-scale machine-to-machine mobile networking. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2014, 63, 1296–1305.
  92. Bio-inspired group mobility model for mobile ad hoc networks based on bird-flocking behavior. Soft Comput. 2012, 16, 437–450.
  93. BSD-based elliptic curve cryptography for the open Internet of Things. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on New Technologies, Mobility and Security (NTMS), Paris, France, 26–29 July 2015; pp. 1–5.
  94. Security and privacy in the internet-of-things under time-and-budget-limited adversary model. IEEE Wirel. Commun. Lett. 2015, 4 , 277–280.
  95. Context-awareness for mobile sensing: A survey and future directions. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 2016, 18 , 68–93.
  96. Supporting military communications with Named Data Networking: An emulation analysis. In Proceedings of the IEEE Military Communications Conference, Orlando, FL, USA, 29 October–1 November 2012; pp. 1–6.
  97. Integrity attestation in military IoT. In Proceedings of the IEEE 2nd World Forum on Internet of Things (WF-IoT), Milan, Italy, 12–14 December 2015; pp. 484–489.
  98. Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) for Department of Defense (DoD). Cloud Computing Security Requirements Guide; Technical Report; DISA: Fort Meade, Maryland, USA, March 2016.
  99. A practical evaluation of information processing and abstraction techniques for the internet of things. IEEE Internet Things J. 2015, 2, pp. 340–354.
  100. Increasing the capability of CubeSat-based software-defined radio applications. In Proceedings of the IEEE Aerospace Conference, Big Sky, MT, USA, 4–11 March 2016; pp. 1–10.
  101. U.S. Department of Defense. Program Acquisition Cost by Weapon System; Technical Report; Office of the under secretary of defense (comptroller)/Chief financial officer: The Pentagon, Arlington County, Virginia, USA, February 2016.
  102. U.S. Department of Defense. Unmanned Systems Integrated Roadmap FY2013–2038; Technical Report; U.S. Department of Defense: The Pentagon, Arlington County, Virginia, USA, 2013.
  103. A dependability evaluation for Internet of Things incorporating redundancy aspects. In Proceedings of the IEEE 11th International Conference on Networking, Sensing and Control (ICNSC), Miami, FL, USA, 7–9 April 2014; pp. 417–422.
  104. Reliability for emergency applications in internet of things. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Distributed Computing in Sensor Systems, Cambridge, MA, USA, 20–23 May 2013; pp. 361–366.
  105. Modeling and analyzing the reliability and cost of service composition in the IoT: A probabilistic approach. In Proceedings of the IEEE 19th International Conference on Web Services (ICWS), Honolulu, HI, USA, 24–29 June 2012; pp. 584–591.
  106. Markov decision processes with applications in wireless sensor networks: A survey. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 2015, 17 , 1239–1267.
  107. Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA). Enabling the Joint Information Environment (JIE), Shaping the Enterprise for the Conflicts of Tomorrow; Technical Report; DISA: Fort Meade, Maryland, USA, 2014.
  108. Lockheed Martin, Lockheed Martin-Led Team Demonstrates Interoperability with Legacy and Stealth Fighters Using Open Systems Architecture. Available online: \changeurlcolorblackhttp://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/news/press-releases/2014/march/140307ae_lockheed-martin-demonstrates-interoperability.html\changeurlcolorblue (accessed on 12 September 2016).
  109. U.S. Army CERDEC (Communications-Electronics Research, Development and Engineering Center) NVESD. Available online: \changeurlcolorblackhttp://www.cerdec.army.mil/inside_cerdec/\changeurlcolorblue (accessed on 12 September 2016).
  110. Designing IoT architecture(s): A European perspective. In Proceedings of the IEEE World Forum on Internet of Things (WF-IoT), Seoul, Korea, 6–8 March 2014; pp. 79–84.
  111. EU FP7 Internet of Things Architecture Project. Available online: \changeurlcolorblackhttp://www.iot-a.eu/public\changeurlcolorblue (accessed on 12 September 2016).
  112. UNISON: Towards a middleware architecture for autonomous cyber defence. In Proceedings of the 24th Australasian Software Engineering Conference (ASWEC), Adelaide, Australia, 28 Septmber–1 October 2015; pp. 203–212.
  113. A rule-based platform for distributed real-time SOA with application in defence systems. In Proceedings of the Military Communications and Information Systems Conference (MilCIS), Canberra, Australia, 12–14 November 2013; pp. 1–7.
  114. Study and application on the architecture and key technologies for IOT. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Multimedia Technology (ICMT), Hangzhou, China, 26–28 July 2011; pp. 747–751.
  115. Challenges in middleware solutions for the internet of things. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Collaboration Technologies and Systems (CTS), Denver, CO, USA, 21–25 May 2012; pp. 21–26.
  116. Research on the architecture of Internet of Things. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Advanced Computer Theory and Engineering (ICACTE), Chengdu, China, 20–22 August 2010; Volume 5, pp. 484–487.
  117. A scalable distributed architecture towards unifying IoT applications. In Proceedings of the IEEE World Forum on Internet of Things (WF-IoT), Seoul, Korea, 6–8 March 2014; pp. 508–513.
  118. Powers, B. A Multi-agent Architecture for NATO Network Enabled Capabilities: Enabling Semantic Interoperability in Dynamic Environments (NC3A RD-2376). In Proceedings of the 32nd Annual IEEE International Computer Software and Applications Conference, Turku, Finland, 28 July–1 August 2008; pp. 563–564.
  119. ASSIST Database. Available online: \changeurlcolorblackhttp://quicksearch.dla.mil/\changeurlcolorblue (accessed on 12 September 2016).
  120. Toward better horizontal integration among IoT services. IEEE Commun. Mag. 2015, 53, 72–79.
  121. In Unique Radio Innovation for the 21st Century: Building Scalable and Global RFID Networks; Ranasinghe, C.D., Sheng, Z.Q., Zeadally, S., Eds.; Springer: Berlin, Germany; Heidelberg, Germany, 2011; pp. 163–181.
  122. Service discovery protocols for constrained machine-to-machine communications. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 2014, 16 , 41–60.
  123. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). IEEE Standard for Information Technology—Telecommunications and Information Exchange between Systems Local and Metropolitan Area Networks–Specific Requirements Part 11: Wireless LAN Medium Access Control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications. IEEE Std 802.11-2012 (Revision of IEEE Std 802.11-2007); IEEE: Piscataway, New Jersey, USA, March 2012.
  124. Performance comparison between slotted IEEE 802.15.4 and IEEE 802.11ah in IoT based applications. In Proceedings of the IEEE 9th International Conference on Wireless and Mobile Computing, Networking and Communications (WiMob), Lyon, France, 7–9 October 2013; pp. 332–337.
  125. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). IEEE Standard for Air Interface for Broadband Wireless Access Systems; IEEE Std 802.16-2012 (Revision of IEEE Std 802.16-2009); IEEE: Piscataway, New Jersey, USA, August 2012.
  126. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). IEEE Standard for Local and Metropolitan Area Networks Part 16: Air Interface for Broadband Wireless Access Systems Amendment 3: Advanced Air Interface; IEEE Std 802.16m-2011(Amendment to IEEE Std 802.16-2009); IEEE: Piscataway, New Jersey, USA, May 2011.
  127. European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI) - Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP). LTE specifications. Release 10, 2010.
  128. Performance Analysis of RFID Protocols: CDMA Versus the Standard EPC Gen-2. IEEE Trans. Autom. Sci. Eng. 2014, 11, 1250–1261.
  129. Open Automotive Alliance. Available online: \changeurlcolor blackhttp://www.openautoalliance.net\changeurlcolorblue (accessed on 12 September 2016).
  130. Data mining for internet of things: A survey. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 2014, 16 , 77–97.
  131. U.S. Department of Defense. Updated Guidance on the Acquisition and Use of Commercial Cloud Computing Services; Technical Report; Department of Defense: Washington, D.C, USA, December 2015.
  132. MilCloud. Available online: \changeurlcolorblackhttp://www.disa.mil/computing/cloud-services/milcloud\changeurlcolorblue (accessed on 12 September 2016).
  133. TSAaaS: Time series analytics as a service on IoT. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Web Services (ICWS), Anchorage, AK, USA, 27 June–2 July 2014; pp. 249–256.
  134. AWS IoT. Available online: \changeurlcolorblackhttp://aws.amazon.com/iot/\changeurlcolorblue (accessed on 12 September 2016).
  135. Nextgov, CIA is Bringing Amazon’s Marketplace to the Intelligence Community. Available online: http://www.nextgov.com/cloud-computing/2015/02/cia-bringing-amazons-marketplace-intelligence- community/104937/ (accessed on 12 September 2016) .
  136. Bluemix IoT Solutions. Available online: \changeurlcolorblackhttps://www.ibm.com/cloud-computing/bluemix/solutions/iot/\changeurlcolorblue (accessed on 12 September 2016).
  137. Xively. Available online: \changeurlcolorblackhttps://www.xively.com/\changeurlcolorblue (accessed on 12 September 2016).
  138. Techniques for Surviving Mobile Data Explosion, 1st ed.; Wiley-IEEE Press: Hoboken, New Jersey, USA, 2014.
  139. Nimbits. Available online: \changeurlcolorblackhttp://bsautner.github.io/com.nimbits/\changeurlcolorblue (accessed on 12 September 2016).
  140. A framework for evaluating Internet-of-Things platforms: Application provider viewpoint. In Proceedings of the IEEE World Forum on Internet of Things (WF-IoT), Seoul, Korea, 6–8 March 2014; pp. 147–152.
  141. A scalable framework for provisioning large-scale IoT deployments. ACM Trans. Internet Technol. 2015, 16, 1–20.
  142. Integrate military with distributed cloud computing and secure virtualization. In Proceedings of the 2012 SC Companion: High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis (SCC), Salt Lake City, UT, USA, 10–16 November 2012; pp. 1200–1206.
  143. An efficient file hierarchy attribute-based encryption scheme in cloud computing. IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. 2016, 11, 1265–1277.
  144. The role of cloudlets in hostile environments. IEEE Pervasive Comput. 2013, 12, 40–49.
  145. Distributed parameter estimation for mobile wireless sensor network based on cloud computing in battlefield surveillance system. IEEE Access 2015, 3, 1729–1739.
  146. Architecture and measured characteristics of a cloud based internet of things. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Collaboration Technologies and Systems (CTS), Denver, CO, USA, 21–25 May 2012; pp. 6–12.
  147. Bringing the cloud to the edge. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Communications Workshops (INFOCOM WKSHPS), Toronto, ON, Canada, 27 April–2 May 2014; pp. 346–351.
  148. Ponte: Connecting Things to Developers. Available online: \changeurlcolorblackhttp://www.eclipse.org/ponte/\changeurlcolorblue (accessed on 12 September 2016).
  149. Kura: OSGI-Based Application Framework for M2M Service Gateways. Available online: \changeurlcolorblackhttp://www.eclipse.org/proposals/technology.kura\changeurlcolorblue (accessed on 12 September 2016).
  150. Scada. Available online: \changeurlcolorblackhttp://www.eclipse.org/proposals/technology.eclipsescada/\changeurlcolorblue (accessed on 12 September 2016).
  151. Krikkit. Available online: \changeurlcolorblackhttp://www.eclipse.org/proposals/technology.krikkit/\changeurlcolorblue (accessed on 12 September 2016).
  152. Wireless IoT platform based on SDR technology. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Cyber, Physical and Social Computing, Beijing, China, 20–23 August 2013; pp. 2245–2246.
  153. A software defined networking architecture for the internet-of-things. In Proceedings of the IEEE Network Operations and Management Symposium (NOMS), Krakow, Poland, 23–27 May 2014; pp. 1–9.
  154. Characterizing cloud federation in IoT. In Proceedings of the 30th International Conference on Advanced Information Networking and Applications Workshops (WAINA), Crans-Montana, Switzerland, 23–25 March 2016; pp. 93–98.
  155. ClouT: Cloud of Things for Empowering the Citizen Clout in Smart Cities. Call: FP7-ICT-2013- EU-Japan. Available online: \changeurlcolorblackhttp://clout-project.eu\changeurlcolorblue (accessed on 12 September 2016).
  156. MUlti-cloud Secure Applications (MUSA) Project. Call: H2020-ICT- 2014-1. Topic: ICT-07-2014. Available online: \changeurlcolorblackhttp://www.musa-project.eu/\changeurlcolorblue (accessed on 12 September 2016).
  157. Cloud-based wireless network: Virtualized, reconfigurable, smart wireless network to enable 5G technologies. Mob. Netw. Appl. 2015, 20, 704–712.
  158. Lee, C.A. Cloud federation management and beyond: Requirements, relevant standards, and gaps. IEEE Cloud Comput. 2016, 3, 42–49.
  159. An analysis of security issues for cloud computing. J. Internet Serv. Appl. 2013, 4, 1–13.
  160. Mechanisms and challenges on mobility-augmented service provisioning for mobile cloud computing. IEEE Commun. Mag. 2015, 53, 89–97.
  161. Towards achieving data security with the cloud computing adoption framework. IEEE Trans. Serv. Comput. 2016, 9, 138–151.
  162. Semantic Web services description based on command and control interaction user context. In Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE 7th Joint International Information Technology and Artificial Intelligence Conference (ITAIC), Chongqing, China, 20–21 December 2014; pp. 541–544.
  163. In Knowledge Engineering: Practice and Patterns; Springer: Berlin, Germany; Heidelberg, Germany, 2008; pp. 347–363.
  164. W3 PROV. Available online: \changeurlcolorblackhttps://www.w3.org/TR/prov-overview\changeurlcolorblue (accessed on 12 September 2016).
  165. U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO). GAO-16-88: DOD Has Addressed Most Reporting Requirements and Continues to Refine Its Asset Visibility Strategy; Technical Report; GAO: Washington, D.C., USA, December 2015.
  166. U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO). Department of Defense Fiscal Year (FY) 2015 Budget Estimates; Technical Report; GAO: Washington, D.C., USA, March 2014.
  167. Technical Report; GAO: Washington, D.C., USA, September 2014.
Citations (200)
View on Semantic Scholar

Summary

  • The paper systematically outlines IoT integration for defense by detailing applications like C4ISR, logistics, and soldier healthcare.
  • The methodology proposes a multi-layer IoT architecture using protocols such as CoAP and MQTT to ensure automation and robust network capabilities.
  • It highlights challenges in network security and system interoperability while offering a detailed research roadmap for mission-critical deployments.

Internet of Things for Defense and Public Safety: An Academic Perspective

The paper under review provides a comprehensive examination of the potential applications and implications of the Internet of Things (IoT) within defense and public safety sectors. Authored by Paula Fraga-Lamas et al., this survey explores how IoT technologies, renowned for revolutionizing industries, can transform modern warfare and public safety operations by enhancing efficiency, effectiveness, and cost savings.

Key Insights and Contributions

The authors systematically explore the applicability of IoT technologies in various defense and public safety scenarios, such as C4ISR (Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance), logistics, smart city operations, soldier healthcare, and energy management. They identify IoT's potential to improve situational awareness, automate response mechanisms, and facilitate real-time information sharing in complex operational environments.

Discussion of Tactical Requirements

The paper thoroughly reviews the tactical requirements essential for IoT integration in mission-critical operations. These include:

  • Deployment Features: Addressing power efficiency and operational resilience in harsh environments.
  • System Management: Emphasizing automation and reducing reliance on manual data processing.
  • Network Capabilities: Highlighting the need for robust network infrastructures capable of handling large volumes of data with secured communication.

Architectural and Protocol Considerations

The authors propose a multi-layer IoT architecture tailored for defense applications, recommending specific protocols like CoAP and MQTT for constrained environments. This architecture ensures seamless interoperability and integration with existing military and public safety communication frameworks.

Challenges and Future Directions

The survey identifies significant hurdles such as network security, interoperability of diverse systems, and the integration of IoT with traditional defense operations. Acknowledging the fragmented nature of current military IoT applications, the authors call for a more unified IT architecture and greater collaboration with the private sector to leverage commercial IoT advancements.

Research Roadmap

A notable contribution of this paper is the detailed research roadmap it proposes for enabling IoT deployment in defense and public safety. The roadmap outlines short-term (2016-2020) objectives across areas like identification, architecture, network capabilities, security, and energy efficiency. It emphasizes the importance of standardization and the development of automated, self-configuring networks.

Implications for Defense and Public Safety

In practice, IoT holds the promise of transforming how defense operations are conducted by providing enhanced real-time data analytics, predictive maintenance for military assets, and improved logistical efficiency. Theoretically, the integration of IoT into defense activities prompts a reevaluation of traditional warfare doctrines and necessitates the development of new operational strategies incorporating IoT capabilities.

Conclusion

The survey by Fraga-Lamas et al. sets a foundational framework for understanding and implementing IoT in defense and public safety. By highlighting the unique operational requirements and addressing potential challenges, this paper serves as a valuable resource for researchers and practitioners aiming to harness IoT innovations in mission-critical environments. Future research should focus on practical field-testing and real-world deployment case studies to continually refine and advance IoT integration in these sectors.

File Document Download Save Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com PDF File Document Download Save Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Markdown