4.6 Article

IoT-RRHM: Provably secure IoT-based real-time remote healthcare monitoring framework

期刊

JOURNAL OF SYSTEMS ARCHITECTURE
卷 138, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.sysarc.2023.102859

关键词

Anonymity; Authentication; Healthcare monitoring; IoT-device; Provable security

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We have developed an IoT-based real-time remote healthcare monitoring framework that ensures the security and privacy of patient data using elliptic curve cryptography and collision-resistant one-way hash function. The framework has low execution costs compared to existing schemes and has been proven to be secure in the random oracle model. Simulation results confirm its ability to withstand known passive and active attacks. Real-time implementation in an IoT healthcare environment further demonstrates its feasibility.
We have designed an IoT-based real-time remote healthcare monitoring (IoT-RRHM) framework to monitor the healthcare conditions of a patient who lives in a remote location. While monitoring the health conditions of a patient remotely via the Internet, the privacy and security of the patient data may be breached through eavesdropping, masquerading, fabrication, and replaying. The proposed IoT-RRHM framework provides health data security and privacy using elliptic curve cryptography and collision-resistant one-way hash function. It also ensures low execution costs compared to state-of-the-art schemes. The proposed IoT-RRHM framework is provably secure in the random oracle model. The AVISPA simulation results, confirm that the proposed IoT-RRHM framework can withstand the known passive and active attacks. The proposed IoT-RRHM is simulated in an IoT environment that used LM35 and MAX30100 sensor devices, Amica ESP 8266 NodeMCU micro -controller device, Raspberry Pi3, and ACS ACR38U-I1 38U contact smartcard reader/writer device for real-time implementation. This implementation shows that the proposed IoT-RRHM framework is feasible in an IoT-based healthcare environment.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据