| Literature DB >> 35634070 |
Mohammad Khalid Imam Rahmani1, Mohammed Shuaib2, Shadab Alam2, Shams Tabrez Siddiqui2, Sadaf Ahmad3, Surbhi Bhatia4, Arwa Mashat5.
Abstract
The internet of medical things (IoMT) is a smart medical device structure that includes apps, health services, and systems. These medical equipment and applications are linked to healthcare systems via the internet. Because IoT devices lack computational power, the collected data can be processed and analyzed in the cloud by more computationally intensive tools. Cloud computing in IoMT is also used to store IoT data as part of a collaborative effort. Cloud computing has provided new avenues for providing services to users with better user experience, scalability, and proper resource utilization compared to traditional platforms. However, these cloud platforms are susceptible to several security breaches evident from recent and past incidents. Trust management is a crucial feature required for providing secure and reliable service to users. The traditional trust management protocols in the cloud computing situation are centralized and result in single-point failure. Blockchain has emerged as the possible use case for the domain that requires trust and reliability in several aspects. Different researchers have presented various blockchain-based trust management approaches. This study reviews the trust challenges in cloud computing and analyzes how blockchain technology addresses these challenges using blockchain-based trust management frameworks. There are ten (10) solutions under two broad categories of decentralization and security. These challenges are centralization, huge overhead, trust evidence, less adaptive, and inaccuracy. This systematic review has been performed in six stages: identifying the research question, research methods, screening the related articles, abstract and keyword examination, data retrieval, and mapping processing. Atlas.ti software is used to analyze the relevant articles based on keywords. A total of 70 codes and 262 quotations are compiled, and furthermore, these quotations are categorized using manual coding. Finally, 20 solutions under two main categories of decentralization and security were retrieved. Out of these ten (10) solutions, three (03) fell in the security category, and the rest seven (07) came under the decentralization category.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35634070 PMCID: PMC9135549 DOI: 10.1155/2022/9766844
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Comput Intell Neurosci
Review of related literature surveys on trust approaches.
| Ref | Idea of paper | Year | Blockchain | Cloud | Trust |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [ | Overview of customer trust in cloud computing schemes to improve service provider behaviors | 2016 | x | ||
| [ | Review of trust approaches in cloud systems | 2016 | x | ||
| [ | Analyze the trust models in cloud systems | 2018 | x | ||
| [ | Overview of attacks and existing trust techniques in cloud system | 2017 | x | ||
| [ | Survey of trust in the cloud computing system | 2016 | x | ||
| [ | Analysis of evaluation methods for trust in cloud computing systems | 2018 | x | ||
| [ | Review of trust models and evaluation methods for a cloud system | 2016 | x | ||
| [ | Survey of trust evaluation methods and factors for cloud computing systems | 2017 | x | ||
| [ | Use of blockchain for making a trust-free system | 2020 | x | ||
| [ | Review application of blockchain in IoT cloud-based systems | 2019 | x | ||
| [ | Discuss the blockchain infrastructure for cloud and performance comparison of cloud data center | 2020 | x | ||
| [ | Review of attacks on blockchain and existing solutions | 2019 | x | x | |
| This study | Blockchain application for trust management in cloud computing based IoMT | 2022 |
Figure 1Architecture of IoMT and cloud integration.
Figure 2PRISMA flowchart.
Inclusion and exclusion criteria.
| Selection criteria | Details |
|---|---|
| Exclusion | (i) Non-English journal |
| (ii) Published between 2015 and 2021 | |
| (iii) Duplication | |
| (iv) Title and abstract not related to the scope of the paper | |
|
| |
| Inclusion | (i) Title and abstract related to trust in cloud computing |
| (ii) The given solution must be evaluated | |
Figure 3Mapping of trust challenges with the solution.
Comparison of trust-based approaches in cloud computing.
| Ref | Focus | Strengths | Type | Software used | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [ | Provide a trusted service brokering scheme to deal with multiple user requests for cloud resources | Robust in managing different dynamic service behavior at numerous cloud sites | Prototype | Eucalyptus—cloud environment | Y | Y | |||
| [ | Provided a trust evolution approach for cloud computing to eliminate the limitation of the existing trust model | It includes factors like user requirements, aggregates qualitative and quantitative evaluation, and incorporates user feedback in the trusted computing | Trust evaluation approach | -- | Y | Y | |||
| [ | Proposed a trust model for a cloud application to address the security issues | 1. Trust function in the given trust model to secure from a security attack | Model | Y | |||||
| 2. The developed trust model provides integrity, access control, availability, and privacy | |||||||||
| [ | A fuzzy logic-based trust calculation scheme by which trust is provided by service provided to the participants | To determine the trustworthiness of the cloud supplied using a fuzzy logic-based rating approach to convert the result and compliance values into rating | Scheme | MATLAB | Y | Y | |||
| [ | A trust evaluation model based on fuzzy logic to predict trust values | Prediction of trust value based on clouds' user feedback | Evaluation model | MATLAB | Y | Y | Y | ||
| [ | An SLA-based trust model was developed using user behaviour evaluation | Selection of cloud provided based on the SLA parameters | Model | MATLAB | Y | Y | |||
| [ | A trust model in insecure clouds based on domain partitions to address the issue of overhead and performance of cloud system | Efficient and accurate computation of trust | Model | MATLAB | Y | Y | |||
| [ | A trust management framework for securing the platforms of cloud computing | Allows the administrator to make decisions and manage the degree of redundancy and cost of resources | Framework | --- | Y | Y | |||
| [ | A trust architecture allows cloud customers to make decisions about cloud providers based on their reputation | Low overhead | Architecture | N/W simulator | Y | Y | |||
| [ | A trust management system to evaluate trust and reputation | The system developed is secured and maintains the trust and reputation of the cloud service provider | Evaluation management system | -- | Y | Y | |||
| [ | A trust evaluation model for improving trust | Robust and secure | Evaluation model | MyEclipse | Y | Y | |||
| Challenges—1. Centralization. 2. Trust evidence. 3. Less adaptive. 4. Huge management overhead. 5. Inaccuracy. | |||||||||
Category of solutions.
| Challenges | Solution |
|---|---|
| Centralized | Decentralization |
| Huge overhead | |
| Trust evidence | |
| Less adaptive | |
| Inaccuracy | Security |
Summary of blockchain-based trust approaches.
| Ref | Publish year | Function and application scenario | Blockchain type | Focus/contribution |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [ | 2020 | Access control framework | Public blockchain | Developed a decentralized identity management system |
| [ | 2019 | Cloud service transactions | Ethereum | Proposed a conventional SLA service model to detect the service infringements |
| [ | 2020 | Cloud security architecture | Ethereum | Proposed a blockchain and SDN-based hybrid cloud service architecture for cloud security |
| [ | 2020 | Cloud manufacturing | Ethereum | A new blockchain-based cloud manufacturing application model for interaction agreement |
| [ | 2020 | Data sharing in multicloud | Consortium blockchain | Architecture for equal data distribution in a multicloud setting in a secure manner |
| [ | 2018 | Data deletion in cloud storage | Public blockchain | Proposed a blockchain-based data deletion scheme to boost verification, reliability, efficiency, accountability, and transparency |
| [ | 2018 | Cloud identity management | Public blockchain | Provide a model to manage trusted behaviors and relationships with users without a centralized authority |
| [ | 2018 | Cloud storage based on P2P architecture | Not clear | A blockchain-based framework to counter data security, single point of failure, and privacy leakage issues in file block replica placement using genetic algorithm |
| [ | 2018 | Cloud data management | Ethereum blockchain | Proposed a controlled cloud data management model to counter lack of control and other potential security threats |
| [ | 2020 | Blockchain timestamping scheme | Public blockchain | Proposed a blockchain-based time stamping scheme to ensure accurate, reliable, efficient, secure, and scalable file storage services |
Solutions for trust issues.
| Ref | Solutions | Category | |
|---|---|---|---|
| [ | Secure and collaborative data sharing | Data sharing | Decentralization |
| [ | CBDM: cloud data management | Data sharing | |
| [ | AuthPrivacyChain | Access control | |
| [ | BC-DCM app | Access control | |
| [ | Witness model | Trust model | |
| [ | BC—data deletion scheme | Trust model | |
| [ | WIP: blockchain trust model | Trust model | |
| [ | BC-SDN | Security | Security |
| [ | Blockchain-based security architecture | Security | |
| [ | Chronos: blockchain-based timestamping scheme | Security | |