Embedding Security Awareness in IoT Systems: A Framework for Providing Change Impact Insights
Source abstract
Abstract
The Internet of Things (IoT) is rapidly advancing toward increased autonomy; however, the inherent dynamism, environmental uncertainty, device heterogeneity, and diverse data modalities pose serious challenges to its reliability and security. This paper proposes a novel framework for embedding security awareness into IoT systems—where security awareness refers to the system’s ability to detect uncertain changes and understand their impact on its security posture. While machine learning and deep learning (ML/DL) models integrated with explainable AI (XAI) methods offer capabilities for threat detection, they often lack contextual interpretation linked to system security. To bridge this gap, our framework maps XAI-generated explanations to a system’s structured security profile, enabling the identification of components affected by detected anomalies or threats. Additionally, we introduce a procedural method to compute an Importance Factor (IF) for each component, reflecting its operational criticality. This framework generates actionable insights by highlighting contextual changes, impacted components, and their respective IFs. We validate the framework using a smart irrigation IoT testbed, demonstrating its capability to enhance security awareness by tracking evolving conditions and providing real-time insights into potential Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Anomaly Detection Techniques and Applications · Network Security and Intrusion Detection · Data Stream Mining Techniques
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Computer Science, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK 74078, USA
Funding
Department of Computer Science at Oklahoma State University
References (62)
Show source-provided references
1. Reggio, G., Leotta, M., Cerioli, M., Spalazzese, R., and Alkhabbas, F. (2020). What are IoT systems for real? An experts’ survey on software engineering aspects. Internet Things, 12.10.1016/j.iot.2020.100313 ↗
2. Internet of Things (IoT): A vision, architectural elements, and future directions10.1016/j.future.2013.01.010 ↗
3. Taivalsaari, A., and Mikkonen, T. (2018, January 23–26). On the development of IoT systems. Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Fog and Mobile Edge Computing (FMEC), Barcelona, Spain.10.1109/FMEC.2018.8364039 ↗
4. Tawalbeh, L.A., Muheidat, F., Tawalbeh, M., and Quwaider, M. (2020). IoT Privacy and security: Challenges and solutions. Appl. Sci., 10.10.3390/app10124102 ↗
5. Internet of Things security: A survey10.1016/j.jnca.2017.04.002 ↗
6. Jahan, S., Alqahtani, S., Gamble, R.F., and Bayesh, M. (2023, January 25–29). Automated Extraction of Security Profile Information from XAI Outcomes. Proceedings of the 2023 IEEE International Conference on Autonomic Computing and Self-Organizing Systems Companion (ACSOS-C), Toronto, ON, Canada.10.1109/ACSOS-C58168.2023.00049 ↗
7. Petrovska, A. (October, January 27). Self-Awareness as a Prerequisite for Self-Adaptivity in Computing Systems. Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE International Conference on Autonomic Computing and Self-Organizing Systems Companion (ACSOS-C), Washington, DC, USA.10.1109/ACSOS-C52956.2021.00039 ↗
8. Autonomous vehicle: Security by design10.1109/TITS.2020.3000797 ↗
9. Li, J., Yi, X., and Wei, S. (2020, January 15–19). A study of network security situational awareness in Internet of Things. Proceedings of the 2020 International Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing (IWCMC), Limassol, Cyprus.10.1109/IWCMC48107.2020.9148549 ↗
10. New security state awareness model for IoT devices with edge intelligence10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3075220 ↗
11. Hemmati, A., and Rahmani, A.M. (2022). The Internet of Autonomous Things applications: A taxonomy, technologies, and future directions. Internet Things, 20.10.1016/j.iot.2022.100635 ↗
12. A Secure Interconnected Autonomous System Architecture for Multi-Domain IoT Ecosystems10.1109/MCOM.001.2300354 ↗
13. Self-adaptive software: Landscape and research challenges10.1145/1516533.1516538 ↗
14. Uncertainty in self-adaptive systems: A research community perspective
15. Jahan, S., Riley, I., and Gamble, R.F. (2020, January 17–21). Assessing adaptations based on change impacts. Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE International Conference on Autonomic Computing and Self-Organizing Systems (ACSOS), Washington, DC, USA.10.1109/ACSOS49614.2020.00025 ↗
16. Jahan, S. (2021). An Adaptation Assessment Framework for Runtime Security Assurance Case Evolution. [Ph.D. Dissertation, The University of Tulsa]. Available online: https://www.proquest.com/docview/2637547876?pq-origsite=gscholar&fromopenview=true&sourcetype=Dissertations%20&%20Theses.
17. Applying machine learning in self-adaptive systems: A systematic literature review
18. Machine learning and deep learning10.1007/s12525-021-00475-2 ↗
19. Vilone, G., and Longo, L. (2020). Explainable artificial intelligence: A systematic review. arXiv.
20. Molnar, C. (2020). Interpretable Machine Learning, Lulu. com. Available online: https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=jBm3DwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=Interpretable+machine+learning&ots=EhvWYjHDSY&sig=fJlg8xyZsauRhLjOYF_xUqr8khQ#v=onepage&q=Interpretable%20machine%20learning&f=false.
21. Alexander, R., Hawkins, R., and Kelly, T. (2011). Security Assurance Cases: Motivation and the State of the Art, High Integrity Systems Engineering, Department of Computer Science, University of York. Available online: https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=623bb1c1ded3860ed1307d45a2a01823b13abff6.
22. Kelly, T., and Weaver, R. (2004). The goal structuring notation–a safety argument notation. Dependable Systems and Networks 2004 Workshop on Assurance Cases, Citeseer. Available online: http://dslab.konkuk.ac.kr/class/2012/12SIonSE/Key%20Papers/The%20Goal%20Structuring%20Notation%20_%20A%20Safety%20Argument%20Notation.pdf.
23. Evaluations of visualization metaphors and views in the context of execution traces and call graphs
24. Salis, V., Sotiropoulos, T., Louridas, P., Spinellis, D., and Mitropoulos, D. (2021, January 25–28). Pycg: Practical call graph generation in Python. Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE/ACM 43rd International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), Madrid, Spain.10.1109/ICSE43902.2021.00146 ↗
25. Zhang, P., Wang, T., and Yan, J. (2022). PageRank centrality and algorithms for weighted, directed networks. Phys. A Stat. Mech. Its Appl., 586.10.1016/j.physa.2021.126438 ↗
26. Moscato, P., and de Vries, N. (2019). Centrality in networks: Finding the most important nodes. Business and Consumer Analytics: New Ideas, Springer.10.1007/978-3-030-06222-4 ↗
27. Centrality in social networks: Conceptual clarification
28. The anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual web search engine10.1016/S0169-7552(98)00110-X ↗
29. Internet of things (IoT) security intelligence: A comprehensive overview, machine learning solutions and research directions10.1007/s11036-022-01937-3 ↗
30. Bouaouad, A.E., Cherradi, A., Assoul, S., and Souissi, N. (2020, January 24–26). The key layers of IoT architecture. Proceedings of the 2020 5th International Conference on Cloud Computing and Artificial Intelligence: Technologies and Applications (CloudTech), Marrakesh, Morocco.10.1109/CloudTech49835.2020.9365919 ↗
31. Mrabet, H., Belguith, S., Alhomoud, A., and Jemai, A. (2020). A survey of IoT security based on a layered architecture of sensing and data analysis. Sensors, 20.10.3390/s20133625 ↗
32. Tukur, Y.M., Thakker, D., and Awan, I.U. (2019, January 26–28). Multi-layer approach to internet of things (IoT) security. Proceedings of the 2019 7th International Conference on Future Internet of Things and Cloud (FiCloud), Istanbul, Turkey.10.1109/FiCloud.2019.00023 ↗
33. A survey on IoT security: Application areas, security threats, and solution architectures10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2924045 ↗
34. Dargaoui, S., Azrour, M., El Allaoui, A., Amounas, F., Guezzaz, A., Attou, H., Hazman, C., Benkirane, S., and Bouazza, S.H. (2023). An overview of the security challenges in IoT environment. Adv. Technol. Smart Environ. Energy, 151–160.10.1007/978-3-031-25662-2_13 ↗
35. Koohang, A., Sargent, C.S., Nord, J.H., and Paliszkiewicz, J. (2022). Internet of Things (IoT): From awareness to continued use. Int. J. Inf. Manag., 62.10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102442 ↗
36. Context-aware autonomous security assertion for industrial IoT10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3032436 ↗
37. Jaigirdar, F.T., Rudolph, C., and Bain, C. (2020–1, January 29). Prov-IoT: A security-aware IoT provenance model. Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE 19th International Conference on Trust, Security and Privacy in Computing and Communications (TrustCom), Guangzhou, China.10.1109/TrustCom50675.2020.00183 ↗
38. A security awareness and protection system for 5G smart healthcare based on zero-trust architecture10.1109/JIOT.2020.3041042 ↗
39. Darias, J.M., Díaz-Agudo, B., and Recio-Garcia, J.A. (2021, January 13–16). A Systematic Review on Model-agnostic XAI Libraries. Proceedings of the ICCBR Workshops, Online.
40. The mythos of model interpretability: In machine learning, the concept of interpretability is both important and slippery10.1145/3236386.3241340 ↗
41. Ribeiro, M.T., Singh, S., and Guestrin, C. (2016, January 13–17). Why should I trust you? Explaining the predictions of any classifier. Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, San Francisco, CA, USA.10.1145/2939672.2939778 ↗
42. Ng, C.H., Abuwala, H.S., and Lim, C.H. (2022, January 22–25). Towards more stable LIME for explainable AI. Proceedings of the 2022 International Symposium on Intelligent Signal Processing and Communication Systems (ISPACS), Penang, Malaysia.10.1109/ISPACS57703.2022.10082810 ↗
43. Dieber, J., and Kirrane, S. (2020). Why model why? Assessing the strengths and limitations of LIME. arXiv.
44. A unified approach to interpreting model predictions
45. Li, M., Sun, H., Huang, Y., and Chen, H. (2024). Shapley value: From cooperative game to explainable artificial intelligence. Auton. Intell. Syst., 4.10.1007/s43684-023-00060-8 ↗
46. Miller, T. (2023, January 12–15). Explainable ai is dead, long live explainable ai! hypothesis-driven decision support using evaluative ai. Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, Chicago, IL, USA.10.1145/3593013.3594001 ↗
47. The application of machine learning in self-adaptive systems: A systematic literature review10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3036037 ↗
48. Bahmani, B., Kumar, R., Mahdian, M., and Upfal, E. (2012, January 12–16). Pagerank on an evolving graph. Proceedings of the 18th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, Beijing, China.10.1145/2339530.2339539 ↗
49. Sallinen, S., Luo, J., and Ripeanu, M. (2023, January 20–23). Real-time pagerank on dynamic graphs. Proceedings of the 32nd International Symposium on High-Performance Parallel and Distributed Computing, Orlando, FL, USA.10.1145/3588195.3593004 ↗
50. Zhang, J., and Luo, Y. (2017, January 26–27). Degree centrality, betweenness centrality, and closeness centrality in social network. Proceedings of the 2017 2nd International Conference on Modelling, Simulation and Applied Mathematics (MSAM2017), Bangkok, Thailand.10.2991/msam-17.2017.68 ↗
51. SensorRank: An energy efficient sensor activation algorithm for sensor data fusion in wireless networks10.1109/JIOT.2018.2871469 ↗
52. Towards pagerank update in a streaming graph by incremental random walk10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3149296 ↗
53. Rangra, A., and Sehgal, V.K. (2021). Social Internet of Things: Their Trustworthiness, Node Rank, and Embeddings Management. [Ph.D. Dissertation, Jaypee University of Information Technology].
54. Ferrag, M.A. (2025, May 25). Edge-IIoTset Cyber Security Dataset of IoT IIoT. Available online: https://www.kaggle.com/datasets/mohamedamineferrag/edgeiiotset-cyber-security-dataset-of-iot-iiot.
55. Edge-IIoTset: A new comprehensive realistic cyber security dataset of IoT and IIoT applications for centralized and federated learning10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3165809 ↗
56. Saheed, Y.K., Abdulganiyu, O.H., Majikumna, K.U., Mustapha, M., and Workneh, A.D. (2024). ResNet50-1D-CNN: A new lightweight resNet50-One-dimensional convolution neural network transfer learning-based approach for improved intrusion detection in cyber-physical systems. Int. J. Crit. Infrastruct. Prot., 45.10.1016/j.ijcip.2024.100674 ↗
57. Joint Task Force (2020). Security and Privacy Controls for Federal Information Systems, NIST. NIST Special Publication 800-53, Revision 5.
58. Depth-first search is inherently sequential10.1016/0020-0190(85)90024-9 ↗
59. Dantas Silva, F.S., Silva, E., Neto, E.P., Lemos, M., Venancio Neto, A.J., and Esposito, F. (2020). A taxonomy of DDoS attack mitigation approaches featured by SDN technologies in IoT scenarios. Sensors, 20.10.3390/s20113078 ↗
60. Guidotti, R. (2021). Evaluating local explanation methods on ground truth. Artif. Intell., 291.10.1016/j.artint.2020.103428 ↗
61. Miró-Nicolau, M., Jaume-i-Capó, A., and Moyà-Alcover, G. (2024). Assessing fidelity in XAI post-hoc techniques: A comparative study with ground truth explanations datasets. Artif. Intell., 335.10.1016/j.artint.2024.104179 ↗
62. Canadian Institute for Cybersecurity (2018). IDS 2018 Intrusion CSVs (CSE-CIC-IDS2018) [Data Set], University of New Brunswick. Available online: https://www.kaggle.com/datasets/solarmainframe/ids-intrusion-csv/data?select=02-20-2018.csv.