Internet of Things is a ubiquitous internetwork of intelligent physical objects, such as Things, and people which legitimate any things to connect and communicate by converting the physical world into a massive information system.
The Internet of things specified as interconnection of smart devices to collect data and make intelligent decisions. By viewing the things on the internet, conventional devices become intelligent and independent whereas this vision becomes real and realistic.
Anyhow, lack of intrinsic security measures makes IOT more vulnerable to privacy and the threats related security. With the “Security by design”, blockchain helps in addressing large-scale security requirements.
It has the adequacy like immutability, transparency, data encryption, and the operational resilience to help us to solve the most architectural deficiencies of the IOT.
With the ever-increasing, the existence of IoT objects and their visibility from the internet and security is the primary concern. On one hand, the ubiquitous nature of IoT encourages the creation of innovative applications for the end-user, but, on the other hand, lack of security measures may lead to critical issues like persons subjected to physical damage such as break-in due to the hacking of the smart alarm system.
Need for Blockchain:
Now, IOT reports for about 5 million connected devices where this number will continue to rise and reach some million devices in the coming future. Every device produces and exchanges immense amounts of data. Inscribing the fundamental security issues for such a vast information system is defying in itself.
A crucial demur for IOT is its distributive architecture. Typically, in a network each node is a possible point of failure which can be exploited by the launch of cyber-attacks such as distributed denial of service wherein the system of nodes with several infected devices working simultaneously collapses briskly.
Another steady and probably one of the most critical threats is data confidentiality and authentication. In the hook of data security, the internet of things is exploited and used inappropriately.
Another challenge is data integrity and one of the significant applications of IOT is in the decision support system. The data aggregated from the ﬂeet of sensors can be used in making timely decisions.
Hence, it is fundamental to protect the system from injection attacks, which try to inject false measures and therefore, affect decision-making. Possibility is crucial for automated systems like vehicular networks, manufacturing industries, and smart grids processing in real-time information.
Sensor downtime results in losses fluctuating from monetary to life-threatening situations. With the evolution of sensor technology, the sensors which generate data capable of trading data in data marketplaces and end-to-end autonomous systems, creating trust between participating entities is a signiﬁcant challenge.
To achieve such targets, several technologies as security and cryptographic functions have been
oppressed. The symbiosis among all these technologies composes the blockchain. This is the most engaging point of this revolutionary emerging technology wherein humans often confuse blockchain with Bitcoin, but Bitcoin indicates a cryptocurrency that drags the technology to be able to circulate globally without the supervision of a central guarantor.
The other security feature was the availability although it is really considered the simplest to be achieved by Blockchain, which they were designed to be handed out systems, allowing them to continue employing even when some nodes were under attack.
There are halting things to be contemplated in handling the security, scalability, cryptographic development, and stability requirements of the novel blockchain IoT applications.
All the blockchain users are known by its hash or their public key. Privacy was more convoluted in Blockchain IoT environments, because these devices discover special user data that can be saved in a Blockchain whose privacy requirements are different for diverse countries.
It implies that anonymity was not accomplished, because whole transactions were shared among which there was potential for third parties to analyze and identify these transactions and infer the participant’s identities.