Standards for Wireless Sensor Networks in Critical Infrastructures

Version	Summary	Created by	Modification	Content Size	Created at	Operation
1		Panagiotis Papageorgas	--	4153	2024-01-23 08:40:01	\|
2	Reference format revised.	Lindsay Dong	Meta information modification	4153	2024-01-24 01:33:51	\|

This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/fi16010033

The crucial role of wireless sensor networks (WSNs) in the surveillance and administration of critical infrastructures (CIs) contributes to their reliability, security, and operational efficiency. It starts by detailing the international significance and structural aspects of these infrastructures, mentions the market tension in recent years in the gradual development of wireless networks for industrial applications, and proceeds to categorize WSNs and examine the protocols and standards of WSNs in demanding environments like critical infrastructures, drawing on the recent literature.

critical infrastructures wireless sensor networks protocols standards

1. Introduction

The present era is filled with global challenges and radical changes in the daily life of the average person. From the year 2010 to 2023, significant global crises have occurred, such as economic crises, pandemics, major climate change-induced disasters, and war conflicts. However, where the economy can sustain a considerable impact is when all these adverse phenomena converge on a critical infrastructure. Disruptions to critical infrastructure can lead to severe economic consequences and substantial harm to the welfare of citizens, particularly the disadvantaged. The economic and social impacts of critical infrastructure disruption primarily result from the loss of the services they provide rather than the cost of physical damages to the assets themselves. For instance, direct damages from disasters to power generation and transport infrastructures are estimated at USD 18 billion annually in low- and middle-income countries globally. However, the estimated cost of the associated service disruptions (energy and transport) ranges from USD 391 billion to USD 647 billion, making it at least 20 times larger. The United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction’s report titled “Making Critical Infrastructure Resilient” ^[1] emphasizes the impact of disasters on critical infrastructures in Europe and Central Asia. According to the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction, 1889 infrastructure assets in 20 countries suffered damage in 2018, resulting in economic losses exceeding USD 3 billion. Climate change intensifies these risks, affecting extreme weather events, droughts, and floods, and particularly impacting the energy, transportation, and water sectors. Predictions indicate a 60% increase in damages due to extreme weather events in the region over the next 30 years ^[1]. Responding to these challenges, the U.S. Department of Agriculture is investing USD 285 million in critical infrastructure ^[2]. Additionally, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Israel National Cyber Directorate, and Binational Industrial Research and Development Foundation (BIRD Foundation) invested USD 3.85 million in critical infrastructure cybersecurity projects ^[3]. The European Investment Bank Group has pledged EUR 8 billion for security investments until 2027, focusing on military mobility, space, green security, and critical infrastructure ^[4]. Siemens announced a USD 150 million investment in a high-tech manufacturing plant to support American data centers and critical infrastructure ^[5].

2. Critical Infrastructures

2.1. Critical Infrastructure Definition

The term critical infrastructure refers to the physical and virtual assets, systems, and networks that are crucial for the functioning of a society. These infrastructures are considered vital due to their significant impact on national security, economic stability, and public health and safety. Their incapacitation, destruction, or disruption can have severe consequences, leading to societal vulnerabilities and adverse effects on citizens. Critical infrastructure is a fundamental component of modern society, encompassing assets, systems, and networks that are essential for the maintenance of vital societal functions. The protection and resilience of critical infrastructure is paramount to ensuring citizens’ security and well-being ^[6]^[7].

2.2. Critical Infrastructure Sectors

Critical infrastructure sectors are categorized differently in different nations. Variations between countries can be explained by differences in conceptualizations of what are critical and country-specific peculiarities and traditions. Sociopolitical factors and geographical and historical preconditions determine whether a sector is deemed to be critical. As an example, the National Infrastructure Protection Plan (NIPP) in the US divided critical infrastructure into 16 sectors in 2013 ^[3]. On the other hand, the European Union divided critical infrastructure into 13 sectors ^[4], Australia into 11 sectors, and India 12 ^[5]. In Table 1, the differences regarding critical infrastructure sectors as addressed in six countries are shown ^[4]^[5]^[6]^[8]. The connection of the content of the rows of Table 1 with the content of the columns is declared by the symbol ■.

Table 1. CI sectors.

Sectors	Countries
	Germany	United Kingdom	Japan	United States	China	India	Australia
Banking and Finance	■	■	■	■	■	■	■
Central Government/Government Services	■	■	■	■		■
Chemical and Nuclear Industry		■	■	■
Emergency/Rescue Services		■		■
Energy	■	■	■	■	■	■	■
Food/Agriculture	■	■		■			■
Health Services	■			■			■
Information Services/Media	■		■
Military Defense/Army/Defense Facilities		■		■	■		■
Telecommunications /Public Communications		■		■	■	■	■
Transportation	■	■	■	■	■	■	■
Water (Supply)/Sewerage	■	■	■	■	■	■	■
Space		■					■
Critical Manufacturing				■
Information and Communication Technology	■		■	■	■		■
Dams				■
e-Government Services					■
Strategic and Public Enterprises						■
Higher Education and Research							■

2.3. Critical Infrastructures and Industry 4.0

Throughout history, societies have continuously evolved, and this natural progression has significantly impacted the industrial sector. The industrial sector itself has undergone four distinct and challenging periods of transformation. The initial period, from 1784 to the mid-19th century, witnessed the introduction of steam-powered machinery, revolutionizing mechanical manufacturing. The second phase, spanning from the late 19th century to the 1970s, marked the era of electric-powered mass production, characterized by assembly lines and division of labor. The third period, from the 1970s to the present day, witnessed remarkable advancements in electronics, information technology, and automation of complex tasks. As societies progress, the industrial sector remains at the forefront of innovation, shaping the course of human development and ushering in new opportunities and challenges. Today, humanity stands at the threshold of a new era known as the fourth industrial revolution or Industry 4.0 ^[9]^[10].

Industry 4.0 (I4.0) was initially introduced in 2011 as a strategic initiative by the German government. Since then, various other nations have followed suit with their initiatives, including the United States’ Advanced Manufacturing Partnership, China’s Made in China, Britain’s Smart Factory, and Japan’s Super Smart Society. Today, the concept of the fourth industrial revolution is being embraced by all developed countries. The essence of Industry 4.0 lies in its aim to transition from centralized production to a more flexible and self-controlled approach. This evolution is a logical outcome of the progress made in computer-integrated manufacturing and flexible manufacturing systems over the past decades and the widespread adoption of digitization in recent years. It is worth noting that the development of I4.0 solutions and technologies has not only benefited the manufacturing sector but has also had a positive impact on the service sector, where applications like big data solutions in banking and marketing have emerged ^[11].

As expected, critical infrastructures are interconnected with this important industrial evolution. The concept of Industry 4.0 plays a vital role in critical infrastructure, as some of its technologies are already or will become integral parts of various sectors. These technologies include industrial automation, robotics, sensors, cyber–physical systems, Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) ^[12], big data, block chain, edge computing, digital twin, and artificial intelligence, which are widely considered in manufacturing and service industries ^[13]^[14]^[15]^[16]. However, the adoption of Industry 4.0 solutions in critical infrastructure also introduces potential risks that need to be carefully addressed, such as cybersecurity and reliability concerns ^[9]^[17]. A pivotal aspect of Industry 4.0 is the IIoT. The Industrial Internet of Things plays a crucial role in the advancement of critical infrastructures through the utilization of intelligent sensors, fast communication protocols, and robust cybersecurity mechanisms. The establishment and effective management of sensor networks form the foundation of IIoT, making it a significant component that profoundly influences both Industry 4.0 and critical infrastructures.

3. Communication Technologies and Wireless Sensors Networks

Over the years, both the scientific community and the industry sector have been dedicated to developing protocols and standards to ensure the efficient operation of sensor networks. Given the diversity of scenarios and requirements, it became evident that a single “golden” protocol or standard would not be sufficient. As a result, the creation of numerous distinct protocols and standards to address various needs and situations has offered a plethora of different options. A sensor network comprises interconnected small devices known as sensors and nodes, working together to collect and transmit data from their surroundings. These sensor networks find application in various fields such as military, agriculture, environmental monitoring, home automation, healthcare, automotive, industrial sectors, etc. As it becomes evident, many of the above sections are also characterized as critical infrastructure. Each field has specific requirements such as network extension, compactness, mobility (which necessitates wireless sensors with autonomous power sources), cost, and performance. Sensor networks can be categorized into wired and wireless networks, each utilizing different protocols and offering different advantages.

Wired communication technologies have played a significant role in industrial monitoring and control networks and have a significant development lead regarding wireless networks. Useful data for understanding the gap between the two technologies can be obtained from the annual research published by HMS Networks ^[17]^[18]. HMS Networks conducts an annual assessment of the industrial network market to estimate the distribution of new nodes within factories. In Figure 1, the timeline of the industrial network market shares is shown. Both technologies at the top of the timeline—Fieldbus and Industrial Ethernet—are wired technologies; wireless networks have the lowest percentage of uses for the industrial environment. To better study the long-term development of these networks, it is useful to consider the annual growth of each technology, as depicted in Figure 2. The yearly expansion of wireless networks is consistently making significant strides. According to research conducted by HMS Networks, industrial wireless networks have experienced a remarkable 22% growth in the past year, and their market share reached 8% in 2023, marking a 1% increase from 2022. This acceleration can be attributed to the increasing introduction of wireless solutions in industrial automation, with common applications including replacing cables, enabling wireless machine access, and facilitating connectivity with mobile industrial equipment.

Figure 1. Timeline of industrial network market shares by HMS Networks.

Figure 2. Timeline of annual growth of network market shares by HMS Networks.

From the preceding Figure 1 and Figure 2, it is evident that wireless sensor networks have a promising future and are here to stay. Although technology is still evolving and has a considerable distance to cover before it can effectively compete with wired technologies in terms of market share, wireless sensor networks have been in use for many years. An early example dates back to the Cold War in the early 1960s, when silent Soviet submarines were detected using the sound surveillance system (SOSUS), which utilized acoustic sensors. These systems have since been adopted by the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) for monitoring events in the oceans. The concept of WSNs can be traced back to the distributed sensor networks (DSN) program initiated in 1980 by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). Subsequent technological advancements in the following decades have provided the means for the development of WSNs capable of meeting and exceeding high-performance standards.

3.1. Wireless Sensors Networks Categorization

Wireless sensor networks offer versatile solutions for a variety of applications and can be categorized in several ways, each shedding light on their unique characteristics:

3.1.1. Categorized by Physical Environment

Underground: WSNs deployed beneath the Earth’s surface, often used in mining or geological monitoring.
Terrestrial: these networks operate on land, making them suitable for a wide range of applications such as environmental sensing and smart agriculture.
Underwater: submerged WSNs are essential for oceanographic research, aquatic habitat monitoring, and underwater exploration. Multimedia: these networks handle multimedia data and are valuable in applications like surveillance, video streaming, and multimedia content distribution.
Mobile WSNs: mobile WSNs are dynamic and adaptable, making them ideal for scenarios like wildlife tracking, vehicular networks, or mobile healthcare solutions ^[18].

3.1.2. Categorized by Different Network Topologies

Star: in a star topology, all sensors communicate directly with a central hub or gateway, offering simplicity in deployment.
Mesh: sensors in a mesh network communicate through neighboring nodes, ensuring self-healing capabilities and redundancy.
Tree: with a hierarchical structure, data flow from leaf nodes to a central sink node, enabling efficient data aggregation.
Hybrid: combine elements of various topologies to strike a balance between reliability, efficiency, and network coverage ^[18]^[19]^[20].

3.1.3. Categorized by Applications

Health monitoring: WSNs play a crucial role in healthcare, employing advanced medical sensors to monitor patients both in hospital and at home. These WSNs facilitate real-time monitoring of vital signs through wearable hardware. The health applications of WSNs encompass patient-wearable monitoring, home assisting systems, and hospital patient monitoring.
Urban: WSNs offer diverse sensing capabilities that open the door to obtaining extensive information about a specified area, whether indoor or outdoor. WSNs serve as a versatile tool for measuring the spatial and temporal characteristics of various phenomena within urban settings, presenting numerous applications. In the urban context, WSNs find widespread use in areas such as smart homes, smart cities, transportation systems, and structural health monitoring.
Flora and fauna: The essential aspects of both plant life (flora) and animal life (fauna) are crucial for any nation. The primaries are greenhouse monitoring, crop monitoring, and livestock farming. The illustration also highlights the prevalent types of sensors commonly employed in these applications.
Environmental: The use of WSNs can enhance environmental applications requiring constant monitoring in challenging and distant locations. This includes subcategories like water monitoring, air monitoring, and emergency alerting, each involving specific types of sensors. The subsequent subsection delves into the examination of WSNs designed for these environmental applications.
Military: The military pioneered WSNs, with early research (such as Smart Dust in the late 1990s) aiming at creating minuscule yet efficient sensor nodes for espionage. Subsequent technological advancements expanded WSN applications in the military, with a focus on battlefield surveillance, combat monitoring, and intruder detection. Various sensor types are now commonly employed in these military WSN applications.
Industrial: Industrial wireless sensor networks (IWSNs) present numerous benefits for facilitating the intricate and dynamic processes within industrial settings. Thanks to their effortless setup, unrestricted mobility, and smart data routing capabilities, IWSNs are emerging as a promising communication option for industrial applications ^[18]^[19]^[20]^[21].

3.2. Standards and Protocols

Standards play a paramount role in security and in the electronic components manufacturing domain and, therefore, for critical infrastructure. Standards ensure a seamless and reliable integration of technology into essential systems. Standards in critical infrastructure are the linchpin for reliability, safety, security, innovation, and regulatory adherence, collectively contributing to the robustness of essential systems that underpin modern society. They define criteria for materials, tolerances, testing procedures, and security, aiming to achieve consistency and interoperability of electronic components. Adhering to these standards enhances product performance, longevity, and compatibility while facilitating industry-wide collaboration.

3.2.1. Standardization Organizations

In alignment with their philosophy, standardization organizations operate extensively across various developed nations, spanning a broad spectrum of scientific domains.

IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers): On 1 January 1963, the American Institute of Electrical Engineers (AIEE) and the Institute of Radio Engineers (IRE) joined forces to establish the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Initially, IEEE boasted 150,000 members, with 140,000 based in the United States. As the early 21st century unfolded, IEEE’s influence spanned 39 societies, 130 journals, and over 300 annual conferences, with a focus on diverse areas like nanotechnologies, bioengineering, and robotics. From jet cockpits to medical imaging, electronics have become omnipresent. As of 2020, IEEE’s membership exceeded 395,000 across 160 countries, solidifying its status as the largest global technical professional organization through a network of units, publications, and conferences ^[22].
ISO (International Organization for Standardization): In 1946, a gathering of 65 representatives from 25 nations convened to deliberate on the future of international standardization. This culminated in the official establishment of ISO in 1947, comprising 67 technical committees. Since its inception, ISO has regularly disseminated information on its technical committees and published standards and organizational updates. Functioning as an independent non-governmental international entity, ISO boasts a membership of 169 national standardization bodies. Through collaborative expertise, ISO facilitates the development of voluntary, consensus-driven, and globally pertinent international standards, fostering innovation and delivering solutions to worldwide challenges ^[23].
CEN (European Committee for Standardization): CEN, the European Committee for Standardization, serves as a consortium uniting national standardization bodies from 34 European nations. This collaborative platform is dedicated to formulating European standards and technical documents across diverse products, materials, services, and processes. Recognized by the European Union and the European Free Trade Association, CEN, along with CENELEC and ETSI, is entrusted with the task of devising voluntary standards at the European level. In the interest of international and European standardization, CEN collaborates with CIE, aiming to leverage the knowledge and expertise within each organization through a formalized agreement ^[24].
IEC (International Electrotechnical Commission): In 1906, the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) was established in London after a proposal at the 1904 International Electrical Congress. The congress recognized that the diversity in electrical systems worldwide was hindering progress. The IEC’s inaugural meeting included representatives from multiple countries, with Lord Kelvin elected as the first president. Today, the IEC, a global non-profit organization, unites over 170 countries and oversees 20,000 experts worldwide. Celebrating its centenary in 2006, the IEC has adapted to 21st-century technological advancements, establishing new technical committees for areas like fuel cells, assessment methods for human exposure to electric and electromagnetic fields (including 5G), avionics, electronic displays, nanotechnology, marine energy generation, solar thermal electric plants, printed electronics, electrical energy storage systems, wearable electronic devices, personal e-transporters, and more. This reflects the IEC’s commitment to staying current with evolving technologies and fostering standardization in diverse fields ^[25].
IPC (Institute of Printed Circuits): Founded in the autumn of 1957, the Institute of Printed Circuits, or IPC, has remained committed to eliminating supply chain challenges, establishing industry standards, and fostering industry progress. As a worldwide trade association, IPC is devoted to enhancing the competitive excellence and financial prosperity of its electronics industry members. To achieve these goals, IPC will allocate resources to management improvement, technology enhancement programs, formulation of pertinent standards, and environmental conservation. IPC aspires to be a globally respected organization, recognized for leadership and its significant role in providing standards and quality programs for the electronics industry ^[26].

Other entities play a pivotal role in establishing and refining standards that govern diverse aspects of products, materials, services, and processes, such as ITU (International Telecommunication Union), BSI (British Standards Institution), ISA (International Society of Automation) MSS (Manufacturers Standardization Society), NEMA (National Electrical Manufacturers Association), JEDEC (Joint Electron Device Engineering Council), ANSI (American National Standards Institute), NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology), and JEITA (Japan Electronics and Information Technology Industries Association). Their operations are not confined to a specific sector, reflecting a comprehensive approach to standardization that resonates with the global pursuit of quality, innovation, and harmonization. In numerous developed countries, these organizations serve as crucial pillars in fostering collaboration, ensuring adherence to best practices, and contributing to the advancement of standards across the scientific landscape.

3.2.2. Wireless Protocols

The cellular Internet of Things (IoT) refers to a category of communication technologies and protocols that enable Internet connectivity for a wide range of IoT devices using cellular networks. It allows these IoT devices to transmit and receive data over cellular infrastructures, which include technologies such as 2G, 3G, 4G, and 5G. Cellular IoT technologies encompass various standards and protocols designed for connecting IoT devices via cellular networks. Second-generation technology introduced digital voice encoding, enabling more efficient use of the radio spectrum compared with its analog predecessor. It enabled text messaging (SMS) for the first time, revolutionizing communication. In 1991, the European standard GSM (global system for mobile communications) became a global benchmark for 2G, ensuring interoperability and driving widespread adoption. This technology laid the foundation for mobile data services, paving the way for future generations of cellular networks and the evolution of modern smartphones and mobile data connectivity. The history of 3G cellular technology is a pivotal chapter in the evolution of mobile communication. Emerging in the early 2000s, 3G (or third-generation technology) marked a substantial advancement over its predecessors. It introduced high-speed data transmission, enabling not only voice calls but also video calls and mobile internet access. The rollout of 3G networks fostered the proliferation of mobile data services, leading to the birth of mobile applications, video streaming, and mobile browsing.

4G Cellular (Fourth Generation)

Fourth-generation cellular technology was a watershed moment in mobile communication. Launched in the late 2000s, 4G (or fourth-generation technology) represented a remarkable leap forward from its 3G predecessor. It introduced unprecedented data speeds and low latency, ushering in the era of high-definition video streaming and faster mobile internet. The long-term evolution (LTE) standard emerged as a global benchmark for 4G, enabling seamless data connectivity. Fourth-generation technology revolutionized communications, serving as the foundation for the mobile app ecosystem, enabling high-quality voice and video calls, and driving the widespread adoption of smartphones. Its impact extended beyond personal communication, supporting the growth of IoT and the development of smart cities and connected devices.

5G Cellular (Fifth Generation)

As 4G networks reached their capacity limits, there was a growing need for a faster, more efficient, and more robust network. The proliferation of IoT devices, smart cities, autonomous vehicles, and augmented reality applications demanded a new solution. Fifth-generation technology is designed to deliver faster data speeds, lower latency, and massive device connectivity. It utilizes higher radio frequencies and small-cell technology to provide faster data rates, often in the gigabit range, and can simultaneously connect a vast number of devices, something that makes it ideal for the IoT.

ZigBee

ZigBee serves as a wireless network data transmission protocol, supporting mesh and cluster tree architectures. Its functionality, akin to Wi-Fi, distinguishes itself through lower energy consumption, modest bit rates (up to 200 and 50 kbps), and an operational range of about 100 m. ZigBee enables two-way communication, allowing devices to both send and receive signals, with some capable of relaying signals. Developed by the ZigBee Alliance in 2002, this technology boasts collaboration from numerous globally recognized companies, including Samsung, Philips, Siemens, Bosch, Motorola, Amazon, and Xiaomi. The initial ZigBee specification, Version 1.0, emerged in 2004, followed by the introduction of ZigBee 3.0 in 2016.

NB-IoT

The Narrowband Internet of Things (NB-IoT) is an emerging IoT technology created by the Third-Generation Partnership Project (3GPP). Operating alongside LTE in licensed cellular spectrums, NB-IoT aims to establish a low-power wide-area network (LPWAN). Devices utilizing NB-IoT are designed for extended battery life, with an expectancy of up to 10 years on a single battery charge, covering approximately 10 km in range. The modules are cost-effective and offer reliable connectivity through commercial LTE operators. These modules can incorporate sensors for measuring and transmitting data (uplink) or receiving data (downlink). In 3GPP’s release 13, the maximum data rates are set at 20 kbps for uplink and 100 kbps for downlink, with later releases significantly improving the uplink rate to 142.5 kbps ^[27].

LoRaWAN

LoRaWAN—a prominent LPWAN technology—has garnered substantial attention from the research community. Developed by Semtech Corporation, it facilitates long-range data transmission with low data rates. Using a chirp spread spectrum (CSS) modulation, where the chirp signal frequency varies, LoRaWAN ensures robust coverage. The modulation employs spreading factors (SFs) ranging from 7 to 12, with higher SFs providing better coverage but at the expense of data rate and power efficiency ^[28]^[29].

Bluetooth Low Energy

Bluetooth technology owes much of its success to the remarkable flexibility it affords developers. With two radio options, Bluetooth caters to a diverse range of wireless connectivity needs, making it a preferred choice for various applications. Whether facilitating high-quality audio streaming, data transfer between devices, or communication in building automation, Bluetooth Low Energy (LE) and Bluetooth Classic radios offer tailored solutions to developers worldwide. The Bluetooth LE radio, designed for ultra-low power operation, operates across 40 channels in the 2.4 GHz unlicensed ISM frequency band. This design grants developers significant flexibility in crafting products that align with the specific connectivity demands of their target markets. Bluetooth LE supports various communication topologies, extending from point-to-point to broadcast and, more recently, mesh, enabling the creation of dependable large-scale device networks. Initially renowned for device communication, Bluetooth LE has evolved into a prominent device positioning technology, meeting the rising demand for highly accurate indoor location services ^[30].

WirelessHART

WirelessHART—initiated in 2004 by 37 HART Communication Foundation companies—is a wireless sensor networking technology developed for process field device networks. Approved by the IEC in 2009, it is an open standard supported by various industry leaders. The latest version—IEC/PAS 62591:2016—was released in 2016. WirelessHART is an extension of the wired HART protocol, operating in the 2.4 GHz ISM band, using the IEEE 802.15.4 standard ^[31]. Kevin B. Hall ^[32] notes that, in rural American communities, electric companies managing supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) systems are increasingly adopting wireless administration. Given the absence of wired high-speed internet access in these rural areas, electric companies (vital components of CI) are turning to wireless sensor and mesh networks (WSMN) for communication over extensive distances. Nodes within the rural electric grids utilize WirelessHART to transmit information back to the central SCADA controller. Lastly, study ^[33] highlights WirelessHART signalling as the predominant digital communication technology in process control industries, boasting over 40 million deployed devices. It emphasizes the growing challenges, particularly in anticipation of the exponential WirelessHART expansion projected until 2028, especially within sectors like oil, gas, chemical, and power generation.

6LowPAN

Smita Sanjay Ambarkar ^[34] explains the range of 6LowPAN from smart home to critical infrastructure and studies the enhancement of IoT network security against routing protocol for low-power and lossy networks (RPL) attacks. It highlights the vulnerability of IoT networks to various RPL attacks, like HELLO flood, version number, and rank attacks. The paper proposes a mutual authentication scheme to protect the network from these threats. The proposed method is evaluated for its effectiveness in mitigating these attacks, focusing on power consumption and network performance. The results demonstrate that the scheme effectively blocks unauthenticated nodes and improves network performance.

References

United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction—Regional Office for Europe & Central Asia. Making Critical Infrastructure Resilient; United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction—Regional Office for Europe & Central Asia: Brussels, Belgium, 2020.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). USDA Rural Development FY 2022 Awards Rural Energy for America Program; United States Department of Agriculture: Washington, DC, USA, 2022; Volume 2023.
Vogelman, S.J. The Fortnightlya Review of Middle East Regional Economic & Cultural News & Developments. Available online: https://atid-edi.com/category/fortnightly/ (accessed on 7 November 2023).
Willis, R. European Investment Bank Pledges Record Funding for Europe’s Security Infrastructure, Vows More Support for Ukraine. Available online: https://www.eib.org/en/press/all/2023-227-eib-pledges-record-funding-for-europe-s-security-infrastructure-vows-more-support-for-ukraine (accessed on 1 December 2023).
Florian Martens, S.K. Siemens to Invest More than US$500 million in U.S. Manufacturing for Critical Infrastructure in 2023. Available online: https://press.siemens.com/global/en/pressrelease/siemens-invest-more-us500-million-us-manufacturing-critical-infrastructure-2023 (accessed on 5 December 2023).
Commission of the European Communities. Communication from the Commission on a European Programme for Critical Infrastructure Protection; Commission of the European Communities: Brussels, Belgium, 2006.
European Parliament. Resilience of Critical Entities and Repealing Council Directive 2008/114/EC. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2022/2557/oj (accessed on 14 September 2023).
Moteff, J.; Parfomak, P. Critical Infrastructure Identification, Prioritization, and Protection, 2004. Available online: https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/ADA454016 (accessed on 20 July 2023).
Wisniewski, M.; Gladysz, B.; Ejsmont, K.; Wodecki, A.; Van Erp, T. Industry 4.0 Solutions Impacts on Critical Infrastructure Safety and Protection–A Systematic Literature Review. IEEE Access 2022, 10, 82716–82735.
Davies, R. Industry 4.0, Digitalisation for Productivity and Growth; European Parliamentary Research Service: Brussels Belgium, 2015.
Majstorovic, V.D.; Mitrovic, R. Industry 4.0 Programs Worldwide. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on the Industry 4.0 Model for Advanced Manufacturing, Belgrade, Serbia, 3–6 June 2019.
Sisinni, E.; Mahmood, A. Wireless Communications for Industrial Internet of Things: The LPWAN Solutions. In Wireless Networks and Industrial IoT; Mahmood, N.H., Marchenko, N., Gidlund, M., Popovski, P., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2021.
Amit Shukla, H.K. Application of robotics in offshore oil and gas industry—A review part II. Robot. Auton. Syst. 2015, 75, 508–524.
Brucherseifer, E.; Winter, H.; Mentges, A.; Mühlhäuser, M.; Hellmann, M. Digital Twin conceptual framework for improving critical infrastructure resilience. At-Automatisierungstechnik 2021, 69, 1062–1080.
Laplante, P.; Amaba, B. Artificial Intelligence in Critical Infrastructure Systems. Computer 2021, 54, 14–24.
Wu, Y.; Dai, H.N.; Wang, H. Convergence of Blockchain and Edge Computing for Secure and Scalable IIoT Critical Infrastructures in Industry 4.0. IEEE Internet Things J. 2020, 8, 2300–2317.
Alqudhaibi, A.; Albarrak, M.; Aloseel, A.; Jagtap, S.; Salonitis, K. Predicting Cybersecurity Threats in Critical Infrastructure for Industry 4.0: A Proactive Approach Based on Attacker Motivations. Sensors 2023, 23, 4539.
Singh, M.K.; Amin, S.I.; Imam, S.A.; Sachan, V.K.; Choudhary, A. A Survey of Wireless Sensor Network and its types. In Proceedings of the 2018 International Conference on Advances in Computing, Communication Control and Networking (ICACCCN), Greater Noida, India, 12–13 October 2018.
Kandris, D.; Nakas, C.; Vomvas, D.; Koulouras, G. Applications of Wireless Sensor Networks: An Up-to-Date Survey. Appl. Syst. Innov. 2020, 3, 14.
Sharma, S.; Kumar, D.; Kishore, K. Wireless Sensor Networks—A Review on Topologies and Node Architecture. Int. J. Comput. Sci. Eng. 2013, 1, 19–25.
Yoo, S.E.; Kim, T. Industrial wireless sensor networks: Protocols and applications. Sensors 2020, 20, 5809.
History of IEEE. Available online: https://www.ieee.org/about/ieee-history.html?utm_source=linkslist_text&utm_medium=lp-about&utm_campaign=history (accessed on 12 November 2023).
About of ISO. Available online: https://www.iso.org/about-us.html (accessed on 5 December 2023).
About of CEN. Available online: https://www.cencenelec.eu/about-cen/ (accessed on 7 December 2023).
About of IEC. Available online: https://www.iec.ch/history/how-why-iec-was-started (accessed on 5 December 2023).
About of IPC. Available online: https://www.ipc.org/about-ipc (accessed on 9 December 2023).
Trigkas, A.; Sarigiannis, G.; Daousis, S.; Papageorgas, P.; Agavanakis, K.; Panagiotopoulos, K. NB-IoT for environmental monitoring and a fire early warning detection system in Mount Pentelicus. AIP Conf. Proc. 2022, 2437, 020069.
Haxhibeqiri, J.; De Poorter, E.; Moerman, I.; Hoebeke, J. A Survey of LoRaWAN for IoT: From Technology to Application. Sensors 2018, 18, 3995.
Daousis, S.; Sarigiannis, G.; Trigkas, A.; Agavanakis, K.; Papageorgas, P. The Blue Bee project: A proposal for the development of an internet of ships sensing network for environmental data collection and sharing. AIP Conf. Proc. 2022, 2437, 020068.
Woolley, M. The Bluetooth Low Energy Primer. Bluetooth Blog 2022, 15, 2022.
Joseph, W. A Basic Guide to the HART Protocol; Texas Instruments: Dallas, TX, USA, 2023.
Hall, K.B.; Ngalamou, L. Securing Wireless Scada Systems in Rural American Power Grids. In Proceedings of the IEEE 10th Annual Ubiquitous Computing, Electronics & Mobile Communication Conference (UEMCON), New York, NY, USA, 10–12 October 2019.
Rondeau, C.; Temple, M. DNA Feature Selection for Discriminating WirelessHART IIoT Devices. In Proceedings of the 53rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Mānoa, HI, USA, 7–10 January 2020.
Ambarkar, S.S.; Shekokar, N. An efficient authentication technique to protect iot networks from impact of rpl attacks. Int. J. Eng. Trends Technol. 2021, 69, 137–145.

© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.

Upload a video for this entry

Information

Subjects: Engineering, Electrical & Electronic

Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to https://encyclopedia.pub/register :

Spyridon Daousis

Nikolaos Peladarinos

Vasileios Cheimaras

Panagiotis Papageorgas

Dimitrios D. Piromalis

Radu Adrian Munteanu

View Times: 160

Update Date: 24 Jan 2024

Table of Contents

Video Upload Options

Confirm