1. UMR 5205 Towards the Internet of Things? Lionel Brunie National Institute of Applied Sciences (INSA) LIRIS Laboratory/DRIM Team – UMR CNRS 5205 Lyon, France http://liris.cnrs.fr/lionel.brunie

2. 18/09/2015 Contents of the course Visions: a Disruptive Technology Technologies and Issues Components and Architecture

3. 18/09/2015 Contents of the course Visions: a Disruptive Technology Technologies and Issues Components and Architecture

4. 18/09/2015 A “Disruptive” Technology US National Intelligence Council (NIC) consider Internet of Things as one of the 6 ‘‘Disruptive Civil Technologies” (April 2008 IEEE ranks IoT #1 in the list of “Top Trends for 2013” (Winter 2012):  “ The Internet of Things is more than just the newest buzzword. The IoT promises to be the most disruptive technological revolution since the advent of the World Wide Web. Projections indicate that up to 100 billion uniquely identifiable objects will be connected to the Internet by 2020, but human understanding of the underlying technologies has not kept pace. This creates a fundamental challenge to researchers, with enormous technical, socioeconomic, political, and even spiritual consequences”

5. 18/09/2015 Internet of Things: Visions Term introduced by the Auto-ID Labs (K. Ashton, 1999): linking RFID-based supply chain and Internet UN (2005): “A new era of ubiquity is coming where humans may become the minority as generators and receivers of traffic and changes brought about by the Internet will be dwarfed by those prompted by the networking of everyday objects” ITU: ‘‘From anytime, anyplace connectivity for anyone, we will now have connectivity for anything” EU: ‘‘Things having identities and virtual personalities operating in smart spaces using intelligent interfaces to connect and communicate within social, environmental, and user contexts”

6. 18/09/2015 Internet of Things: Visions EU: ‘‘Things having identities and virtual personalities operating in smart spaces using intelligent interfaces to connect and communicate within social, environmental, and user contexts” US National Intelligence Council: ‘‘By 2025 Internet nodes may reside in everyday things – food packages, furniture, paper documents, and more” Target applications: no limit:  logistics  industry/manufacturing (cf. German Industry 4.0 initiative)  health  domotics  ITS  social networking… Intensive standardization and R&D activity

7. 18/09/2015 Internet of Things: Definition CERP-IoTCERP-IoT: « The Internet of Things (IoT) is […] a dynamic global network infrastructure with self configuring capabilities based on standard and interoperable communication protocols where physical and virtual ‘things’ have identities, physical attributes, and virtual personalities and use intelligent interfaces, and are seamlessly integrated into the information network. In the IoT, ‘things’ are expected to become active participants in business, information and social processes where they are enabled to interact and communicate among themselves and with the environment by exchanging data and information ‘sensed’ about the environment, while reacting autonomously to the ‘real/physical world’s events »

8. 18/09/2015 Contents of the course Visions: a Disruptive Technology Technologies and Issues Components and Architecture

9. 18/09/2015 Internet of Things: Technologies and Issues Integration of multiple ICT technologies  identification and tracking technologies  sensor networks  network protocols (cf. Future Internet  autonomic, pervasive and ubiquitous computing  AI, knowledge management, semantics Key issues:  interoperability  security/trust and privacy  low resources (=> revisit protocols and algorithms implemented in Internet and Web)  scalability

10. 18/09/2015 Internet of Things: 2 Points of View Network/Internet Point of View Things point of View

11. 18/09/2015 L. Atzori et al. / Computer Networks 54 (2010) 2787–2805 Internet of Things: 3 Points of View?

12. 18/09/2015 Internet of Things: a 4th Point of View A Digital Ecosystem Point of View?

13. 18/09/2015 The Things Point of View (1/2) Key issue: object identification and tracing A prominent killer app: Electronic Product Code  basic goal: product/object traceability  RFID tags attached to products RFID advantages  low cost  maturity  no need of power (passive tags)  lifetime  strong support from supply chain and consumer goods industries Other basic things  Mobile equipments (Near Field Communications (NFC), GSM…)  Sensors and (Wireless) Sensor Networks ((W)SN)

14. 18/09/2015 The Things Point of View (2/2) Development of supply chain platforms  Ex: WISP (Wireless Identification and Sensing Platforms) project “Philosophical” vision: spime (B. Sterling)  object tracking through space and time  autonomy and collaboration (Web) Semantic vision: The Web of Things

15. 18/09/2015 The Network Point of View Key issue: object2object communication First approach: develop specific communication protocols  adapted to each type of things and type of applications  need for standardization  which compatibility with Internet? Second approach: (re-)use IP  integrate IP and IEEE 802.15.4 (6LoWPAN) (IP for Smart Objects (IPSO) Alliance)  make IP lighter (Internet Ø) Third approach: (re-use) 802.15.4  enrich 802.15.4 (Zigbee)

16. 18/09/2015 16 A Universal Network of Things ? From readwrite.com

17. 18/09/2015 17 An Infinity of Networks of Things From readwrite.com

18. 18/09/2015 Contents of the course Visions: a Disruptive Technology Technologies and Issues Components and Architecture

19. 18/09/2015 Technological Components (some kind of layered architecture) Identification (“sensing”)  (passive, active) RFID tags  sensor networks Communication  see discussion above  interface object/network  embed the TCP/IP stack into the devices (TinyTCP, mIP, IwIP…)? Integration  object and service discovery  object and service cataloging  service composition/orchestration Intelligence and Collaboration Security and Privacy

20. 18/09/2015 Identification (“sensing”) Ultimate goal: unique/universal Id for naming and addressing individual objects i.e., to attach an ego to each object, condition to develop ego-centric applications (cf. Jacob and the Angel (Genesis)) Naming is difficult!  ONS: Object Name Service  basically, RFID tag/EPC code → URI of a description file (Object Code Mapping Service-Direct Search (OCMS-DS)  more complex Object Code Mapping Service-Reverse Search (OCMS-DS): description → EPC code(s) Addressing is difficult!  stupid but tricky issue: RFID addresses are different from IPv6 addresses (64-96 bits vs 128 bits)  addressing moving objects is even more difficult

21. 18/09/2015 Communication From host2host to object2object TCP is not adapted  designed for long-lasting connections while objects (like tags or sensors) exchange small pieces of data => handshake + congestion control/retransmit/recovery + flow control + buffering procedures too complex Very heterogeneous networks and traffic Scalability? Quality of service?

22. 18/09/2015 Security and Privacy (1/3) A definitive threat for privacy! A security nightmare! Security  IoT = a kind of unsupervised mobile/pervasive grids whose end-components are resource limited tiny objects = a security nightmare  memory segments of tags are protected by (short) password  physical attacks  Man in the Middle attacks  cryptographic techniques too CPU-intensive for low energy objects  multiple administrative domains (cf. grids)

23. 18/09/2015 Security and Privacy (2/3) Privacy  all your life can will be traced => possible monitoring, mining, analysis  connection possible with Linked Open Data => worsen the threats  open air connections => possibility of eavesdropping  not only your digital life but also your “analogical” life  you cannot even know what is sensed about you, when it is sensed, etc. Sensors do not ask for permission (cf. video surveillance)  no “forget option”

24. 18/09/2015 Security and Privacy (3/3) Privacy (cont’d)  Basic approach (e.g. EEXCESS EU project, W3C P3P (Platform for Privacy Preference)  user defined policy  privacy proxy  negotiation protocol  anonymization/pseudomization  integration of reputation and trust mechanisms (cf. course on security and privacy)  Issues  cryptographic techniques are too complex  scalability

25. 18/09/2015 An Intensive Activity of Standardization RFID  EPCGlobal  ISO, IEC (Int. Electrotechnical Commission), CEN, NAFTA…  industrial consortia M2M  ETSI (European Telecommunications Standards Institute )  7 standard bodies joined in 2012 Communication  6LoWPAN  ZigBee  NFC  … all communications standard bodies (ISO, IEEE…)

26. 18/09/2015 Conclusion Yet another buzzword or a revolution? Strong support from the industry IoT platforms yet exist: xively (ex cosm, ex pachube), sen.se, etc. Close to reality in “closed” ecosystems Far from reality in “open” ecosystem” Need for an holistic vision → multi-scale digital ecosystem?