Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Business continuity framework for Internet of Things (IoT) Services

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Internet of Things (IoT) is currently the main enabler of smart services, where network communication links physical objects (embedded Things), such as a sensor with a main backend server, and allows the collection and exchange of data. Therefore, it is very important to maintain high availability of smart services, especially critical services, in case any failure of the objects occurs. In this paper, we address the different business continuity (BC) approaches that can be implemented in IoT services. An assessment of the vulnerabilities and threats of IoT services is essential for containing damage and continuing services during a crisis. There is a lack of frameworks and guidelines that address the BC of IoT services. Therefore, in this paper, we review and analyze the different types of IoT architectures and risks associated with them. In addition, we analyze many use cases and different types of standards, guidelines, policies and frameworks of BC that can outfit our final framework. As a result, the analysis outcomes are used to propose a BC framework for the IoT. The proposal explains different types of IoT architectures along with different types of BC measurements for IoT services. Finally, we implement our proposed framework with one of the real IoT service use cases.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ajit Jha C, Sunil M (2014) Security considerations for Internet of Things

  • Ashton K (2010) Internet of things. RFID

  • Asplund M, Nadjm-Tehrani S (2016) Attitudes and perceptions of IoT security in critical societal services. IEEE Access 4:2130–2138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Billure R, Tayur VM, Mahesh V (2015) Internet of things—A study on the security challenges:. In 2015 IEEE international advance computing conference (IACC). IEEE

  • Boeckl KB (2019) Considerations for managing Internet of Things (IoT) cybersecurity and Privacy risks. US department of Commerce—National Institute of Standards and Technology, US

  • Boyes H (2015) Security, privacy, and the built environment. IT Prof 17(3):25–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brous PJ, Janssen M, Herder P (2019) The dual effects of the Internet of Things (IoT): a systematic review of the benefits and risks of IoT adoption by organizations. Int J Inf Manag 51:101952

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CCSA (2011) Terms of the ubiquitous network. CCSA Standard YDB 062-2011

  • Celik ZB (2019) Program analysis of commodity IoT applications for security and privacy: challenges and opportunities. ACM Comput Surv 52(4):1–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duan YP, Zhao CX, Tian Z (2014) Application of the Internet of Things technology in agriculture. Appl Mech Mater 687–691:2395–2398

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • GSMA IG (n.d.) Number of connected IoT devices by 2020. GSMA, ITU, Hammersmith Group

  • IBM (2017) Device democracy: saving the future of the Internet of Things. IBM, pp 1–2

  • ITU-T (2012) Overview of IoT standard Y.2060. ITU

  • Khoo B (2011) RFID as an enabler of the Internet of Things: Issues of security and privacy. In: 2011 IEEE international conferences on Internet of Things, and cyber, physical and social computing, pp 709–712

  • Kitchenham B (2004) Procedures for undertaking systematic reviews. Joint Technical Report. Computer Science Department, Keele University (TR/SE-0401) and National ICT Australia Ltd (0400011T.1), Australia

  • Kumar R, Goyal R (2019) On cloud security requirements, threats, vulnerabilities and countermeasures: a survey. Comput Sci Rev 33:1–48

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Lee EA (2012) The IoT—concept and problem statement. IETF Standard draft-lee-iot-problem-statement-05

  • Macedo D, Guedes LA, Silva I (2014) A dependability evaluation for Internet of Things incorporating redundancy aspects. In: 11th IEEE international conference on networking, sensing and control, IEEE, USA, pp. 417–422

  • Mozsolics A (2017) Smart metering—smart grids case study of Hungary. Energy Regulators Regional Association, Hungary

    Google Scholar 

  • Mustafa J, Sandström K, Ericsson N, Rizvanovic L (2019) Analyzing availability and QoS of service-oriented cloud for industrial IoT applications. Zaragoza, Spain. IEEE

  • Nawir M, Amir A, Yaakob N, Lynn OB (2016). Internet of things (IoT): taxonomy of security attacks. In: 2016 3rd international conference on electronic design (ICED), Thailand. IEEE, p 322

  • NCEMA_7000_2015 (2020, 1 24) NCEMA_7000_2015. www.ncema.gov.ae: https://www.ncema.gov.ae/dassets/download/67abc660/AE_SCNS_NCEMA_7000_2015_ENGLISH.pdf.aspx

  • Numbering Team TRA (2017, Jan 26) REGULATIONS & RULING. TRA website: https://www.tra.gov.ae/en/about-tra/telecommunication-sector/regulations-and-ruling/details.aspx#documents

  • Ometov A, Bezzateev SV, Kannisto J, Harju J, Andreev S, Koucheryavy Y (2016) Facilitating the delegation of use for private devices in the era of the internet of wearable things. IEEE Internet Things J 4:843–854

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ORLANDO F (2015, October 6) Top 10 strategic technology trends for 2016. http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/3143521

  • Perera C, Liu CH, Jayawardena S (2015) The emerging Internet of Things marketplace from an industrial perspective: a survey. IEEE Trans Emerg Top Comput 8:585–598

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roumani Y, Nwankpa JK (2019) An empirical study on predicting cloud incidents. Int J Inf Manag 47:131–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sahebjamnia NT (2015) Integrated business continuity and disaster recovery planning: towards organizational resilience. Eur J Oper Res 242:261–273

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Sahebjamnia N, Torabi SA, Mansouri SA (2015) Integrated business continuity and disaster recovery planning: towards organizational resilience. Euro J Oper Res 242(1):261–273

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Smith EA (2009) RFID and the inclusive model for the IoT. CASAGRAS Partnership Report, pp. 10–12

  • Sobhan Babu B (2014) IoT of healthcare. Int J Sci Res 5(2):2319–7064

    Google Scholar 

  • Torabi SA (2014) A new framework for business impact analysis in business continuity management (with a case study). Saf Sci 68:309–323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • TRA, IoT Framework (2018) REGULATIONS & RULING. TRA website: https://www.tra.gov.ae/en/about-tra/telecommunication-sector/regulations-and-ruling/details.aspx#documents

  • Uddin HGR (2019) IoT for 5G/B5G applications in smart homes, smart cities, wearables and connected cars. In: 2019 IEEE 24th international workshop on computer aided modeling and design of communication links and networks (CAMAD), US. IEEE, pp 1–5

  • Wang W, Lu Z (2013) Cyber security in the smart grid: survey and challenges. Comput Netw 57:1344–1371

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wieringa RJ (2014) Design science methodology for information systems and software engineering. Springer, Berlin

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Yan Y, Qian Y, Sharif H, Tipper D (2012) A survey on cyber security for smart grid communications. IEEE Commun Surv Tutor 14:998–1010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang K, Forte D, Tehranipoor MM (2015) Protecting endpoint devices in IoT supply chain. In: 2015 IEEE/ACM international conference on computer-aided design (ICCAD), USA. IEEE, pp 351–356

  • Zhao C, Li XS, Chen JS (2011) Study on the application of Internet of Things in the logistics in forest industry. Appl Mech Mater 97–98:664–668

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhu C, Leung VC, Shu L (2015) Green Internet of Things for smart world. IEEE Access 3:2151–2562

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Engineering - Engineering Management, PhD Program, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates

    Jasim Al Ali

  2. Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates

    Qassim Nasir

  3. Department of Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates

    Fikri T. Dweiri

Authors
  1. Jasim Al Ali
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Qassim Nasir
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Fikri T. Dweiri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jasim Al Ali.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ali, J.A., Nasir, Q. & Dweiri, F.T. Business continuity framework for Internet of Things (IoT) Services. Int J Syst Assur Eng Manag 11, 1380–1394 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13198-020-01005-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13198-020-01005-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation