SCIENTIA SINICA Informationis, Volume 49 , Issue 12 : 1640-1658(2019) https://doi.org/10.1360/SSI-2019-0176

Integrated security of cyber-physical vehicle networked systems in the age of 5G

More info
  • ReceivedAug 21, 2019
  • AcceptedOct 8, 2019
  • PublishedDec 13, 2019


In recent years, a series of serious catastrophic traffic accidents, such as the Chongqing bus crash and Wuxi Road bridge collapse, revealed some serious issues in the mobile vehicle safety and emergency response mechanisms. The advent of 5G communication has undoubtedly created some great opportunities for solving these issues. In order to fulfill the requirements of serious traffic accident prevention and forensic analysis, this paper proposes an event-based mobile vehicle cyber-physical security governance framework based on 5G communication technology. The proposed framework aims to resolve the issues of mobile vehicle security, including the availability of network resources in high-speed motion and the complexity of security objectives within cyber-physical systems. Relying on precise perception of insecure events at the physical, communication, and society layers, this paper constructs an integrated intelligent safety response strategy for physical equipment information security, state vehicle security, environmental vehicle security, and network security by intelligent perception, edge-cloud computing, and other technologies. The proposed framework achieves the goals of real-time event prediction before the event, immediate alarm during the event, and replay for evidence forensics after the event.

Funded by




[1] World Health Organization. Global status report on road safety 2018. 2018. https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/ handle/10665/276462/9789241565684-eng.pdf?ua=1. Google Scholar

[2] National Bureau of Statistics of China. China statistical yearbook-2018. 2018. Google Scholar

[3] Gupta A, Jha R K. A Survey of 5G Network: Architecture and Emerging Technologies. IEEE Access, 2015, 3: 1206-1232 CrossRef Google Scholar

[4] Jiang D J, Liu G Y. An overview of 5G requirements. In: 5G Mobile Communications. Berlin: Springer, 2017. 3--26. Google Scholar

[5] Li S C, Xu L D, Zhao S S. 5G Internet of Things: A survey. J Industrial Inf Integration, 2018, 10: 1-9 CrossRef Google Scholar

[6] Huawei. Top ten application scenarios in the 5G era white paper. 2017. Google Scholar

[7] Chen Z Y, Yu J D, Zhu Y M, et al. D3: Abnormal driving behaviors detection and identification using smartphone sensors. In: Proceedings of the 12th Annual IEEE International Conference on Sensing, Communication, and Networking (SECON), Seattle, 2015. 524--532. Google Scholar

[8] Fang S H, Liang Y C, Chiu K M. Developing a mobile phone-based fall detection system on android platform. In: Proceedings of Computing, Communications and Applications Conference, Hong Kong, 2012. 143--146. Google Scholar

[9] Morris B T, Trivedi M M. A Survey of Vision-Based Trajectory Learning and Analysis for Surveillance. IEEE Trans Circuits Syst Video Technol, 2008, 18: 1114-1127 CrossRef Google Scholar

[10] Zaldivar J, Calafate C T, Cano J C, et al. Providing accident detection in vehicular networks through OBD-II devices and Android-based smartphones. In: Proceedings of the 36th Conference on Local Computer Networks, Bonn, 2011. 813--819. Google Scholar

[11] Zhang M M, Chen C, Wo T Y. SafeDrive: Online Driving Anomaly Detection From Large-Scale Vehicle Data. IEEE Trans Ind Inf, 2017, 13: 2087-2096 CrossRef Google Scholar

[12] Jabon M, Bailenson J, Pontikakis E, et al. Facial expression analysis for predicting unsafe driving behavior. IEEE Pervasive Computing, 2010, 10(4): 84-95. Google Scholar

[13] Ahmad R, Borole J N. Drowsy driver identification using eye blink detection. Int J Comput Sci Inf Tech, 2015, 6: 270--274. Google Scholar

[14] Jain A, Singh A, Koppula H S, et al. Recurrent neural networks for driver activity anticipation via sensory-fusion architecture. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), Stockholm, 2016. 3118--3125. Google Scholar

[15] Hallac D, Sharang A, Stahlmann R, et al. Driver identification using automobile sensor data from a single turn. In: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC), Rio de Janeiro, 2016. 953--958. Google Scholar

[16] Wu J D, Ye S H. Driver identification using finger-vein patterns with Radon transform and neural network. Expert Syst Appl, 2009, 36: 5793-5799 CrossRef Google Scholar

[17] Barr J R, Bowyer K W, Flynn P J. FACE RECOGNITION FROM VIDEO: A REVIEW. Int J Patt Recogn Artif Intell, 2012, 26: 1266002 CrossRef Google Scholar

[18] Deniz O, Serrano I, Bueno G, et al. Fast violence detection in video. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Computer Vision Theory and Applications, Lisbon Portugal, 2014. 2: 478--485. Google Scholar

[19] Sivaraman S, Trivedi M M. Looking at Vehicles on the Road: A Survey of Vision-Based Vehicle Detection, Tracking, and Behavior Analysis. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst, 2013, 14: 1773-1795 CrossRef Google Scholar

[20] Kumar S, Shi L, Ahmed N, et al. Carspeak: a content-centric network for autonomous driving. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM 2012 Conference on Applications, Technologies, Architectures, and Protocols for Computer Communication, Helsinki, 2012. 259--270. Google Scholar

[21] Sakiz F, Sen S. A survey of attacks and detection mechanisms on intelligent transportation systems: VANETs and IoV. Ad Hoc Networks, 2017, 61: 33-50 CrossRef Google Scholar

[22] Halimeh J C, Roser M. Raindrop detection on car windshields using geometric-photometric environment construction and intensity-based correlation. In: Proceedings of IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium, Xi'an, 2009. 610--615. Google Scholar

[23] Sato R, Domany K, Deguchi D, et al. Visibility estimation of traffic signals under rainy weather conditions for smart driving support. In: Proceedings of the 15th International IEEE Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems, Anchorage, 2012. 1321--1326. Google Scholar

[24] Liu W, Maruya K. Detection and recognition of traffic signs in adverse conditions. In: Proceedings of IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium, Xi'an, 2009. 335--340. Google Scholar

[25] Mori K, Takahashi T, Ide I, et al. Recognition of foggy conditions by in-vehicle camera and millimeter wave radar. In: Proceedings of IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium, Istanbul, 2007. 87--92. Google Scholar

[26] Li Q Q, Chen L, Li M. A Sensor-Fusion Drivable-Region and Lane-Detection System for Autonomous Vehicle Navigation in Challenging Road Scenarios. IEEE Trans Veh Technol, 2014, 63: 540-555 CrossRef Google Scholar

[27] Eriksson J, Girod L, Hull B, et al. The pothole patrol: using a mobile sensor network for road surface monitoring. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Mobile Systems, Applications, and Services, Breckenridge, 2008. 29--39. Google Scholar

[28] Chen K Y, Lu M M, Fan X P, et al. Road condition monitoring using on-board three-axis accelerometer and GPS sensor. In: Proceedings of the 6th International ICST Conference on Communications and Networking in China (CHINACOM), Harbin, 2011. 1032--1037. Google Scholar

[29] Mohan P, Padmanabhan V N, Ramjee R. Nericell: rich monitoring of road and traffic conditions using mobile smartphones. In: Proceedings of the 6th ACM Conference on Embedded Network Sensor Systems, Raleigh, 2008. 323--336. Google Scholar

[30] Bhoraskar R, Vankadhara N, Raman B, et al. Wolverine: traffic and road condition estimation using smartphone sensors. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Communication Systems and Networks (COMSNETS 2012), Bangalore, 2012. 1--6. Google Scholar

[31] Glaser S, Nouveliere L, Lusetti B. Speed limitation based on an advanced curve warning system. In: Proceedings of IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium, Istanbul, 2007. 686--691. Google Scholar

[32] García F, Jiménez F, Anaya J. Distributed pedestrian detection alerts based on data fusion with accurate localization.. Sensors, 2013, 13: 11687-11708 CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar

[33] Gámez Serna C, Ruichek Y. Dynamic Speed Adaptation for Path Tracking Based on Curvature Information and Speed Limits.. Sensors, 2017, 17: 1383 CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar

[34] Hussein A, García F, Armingol J M, et al. P2V and V2P communication for pedestrian warning on the basis of autonomous vehicles. In: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC), Rio de Janeiro, 2016. 2034--2039. Google Scholar

[35] Nkenyereye L, Liu C H, Song J S. Towards secure and privacy preserving collision avoidance system in 5G fog based Internet of Vehicles. Future Generation Comput Syst, 2019, 95: 488-499 CrossRef Google Scholar

[36] Kokuti A, Hussein A, Marín-Plaza P, et al. V2X communications architecture for off-road autonomous vehicles. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Vehicular Electronics and Safety (ICVES), Vienna, 2017. 69--74. Google Scholar

[37] Koscher K, Czeskis A, Roesner F, et al. Experimental security analysis of a modern automobile. In: Proceedings of IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, Berkeley/Oakland, 2010. 447--462. Google Scholar

[38] Sau S, Haj-Yahya J, Wong M M, et al. Survey of secure processors. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Embedded Computer Systems: Architectures, Modeling, and Simulation (SAMOS), Pythagorion, 2017. 253--260. Google Scholar

[39] Bécsi T, Aradi S, Géspár P. Security issues and vulnerabilities in connected car systems. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Models and Technologies for Intelligent Transportation Systems (MT-ITS), Budapest, 2015. 477--482. Google Scholar

[40] Wang Q, Sawhney S. VeCure: a practical security framework to protect the CAN bus of vehicles. In: Proceedings of International Conference on the Internet of Things (IOT), Cambridge, 2014. 13--18. Google Scholar

[41] Avatefipour O, Malik H. State-of-the-art survey on in-vehicle network communication (CAN-Bus) security and vulnerabilities. Int J Comput Sci Netw, 2017, 6: 720--727. Google Scholar

[42] Keenlab. Experimental security assessment of BMW cars: a summary report. 2018. https://keenlab.tencent.com/en/ 2018/05/22/New-CarHacking-Research-by-KeenLab-Experimental-Security-Assessment-of-BMW-Cars/. Google Scholar

[43] Nie S, Liu L, Du Y. Free-fall: hacking tesla from wireless to CAN bus. Briefing, Black Hat USA, 2017: 1--16. Google Scholar

[44] Hashem Eiza M, Ni Q. Driving with Sharks: Rethinking Connected Vehicles with Vehicle Cybersecurity. IEEE Veh Technol Mag, 2017, 12: 45-51 CrossRef Google Scholar

[45] Checkoway S, McCoy D, Kantor B, et al. Comprehensive experimental analyses of automotive attack surfaces. In: Proceedings of the 20th USENIX Security Symposium, San Francisco, 2011. 447--462. Google Scholar

[46] Ishtiaq Roufa R M, Mustafaa H, Travis Taylora S O, et al. Security and privacy vulnerabilities of in-car wireless networks: A tire pressure monitoring system case study. In: Proceedings of the 19th USENIX Security Symposium, Washington, 2010. 11--13. Google Scholar

[47] Markovitz M, Wool A. Field classification, modeling and anomaly detection in unknown CAN bus networks. Vehicular Commun, 2017, 9: 43-52 CrossRef Google Scholar

[48] Marchetti M, Stabili D. READ: Reverse Engineering of Automotive Data Frames. IEEE TransInformForensic Secur, 2019, 14: 1083-1097 CrossRef Google Scholar

[49] Pawelec K, Bridges R A, Combs F L. Towards a CAN IDS based on a neural network data field predictor. In: Proceedings of ACM Workshop on Automotive Cybersecurity, Dallas, 2019. 31--34. Google Scholar

[50] Olufowobi H, Ezeobi U, Muhati E, et al. Anomaly detection approach using adaptive cumulative sum algorithm for controller area network. In: Proceedings of ACM Workshop on Automotive Cybersecurity, Dallas, 2019. 25--30. Google Scholar

[51] Young C, Olufowobi H, Bloom G, et al. Automotive intrusion detection based on constant CAN message frequencies across vehicle driving modes. In: Proceedings of ACM Workshop on Automotive Cybersecurity, Dallas, 2019. 9--14. Google Scholar

[52] Koyama T, Shibahara T, Hasegawa K, et al. Anomaly detection for mixed transmission CAN messages using quantized intervals and absolute difference of payloads. In: Proceedings of ACM Workshop on Automotive Cybersecurity, Dallas, 2019. 19--24. Google Scholar

[53] Song H M, Kim H R, Kim H K. Intrusion detection system based on the analysis of time intervals of CAN messages for in-vehicle network. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Information Networking (ICOIN), Kota Kinabalu, 2016. 63--68. Google Scholar

[54] Choi W, Joo K, Jo H J. VoltageIDS: Low-Level Communication Characteristics for Automotive Intrusion Detection System. IEEE TransInformForensic Secur, 2018, 13: 2114-2129 CrossRef Google Scholar

[55] Gerla M, Lee E K, Pau G, et al. Internet of vehicles: from intelligent grid to autonomous cars and vehicular clouds. In: Proceedings of IEEE World Forum on Internet of Things (WF-IoT), Seoul, 2014. 241--246. Google Scholar

[56] Petit J, Stottelaar B, Feiri M, et al. Remote attacks on automated vehicles sensors: experiments on camera and lidar. Black Hat Europe, 2015, 11: 2015. Google Scholar

[57] Yan C, Xu W, Liu J. Can you trust autonomous vehicles: Contactless attacks against sensors of self-driving vehicle. DEF CON, 2016, 24. Google Scholar

[58] Sitawarin C, Bhagoji A N, Mosenia A, et al. Darts: deceiving autonomous cars with toxic signs. 2018,. arXiv Google Scholar

[59] Rahimi-Eichi H, Ojha U, Baronti F. Battery Management System: An Overview of Its Application in the Smart Grid and Electric Vehicles. EEE Ind Electron Mag, 2013, 7: 4-16 CrossRef Google Scholar

[60] Sagstetter F, Lukasiewycz M, Steinhorst S, et al. Security challenges in automotive hardware/software architecture design. In: Proceedings of Conference on Design, Automation and Test in Europe, Grenoble, 2013. 458--463. Google Scholar

[61] Falk R, Fries S. Electric vehicle charging infrastructure security considerations and approaches. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Evolving Internet, 2012. 58--64. Google Scholar

[62] Mustafa M A, Zhang N, Kalogridis G, et al. Smart electric vehicle charging: security analysis. In: Proceedings of IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Conference (ISGT), Washington, 2013. 1--6. Google Scholar

[63] Siemens. Traffic control via the Siemens private cloud. 2014. www.siemens.com/press/pool/de/events/2014/infrastructure-cities/2014-03-intertraffic/background-private-cloud-e.pdf. Google Scholar

[64] Tennessee Department of Transportation. TDOT smartway. www.tdot.state.tn.us/tdotsmartway/. Google Scholar

[65] Liu J, Li J T, Zhang L. Secure intelligent traffic light control using fog computing. Future Generation Comput Syst, 2018, 78: 817-824 CrossRef Google Scholar

[66] Ghena B, Beyer W, Hillaker A, et al. Green lights forever: Analyzing the security of traffic infrastructure. In: Proceedings of the 8th USENIX Workshop on Offensive Technologies, Berkeley, 2014. 7. Google Scholar

[67] Laszka A, Potteiger B, Vorobeychik Y, et al. Vulnerability of transportation networks to traffic-signal tampering. In: Proceedings of the 7th International conference on Cyber-Physical Systems (ICCPS), Vienna, 2016. 1--10. Google Scholar

[68] Mazloom S, Rezaeirad M, Hunter A, et al. A security analysis of an in-vehicle infotainment and app platform. In: Proceedings of 10th USENIX Workshop on Offensive Technologies, Austin, 2016. 1--12. Google Scholar

[69] Jo H J, Choi W, Na S Y. Vulnerabilities of Android OS-Based Telematics System. Wireless Pers Commun, 2017, 92: 1511-1530 CrossRef Google Scholar

[70] Wang X, Konstantinou C, Maniatakos M, et al. Confirm: detecting firmware modifications in embedded systems using hardware performance counters. In: Proceedings of IEEE/ACM International Conference on Computer-aided Design, Austin, 2015. 544--551. Google Scholar

[71] Faruki P, Bharmal A, Laxmi V. Android Security: A Survey of Issues, Malware Penetration, and Defenses. IEEE Commun Surv Tut, 2015, 17: 998-1022 CrossRef Google Scholar

[72] Zhou W, Zhou Y J, Jiang X X, et al. Detecting repackaged smartphone applications in third-party android marketplaces. In: Proceedings of the 2nd ACM Conference on Data and Application Security and Privacy, San Antonio, 2012. 317--326. Google Scholar

[73] Mutchler P, Doupé A, Mitchell J, et al. A large-scale study of mobile web app security. In: Proceedings of Mobile Security Technologies Workshop (MoST), San Jose, 2015. 1--11. Google Scholar

[74] Martin W, Sarro F, Jia Y. A Survey of App Store Analysis for Software Engineering. IIEEE Trans Software Eng, 2017, 43: 817-847 CrossRef Google Scholar

[75] Watanabe T, Akiyama M, Kanei F, et al. Understanding the origins of mobile app vulnerabilities: a large-scale measurement study of free and paid apps. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Mining Software Repositories, Buenos Aires, 2017. 14--24. Google Scholar

[76] Sbirlea D, Burke M G, Guarnieri S. Automatic detection of inter-application permission leaks in Android applications. IBM J Res Dev, 2013, 57: 10:1-10:12 CrossRef Google Scholar

[77] Woo S, Jo H J, Lee D H. A Practical Wireless Attack on the Connected Car and Security Protocol for In-Vehicle CAN. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst, 2014, : 1-14 CrossRef Google Scholar

[78] Rastogi S, Bhushan K, Gupta B B. Android Applications Repackaging Detection Techniques for Smartphone Devices. Procedia Comput Sci, 2016, 78: 26-32 CrossRef Google Scholar

[79] Hsueh S C, Li J T. Secure transmission protocol for the IoT. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Industrial and Business Engineering, Sapporo, 2017. 73--76. Google Scholar

[80] Granjal J, Monteiro E, Sa Silva J. Security for the Internet of Things: A Survey of Existing Protocols and Open Research Issues. IEEE Commun Surv Tut, 2015, 17: 1294-1312 CrossRef Google Scholar

[81] Pelzl J, Wolf M, Wollinger T. Virtualization Technologies for Cars. Technical Report 2008, escrypt GmbH-Embedded Security, 2008. Google Scholar

[82] Le V H, den Hartog J, Zannone N. Security and privacy for innovative automotive applications: A survey. Comput Commun, 2018, 132: 17-41 CrossRef Google Scholar

[83] Jeong E, Park J, Son B, et al. Study on signature verification process for the firmware of an android platform. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Innovative Mobile and Internet Services in Ubiquitous Computing, Matsue, 2018. 540--545. Google Scholar

[84] Petri R, Springer M, Zelle D, et al. Evaluation of lightweight TPMs for automotive software updates over the air. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Embedded Security in Car USA, Detroit, 2016. 1--15. Google Scholar

[85] Luo Q, Liu J J. Wireless Telematics Systems in Emerging Intelligent and Connected Vehicles: Threats and Solutions. IEEE Wireless Commun, 2018, 25: 113-119 CrossRef Google Scholar

[86] Chawan A, Sun W, Javaid A, et al. Security enhancement of over-the-air update for connected vehicles. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Wireless Algorithms, Systems, and Applications, Tianjin, 2018. 853--864. Google Scholar

[87] Ashraf M I, Liu C F, Bennis M, et al. Towards low-latency and ultra-reliable vehicle-to-vehicle communication. In: Proceedings of European Conference on Networks and Communications, Oulu, 2017. 1--5. Google Scholar

[88] Shah S A A, Ahmed E, Imran M. 5G for Vehicular Communications. IEEE Commun Mag, 2018, 56: 111-117 CrossRef Google Scholar

[89] Engoulou R G, Bella^ıche M, Pierre S, et al. VANET security surveys. Comput Commun, 2014, 44: 1--3. Google Scholar

[90] Series M. IMT Vision---framework and overall objectives of the future development of IMT for 2020 and beyond. Recommendation ITU, 2015: 2083-0. Google Scholar

[91] Poli F. Vehicular communications: from DSRC to Cellular V2X. Politecnico di Torino, 2018. Google Scholar

[92] Zhou H B, Xu W C, Bi Y G. Toward 5G Spectrum Sharing for Immersive-Experience-Driven Vehicular Communications. IEEE Wireless Commun, 2017, 24: 30-37 CrossRef Google Scholar

[93] Masini B, Bazzi A, Zanella A. A Survey on the Roadmap to Mandate on Board Connectivity and Enable V2V-Based Vehicular Sensor Networks.. Sensors, 2018, 18: 2207 CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar

[94] Nguyen T V, Shailesh P, Sudhir B, et al. A comparison of cellular vehicle-to-everything and dedicated short range communication. In: Proceedings of 2017 IEEE Vehicular Networking Conference (VNC), Torino, 2017. 101--108. Google Scholar

[95] Ancans A, Petersons E, Ancans G. Technical and economic analysis of transport telecommunication infrastructure. Procedia Comput Sci, 2019, 149: 206-214 CrossRef Google Scholar

[96] Woolley M, Schmidt S. Bluetooth 5/Go Faster, Go Further. Bluetooth SIG, 2017, 1: 1--25. Google Scholar

[97] Funai C, Tapparello C, Heinzelman W. Enabling multi-hop ad hoc networks through WiFi Direct multi-group networking. In: Proceedings of 2017 International Conference on Computing, Networking and Communications (ICNC), Silicon Valley, 2017. 491--497. Google Scholar

[98] Schneider P, Horn G. Towards 5G security. In: Proceedings of IEEE Trustcom/BigDataSE/ISPA, Helsinki, 2015. 1165--1170. Google Scholar

[99] Fang D F, Qian Y, Hu R Q. Security for 5G Mobile Wireless Networks. IEEE Access, 2018, 6: 4850-4874 CrossRef Google Scholar

[100] Zaidi K, Rajarajan M. Vehicular Internet: Security & Privacy Challenges and Opportunities. Future Internet, 2015, 7: 257-275 CrossRef Google Scholar

[101] Petit J, Shladover S E. Potential Cyberattacks on Automated Vehicles. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst, 2014, : 1-11 CrossRef Google Scholar

[102] Ahmad I, Kumar T, Liyanage M. Overview of 5G Security Challenges and Solutions. IEEE Comm Stand Mag, 2018, 2: 36-43 CrossRef Google Scholar

[103] Malla A M, Sahu R K. Security attacks with an effective solution for dos attacks in VANET. Int J Comput Appl, 2013, 66. Google Scholar

[104] Jeske T. Floating car data from smartphones: what google and waze know about you and how hackers can control traffic. In: Proceedings of the BlackHat Europe, Amsterdam, 2013. 1--12. Google Scholar

[105] Lee E, Lee E K, Gerla M. Vehicular cloud networking: architecture and design principles. IEEE Commun Mag, 2014, 52: 148-155 CrossRef Google Scholar

[106] Boukerche A, De Grande R E. Vehicular cloud computing: Architectures, applications, and mobility. Comput Networks, 2018, 135: 171-189 CrossRef Google Scholar

[107] Whaiduzzaman M, Sookhak M, Gani A. A survey on vehicular cloud computing. J Network Comput Appl, 2014, 40: 325-344 CrossRef Google Scholar

[108] Ning Z L, Wang X J, Huang J. Mobile Edge Computing-Enabled 5G Vehicular Networks: Toward the Integration of Communication and Computing. IEEE Veh Technol Mag, 2019, 14: 54-61 CrossRef Google Scholar

[109] Hashem Eiza M, Ni Q, Shi Q. Secure and Privacy-Aware Cloud-Assisted Video Reporting Service in 5G-Enabled Vehicular Networks. IEEE Trans Veh Technol, 2016, 65: 7868-7881 CrossRef Google Scholar

[110] Sun Y C, Zhang J S, Xiong Y P. Data Security and Privacy in Cloud Computing. Int J Distributed Sens Networks, 2014, 10: 190903 CrossRef Google Scholar

[111] Nafi K W, Kar T S, Hoque S A. A Newer User Authentication, File encryption and Distributed Server Based Cloud Computing security architecture. IJACSA, 2012, 3 CrossRef Google Scholar

[112] Wang C, Wang Q, Ren K, et al. Privacy-preserving public auditing for data storage security in cloud computing. In: Proceedings of IEEE Infocom, San Diego, 2010. 1--9. Google Scholar

[113] Zhang W Y, Li S G, Liu L Y, et al. Hetero-edge: orchestration of real-time vision applications on heterogeneous edge clouds. In: Proceedings of IEEE Conference on Computer Communications, Paris, 2019. 1270--1278. Google Scholar

[114] Taleb T, Samdanis K, Mada B. On Multi-Access Edge Computing: A Survey of the Emerging 5G Network Edge Cloud Architecture and Orchestration. IEEE Commun Surv Tut, 2017, 19: 1657-1681 CrossRef Google Scholar

  • Figure 1

    (Color online)Integrated security framework for cyber-physical vehicle networked systems

  • Figure 2

    (Color online)Security event perception metrics for cyber-physical vehicle networked systems

  • Figure 3

    (Color online)Key capabilities comparison between 4G and 5G [91]

  • Figure 4

    Event-based integrated security monitoring & intelligent decision-making scheme

  • Table 1   Key capabilities comparison among vehicular communication technologies
    Data rate Frequency band Range Mobility support Coverage
    3G [90] 2 Mbit/s 700–2600 MHz Up to 10 km High Ubiquitous
    4G [90-92] 1 Gbit/s Licensed band Up to 30 km High (350 km/h) Ubiquitous
    5G [91] 20 Gbit/s Licensed band 300–400 m High (500 km/h) Intermittent
    Drive-thru Internet [92] 150 Mbit/s 2.4 GHz/5 GHz 500 m High (120 km/h) Intermittent
    DSRC [92] 3–27 Mbit/s 5.86–5.92 GHz 300–1000 m High (140 km/h) Intermittent
    TV white space [92] 420 Mbit/s 470–790 MHz 1 km/17–33 km High (114 km/h) Intermittent
    Cellular V2X [90,93-95] 3 Gbit/s 5.9 GHz 1.6 km High (up to 250 km/h) Intermittent
    Wi-Fi [90] 6–54 Mbit/s 2.4 GHz/5.2 GHz Up to 100 m Low Intermittent
    Bluetooth 5 [90,96] 50 Mbit/s 2.4 GHz 240 m N/A N/A
    WiFi direct [90,97] 250 Mbit/s 2.4 GHz/5 GHz 200 m N/A N/A
    LTE direct [90] 13.5 Mbit/s Licensed LTE spectrum 500 m N/A N/A

Copyright 2020 Science China Press Co., Ltd. 《中国科学》杂志社有限责任公司 版权所有

京ICP备17057255号       京公网安备11010102003388号