16492 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS, VOL. 23, NO.

9, SEPTEMBER 2022

A Privacy-Preserving-Based Secure Framework

Using Blockchain-Enabled Deep-Learning in
Cooperative Intelligent Transport System
Randhir Kumar , Student Member, IEEE, Prabhat Kumar , Student Member, IEEE,
Rakesh Tripathi, Senior Member, IEEE, Govind P. Gupta , Member, IEEE,
Neeraj Kumar , Senior Member, IEEE, and Mohammad Mehedi Hassan , Senior Member, IEEE

Abstract— Cooperative Intelligent Transport System (C-ITS)
is a promising technology that aims to improve the tradi-
tional transport management systems. In C-ITS infrastructure
Autonomous Vehicles (AVs) communicate wirelessly with other
AVs, Road Side Units (RSUs) and Traffic Command Cen-
tres (TCCs) using an open channel Internet. However, the use
of the Internet brings inherent vulnerabilities related to privacy
(e.g., adversary performing inference and data poisoning attacks),
and security (e.g., AVs can be compromised using advanced
hacking techniques) issues and prevents the faster realization
of C-ITS applications. To address these challenges, this paper
presents a privacy-preserving-based secure framework to provide
both privacy and security in C-ITS infrastructure. The proposed
framework provides two level of security and privacy using
blockchain and deep learning modules. First, a blockchain
module is designed to securely transmit the C-ITS data between
AVs–RSUs-TCCs, and a smart contract-based enhanced Proof of
Work (ePoW) technique is designed to verify data integrity and
mitigate data poisoning attacks. Second, a deep-learning module
is designed that includes Long-Short Term Memory-AutoEncoder
(LSTM-AE) technique for encoding C-ITS data into a new format
to prevent inference attacks. The encoded data is used by the
proposed Attention-based Recurrent Neural Network (A-RNN),
for intrusive events recognition in C-ITS infrastructure. The
proposed A-RNN is trained using Truncated Backpropagation
Through Time (BPTT) algorithm. The framework is further
validated and tested using two publicly available ToN-IoT and
CICIDS-2017 datasets. The proposed framework is compared
with peer privacy-preserving intrusion detection techniques, and
the result shows the effectiveness of the proposed framework
over several state-of-the-art techniques in both blockchain and
non-blockchain systems.
Manuscript received 17 March 2021; revised 19 June 2021 and 10 July
2021; accepted 15 July 2021. Date of publication 3 August 2021; date of
current version 12 September 2022. This work was supported in part by the
Ph.D. scholarship provided by Ministry of Education, India and in part by
CPDS Grant provided by NIT Raipur, India. The Associate Editor for this
article was S. H. Ahmed. (Corresponding author: Neeraj Kumar.)
Randhir Kumar, Prabhat Kumar, Rakesh Tripathi, and Govind P. Gupta
are with the National Institute of Technology at Raipur, Raipur 492010,
India (e-mail: rkumar.phd2018.it@nitrr.ac.in; pkumar.phd2019.it@nitrr.ac.in;
rtripathi.it@nitrr.ac.in; gpgupta.it@nitrr.ac.in).
Neeraj Kumar is with the Department of Computer Science and Engineering,
Thapar University, Patiala 147001, India, also with the School of Computer
Science, University of Petroleum and Energy Studies, Dehradun, Uttarakhand
248001, India, and also with the Department of Computer Science and
Information Engineering, Asia University, Taizhong 41354, Taiwan (e-mail:
neeraj.kumar@thapar.edu).
Mohammad Mehedi Hassan is with the College of Computer and Informa-
tion Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh 11543, Saudi Arabia (e-mail:
mmhassan@ksu.edu.sa).
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TITS.2021.3098636
1558-0016 © 2021 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Index Terms— Blockchain technology, cooperative intelligent
transport system (C-ITS), deep-learning, intrusion detection
system, privacy-preservation.
I. I NTRODUCTION
C OOPERATIVE Intelligent Transport Systems (C-ITS)
are networks designed to facilitate improved road-safety,
driver comfort through enhanced traffic management. The
concept behind C-ITS is pervasive vehicle accessibility to
provide them with a clear understanding of traffic patterns
on the road [1]. The Trusted Authority (TA), Autonomous
vehicles (AVs), Road Side Units (RSUs) and Traffic Command
Centres (TCCs) are the major components of C-ITS [2]. The
TA is responsible to register and authenticate every other
components that participates in the C-ITS paradigm. The
AVs also called as smart vehicles, comes with integrated
global positioning system, sensors and On-Board Unit (OBU)
for data storage and processing [3]. The aim of AVs is
to minimize driver requirements, reduce traffic fatalities and
travel expenses, and boosting traffic flow. In addition to vehicle
to vehicle communication, infrastructure RSUs are positioned
at different geographical locations to disseminate data from
vehicles to central TCCs [4]. The centralized TCCs assists in
traffic control at the city level, ensuring accurate emergency
warning alerts and traffic data processing for efficient path
assessment [5].
With the current advancement in fog computing, the com-
munication environment of C-ITS uses fog paradigm for faster
response. In the fog-cloud computing-based C-ITS environ-
ment, there are different types of communications, “vehicle-
to-vehicle (V2V)”, “vehicle-to-roadside unit”, “roadside-unit-
to-fog server” and “fog server-to-cloud server” as shown
in Fig. 1. Fog computing is a form of cloud computing
that delivers a range of services to the network’s edge [6].
It provides end-users with data, storage, computation, and
application resources, comparable to cloud computing. It also
has other advantages, such as reduced bandwidth, reduced
latency, and improved security. As a consequence, fog com-
puting is a promising technique for C-ITS applications [7].
Due to the connectivity of C-ITS entities with Internet,
it usually brings inherent vulnerabilities related to security
and privacy [8]. First, security issues arises as a result of
the rapid evolution of hacking techniques, and due to the

Authorized licensed use limited to: VNR Vignana Jyothi Inst of Eng & Tech. Downloaded on March 10,2023 at 19:48:02 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
KUMAR et al.: PRIVACY-PRESERVING-BASED SECURE FRAMEWORK
incorporation of insecure devices and applications with trans-
portation networks. As a consequence, attacks on C-ITS can
cause infrastructure disruption, emergency response delays,
casualties, and even risks to national security. There are two
kinds of attacks in C-ITS, namely: physical and cyber. Physical
attacks are those that tries to directly temper the hardware
components while cyber attacks are typically carried out using
malware or malicious software or by obtaining access to
network systems components [9], [10].
Second, privacy issues involve compromising sensitive
information using active and passive attacks [11]. In the
latter category, attackers tries to alter data. For example,
in data poisoning attacks, the attacker tries to manipulate the
input data used during the training or operation (test) time
of machine learning-based data analytic or Intrusion Detec-
tion Systems (IDS). Thus, the output will be very different
compared to the expected results and therefore, can impact
the performance of overall security systems [12]. In passive
attacks, the attacker tries to sniff private information about the
target model or its training data [13]. For example in inference
attacks, the attacker tries to infer whether an input is part of
the model’s training dataset [14], [15] and then tries to gain
knowledge about end users. As a result, privacy preservation in
C-ITS environment, including data privacy and entity privacy,
is of great importance and also a challenge [16]. Therefore,
to protect the privacy and security of user data, the blockchain
and intrusion detection techniques can be adopted in C-ITS
environment.
Blockchain is a peer to peer distributed decentralized data-
base that maintains information transparency and build trust
among participants via blockchain’s decentralized, secure,
tamper-proof and traceable characteristics, and therefore
can be considered to promote secure and privacy-preserved
data exchange ecosystem for C-ITS [17]. In conventional
blockchain applications, the privacy of data can be breached
due the distributed nature of blockchain. However, deploying
smart contracts i.e., a self-enforcing and self-verifying agree-
ments i.e., programmable code, that are stored permanently
across the decentralized network of blockchain can resolve
this issue [18]. Moreover, with the explosive growth of the
AVs, RSUs, and TCCs entities, the large amount of data will
continue to increase. Storing complete data on blockchain
will require huge resources and performing operations such
as; search and verify will become too complex [19], [20].
In consideration to limited storage capacity of each blockchain
node InterPlanetary File System (IPFS) distributed file system
can be adopted to make entire environment scalable. IPFS is
a content-addressable, decentralized file system in which data
are distributed and stored in different IPFS nodes all over
Internet with high integrity and resiliency [21]. Moreover, for
each file storage, IPFS returns a unique hash string that is
stored in blockchain network [22].
In C-ITS, each participating entity exchanges sensitive
information about itself and it’s surrounding with other enti-
ties [23]. An intruder or malicious node in the network
can perform malicious activities such as dropping of pack-
ets, information leakage and modification of information,
etc [24], [25]. Therefore, to deal with intruders and malicious
Authorized licensed use limited to: VNR Vignana Jyothi Inst of Eng & Tech. Downloaded on March 10,2023 at 19:48:02 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
16493
users Intrusion Detection Systems (IDSs) can be used in C-ITS
environment.
A. Contribution
In this paper, we propose a blockchain-enabled
deep-learning framework for providing privacy and security
to C-ITS data. The major contributions of the paper are
summarized as follows:
• A new privacy-preserving-based secure framework is
developed by integrating blockchain and deep-learning
techniques. The underlying framework provides two-level
privacy and two-level security to C-ITS data and provides
a generalized way for secure communications of C-ITS
data between AVs–RSUs-TCCs.
• In first level of data security and privacy, a blockchain
and smart contract-based module is designed to enable
immutable C-ITS data exchange, and to authenticate
and prevent data poisoning attacks. Furthermore, data
is encrypted and stored in IPFS (Inter-Planetary File
System) distributed storage system, which can efficiently
reduce communication overhead and computation over-
head while ensuring privacy preserving.
• In second level of data privacy and security, a deep-
learning-based module is designed. This module includes
a Long-Short Term Memory-AutoEncoder (LSTM-AE)
technique for encoding C-ITS data into a new for-
mat to prevent inference attacks and an IDS using
Attention-based Recurrent Neural Network (A-RNN) is
proposed to handle the multiclass attack detection issue,
including benign and attack types such as DoS, DDoS
and so on. For training an A-RNN, we use Truncated
Backpropagation Through Time (BPTT) algorithm.
• Different from most of the traditional IDSs, and consid-
ering the limited resources of OBUs and RSUs, the pro-
posed IDS is mounted on fog nodes to collect and analyse
network data from RSUs.
• The proposed IDS is rigorously evaluated on two publicly
available network datasets namely, ToN-IoT [24], [26]
and CICIDS-2017 [25], [27] before and after applying
the privacy technique. Furthermore, performance is com-
pared with peer privacy-preserving intrusion detection
approaches.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section II studies
the related work on privacy-preservation and intrusion detec-
tion techniques. Section III explains the proposed framework
and its functional components. Then we evaluate and compare
the performance in Section IV and finally conclude the paper
with future direction in Section V.
II. R ELATED W ORK
In this section, we present the relevant related work that
has been taken into the consideration to identify gaps in
the proposed study. Blockchain-based solutions have been
used in several studies to assert data confidentiality and
improve trust among IDSs. For instance, Mollah et al. [17]
surveyed various ways to integrate blockchain and IDS
in ITS environment. The authors suggested various other
16494 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS, VOL. 23, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2022

privacy-preservation techniques that have been incorporated

in IoV from the ITS perspective. Tripathi et al. [28] reviewed
the significance of blockchain and its theoretical approaches
that could secure IoV network. Hamida et al. [2] reviewed
various ITS security threats along with their corresponding
cryptographic countermeasures. Bagga et al. [7] proposed
a privacy-preserving authentication scheme for secure com-
munication between RSUs and IoVs based on blockchain.
Wazid et al. [6] proposed an key management approach for
secure communications between IoV entities. Various intrusion
detection schemes have been developed to secure and protect
C-ITS components. For example, Nie et al. [8] proposed a
deep learning architecture based on the Convolutional Neural
Network (CNN) with 7 layers to detect the intrusions at RSUs.
Kuutti et al. [29] surveyed various deep-learning techniques
that can be used in autonomous vehicle applications, including
decision making, mapping and localisation.
Several privacy-preserving schemes have been developed to Fig. 1. Proposed privacy-preserving-based secure framework in cooperative
protect data privacy for intrusion detection during data sharing intelligent transport system.
[11], [12], [15], [19], [21], [30]. Wang et al. [31] proposed
Rabin fingerprint algorithm based privacy-preserving frame- 2) Road Side Units (
): 
 are considered to
work for signature-based intrusion detection at fog nodes. authenticate the messages flown by vehicles within its group.
Sedjelmaci et al. [32] studied the challenges of IDS overhead Each zone of 
 consists of some vehicles at every instance.
and proposed an intrusion detection mechanism based on the Like s, an 
 also manages all the vehicles, and authen-
Bayesian game model. Yang et al. [33] proposed an intelligent ticates the vehicles under its scope.
IDS based on tree-structure machine learning models. This 3) Fog Server (): A fog server, such as , is attached
model uses different types of techniques such as, decision to one or more 
 and receives a partial block containing
tree, random forest, XG-Boost and so on. Garg et al. [11] a list of transactions and their compact signature.  verifies
suggested a probabilistic data structures-based IDS for IoV. the attached signature and, if the signature is correct, forwards
Similar to this work Garg et al. [34] suggested a multi-stage
IDS based on Support Vector Machine (SVM). This model
used Artificial Bee Colony (ABC) Optimization technique
with a Cauchy based mutation operator for feature selection
in IoV environment.
III. P ROPOSED P RIVACY-P RESERVING -BASED
the partial block to a cloud server   in the blockchain
hub.
4) Automatic Vehicles (): In the C-ITS,  are the
dynamically moving traffic entities. They have OBUs that
can connect wirelessly with fog nodes. In C-ITS, these 
requirements are privacy preservation and secure real-time data
interaction.
S ECURE F RAMEWORK
A. Overall Systematic Architecture
Fig 1 itself illustrates the proposed framework in C-ITS
environment. There are six main system components: Trusted
Authority ( ), Fog Server (), Automatic Vehicles (),
Road Side Units (
5) Cloud Server ( ): A cloud server, such as  ,
transforms partial blocks to complete blocks after receiving
them from its respective fog server (). The complete
block is then mined using the proposed smart contract-based
enhanced Proof of Work (ePoW) technique.
), Cloud Server ( ) and DL-based 6) DL-Based IDS: The proposed DL-based IDS is mounted
IDS. All these components communicate together coopera- on fog nodes, i.e.,  to collect and analyse network data from
tively. For example, As shown in Fig 1, an accident scenario RSUs. The proposed IDS has two components; a LSTM-AE
has been shown. The real-time information of accident is technique for encoding real-time data into different format to
being send to nearby AV and RSU through V2V and V2I prevent inference attack and A-RNN based intrusion detection
communication, respectively. Thus, all AVs moving in the system is designed using encoded dataset.
same direction are notified and are asked to divert or stop.
However, the communication between AV and RSU is done B. Level 1: Blockchain Module for Security and
using public channel (i.e., Internet). Therefore, in order to Privacy-Preservation
ensure secure communication and detect attack, we proposed The proposed module contains five different phases for
a framework by integrating blockchain and deep-leaning. The ensuring security and privacy such as Initialization phase, reg-
components of this framework is explained below: istration phase, Authentication and Key Management phase,
1) Trusted Authority ( ):  is a completely trusted Validation and Block creation phase, and Data creation and
authority that primarily manages initialization. It is capable block updation. The process of each phase are discussed below.
of completing the registration of the  and 
 pseudo 1) Initialization Phase: To create appropriate parameters of
identities, as well as the generation of public parameters, and system, the trusted authority ( ) accomplish following steps
key delivery prior to placement in the network. at first:

Authorized licensed use limited to: VNR Vignana Jyothi Inst of Eng & Tech. Downloaded on March 10,2023 at 19:48:02 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
KUMAR et al.: PRIVACY-PRESERVING-BASED SECURE FRAMEWORK 16495

Step 1:  selects non-singular elliptic curve (, ) over

the finite filed  , where  denotes a prime number and (, )
∈  are selected in such a way that the constraints 4a3 +
27b2 = 0 (mod p) is matched successfully. Assume, P is the
generator of (, ) for additive group  of order .
Step 2:  again selects a cryptographic hash function  (.)
for ensuring collision resistance value in the form of hash
using SHA-256.
Step 3: Finally,  chooses a master key for the  ∈ 
and computes the respective public key  =  . TA .
P and generate system parameters ( (, ), P,  ,  (.)), Fig. 2. Summary of registered entity credential.
where  denotes private master key.
fog server. Finally, the secret key is computed ‘ =
2) Registration Phase: In this phase  accomplishes the HS(HS(  ||
 || 
 || 
  )) by .
registration of , , 
, and  . Here,  creates Step 4 (Cloud Server Registration): The  computes cre-
two secret key  and  during registration process. The ates unique identity  and temporary id 
detailed registration process are discussed below and credential and finds pseudorandom identity  = HS( ||
of each registered entity is shown Fig. 2.  ||  ), where  denotes timestamp
Step 1 (Fog Registration): For the registration of fog, during registration for   . Next,  preserve (( ,
 selects unique identity (
 ) and temporary identity  ), HS( ‘ ||  , HS(.)) in the 
( 
 ), and selects two secret key 
 and 
  memory.
randomly. Next  processes random identity (
 ) = 3) Authentication and Key Management: This phase
For the registration of fog,  selects unique identity (
 ) explains authentication and key management with different
and temporary identity ( 
 ), and selects two secret communication like AV to fog, RSU to fog, and fog to cloud
key 
 and 
  randomly. Next  processes random server.
identity (
 ) = HS( || 
 || 
 ), and finds a) Authentication and key management between AV and
secret keys ‘ = HS(HS(  || 
 || 
 || fog server: This process explores the communication between

 )) and ‘ = HS(HS(  || 
 || 
 ||  and  . The detailed steps are discussed below:
Step 1:  selects random value of nonce  and

  )), where 
 denotes timestamp of  . Next timestamp  and computes parameters  =
 preserve credential (( 
 , 
 ), (  , HS(HS( ‘ ||  ||  ) ⊕  ) and  =
 , where m = {1, 2, . . . , n AV }), (  ,  ,
HS( || HS( ‘ ||  ||  ||  )) and
where t = {1, 2, . . . , n R SU }), (  ,  , where
transmit the message (  ,  ,  ,  ) to
z = {1, 2, . . . , n C L S V }), ‘ , ‘ , HS(.),  ) for
 through secure channel.
deployment of  . The (  ,  ), where m = 1 Step 2: Once  receives the (  ,  ,  ,
to n AV denotes number of vehicles, (  ,   ) from  , it checks for timestamp  verifica-
t = 1 to n R SU denotes number of road side units, and tion by maximum time delay using |  − ∗ | <=
(  ,  ), z = 1 to n C L S V denotes number T S, where T S denotes maximum time delay and ∗
of cloud server. The n AV , n R SU , and n C L S V denotes number is the reception time of (  ,  ,  ,  )
of registered autonomous vehicle, road side units, and cloud if these condition matches, the  obtains  for given
server. The secret key ‘ , ‘ , 
 ,
 are  by computing  = HS(HS( ‘ || 
unique for each registration. ||  ) ⊕  ) and ‘ = HS( || HS( ‘ ||
Step 2 (AV Registration): The  computes creates unique
identity  and temporary id  and finds pseudo-
 ||  ||  )) with stored ‘ and matches
random identity  = HS( ||  ||  ), ‘ =  , if matches the  is authenticated by 
where  denotes timestamp during registration for  . and resultant is particular  is valid otherwise the services
Next,  preserve (( ,  ), HS( ‘ ||  , of the  gets terminated immediately by the  .
where j = {1, 2, . . . , n f og }, HS(.)) in the  memory. Step 3:  selects random value of nonce 
The n f og } denotes number of registered fog server. Finally, and timestamp  , and temporary key  for
the secret key is computed ‘ = HS(HS(  ||
 || , and computes parameters  = HS(HS( ‘ ||

 || 
 )) by .  ||  ) ⊕ ), session key
  =
Step 3 (RSU Registration): The  computes creates unique HS(HS( ‘ ||  ||  ||  ||  ||
identity  and temporary id  and finds )) is shared with  . Next,  = HS(
 
pseudorandom identity  = HS( ||  || ||  ) and ‘ =  ⊕ HS(  ||
 ), where  denotes timestamp during registration
  ||  ),  sends message to ( ‘ ,
for 
 . Next,  preserve (( ,  ), HS( ‘  ,  ,  ) to  using secure channel.
||  , where j = {1, 2, . . . , n f og }, P,  , HS(.)) in Further,  updates  with  in the
the  memory. The n f og } denotes number of registered database.

Authorized licensed use limited to: VNR Vignana Jyothi Inst of Eng & Tech. Downloaded on March 10,2023 at 19:48:02 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
16496 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS, VOL. 23, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2022

Step 4: Once these information get received ( ‘ ,

 ,  ,  ) from  , it checks for timestamp
 verification by maximum time delay using | 
- ∗ | <= T S, where T S denotes maximum time
delay and ∗ is the reception time of ( ‘ ,
 ,  ,  ) for successful validation by
Mathbb AVn by computing  =  ⊕ HS(HS( ‘
||  ||  )) and session key
  =
HS(HS( ‘ ||  ||  ||  ||  )) which is
shared with  , ‘ = HS(    ||  ) and
 = ‘ ⊕ HS(  || (
 
||  ). If ‘ =  matches successfully, 
authenticates the  and computes the session key as
correct session key, otherwise  terminates the session with
 . Further,  updates the  and 
in the database. At last, the  and  securely estab-
lished a session key
  =    for future
communication. Fig.3 shows details of registration process
between  and  server.
b) Authentication and key management between RSU and
fog server: The Next authentication of road side unit 

and fog server  is performed. The following steps are
discussed below:
Step 1: 
 selects random value of nonce 
 and
timestamp  and computes parameters  = 
 .
 = ( 
 ).  and  = HS(HS( ‘ ||
 ||  || ). Next 
 sends message of
(  ,  , ,  ) to  through secure
channel.
Step 2: On receiving of (  ,  , ,
 ) by 
 to  then it checks the timestamp
 by validating  - ∗ | <= T S,
where T S denotes maximum time delay and ∗ is
the reception time of (  ,  , ,  ) Fig. 3. Key authentication between AV and fog server.
if these condition matches, the  obtains  for
given  by computing ‘ = HS(HS( ‘ ||
 ||  ||  || ). If the verification is  = 
 . = ( 
 
)., session
successful ‘ =  , the 
 is validated by  key 
 
 = HS(HS( ‘ ||  || 
and communication takes place otherwise  terminates the ||  ||  ) share to  and ‘ =
communication of 
 . HS( 
 
 ||  ||  || ) with previously
Step 3:  picks random value of nonce 
 evaluated . If ‘ =  , 
 authenticates
and timestamp  , and computes  = 
.  and the computed session key is valid otherwise
 = ( 
). ,  = 
.  = ( 
 terminates the session key with  . Finally, 


 
 )., session key 
 
 = HS(HS( ‘ computes new temporary key using previously computed
||  ||  ||  || ) and shared as  = ‘ ⊕ HS(  ||
the 
 and  = HS( 
 
 ||  
 
 ||  ) and updates  with
||  || ). Further  creates temporary identifica-  in the database. Finally, 
 and 
tion  for 
 and computes ‘ = establishes secure communication using (   )
 ⊕ HS(  || 
 
 ||  ). = ( 
 
 ) for the future use. Fig.4 details the
Next, evaluating these parameters  transmit the message authentication process between 
and  server.
( ‘ , ,  ,  ) to 
 using secure c) Authentication and key management between fog and
channel. Further,  updates  with  cloud server: The key management of fog server  and
in the database. cloud server   is performed. The following steps are
Step 4: On receiving of ( ‘ , ,  , discussed below:
 ) from  , 
 checks the timestamp Step 1:  selects the random nonce   and the
of  using | ∗ | <= T S, where timestamp  and compute the message 
 is the time of reception for the message.
∗ = HS(HS( ‘ ||  ||  )) ⊕  
If the condition successfully matches 
 computes and  = HS(  || HS( ‘ ||  ) ||

Authorized licensed use limited to: VNR Vignana Jyothi Inst of Eng & Tech. Downloaded on March 10,2023 at 19:48:02 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
KUMAR et al.: PRIVACY-PRESERVING-BASED SECURE FRAMEWORK 16497

Fig. 5. Key authentication between fog server and cloud server.

Fig. 4. Key authentication between RSU and fog server.

− ∗ is the time of reception ( ‘
 ,  ,

 || 
 ||  ) and sends the message  ,  ). After successful validation 
( 
 ,  ,  ,  ) to   computes   = 
 ⊕ HS(HS(  ||
‘

using secure channel.  ) ||  ), and session key 
  =
Step 2: On the receiving of ( 
 ,  ,
 ,  ) from  ,   checks the HS(HS(  ||  ) || HS(  ||  ) ||
‘ ‘

timestamp of  by using  - ∗

 || 
 ||   ||  ) shared
to   , ‘ = HS( 
  ||  ),
| <= T S, where T S denotes maximum time delay and 
∗ is the reception time of ( 
 ,  , and 
 = 
 ⊕ HS( 
 ||
‘

 ,  ), if these condition matches,   

  ||  ), if validation is success-
retrieves 
 and temporary id 
 , computes ful ‘ =  then  communicates with
 =  ⊕ HS(HS( ‘ ||  ) ||   , otherwise communication gets terminated. Next, 

 ) and ‘ = HS(tFCLSVm || HS( ‘ || stores the 
 with 
 in the database.
 || 
 ||  )), and verify ‘ = Further,  and   establish secure communication
 . If matches successful   authenticates  using 
  =  
 . Fig.5 shows the
and  it legitimate otherwise   terminates the com- process of authentication of fog server and cloud server.
munication of  . 4) Validation and Block Creation Phase: If the  is
Step 3:   selects a random nonce   and registered successfully with  then, request of joining
timestamp  , creates temporary identity 
 blockchain gets initiated. Next, process of block creation
for  and computes  = HS(HS( ‘ ||  ) and validation is performed using smart contract enabled
||  ) ⊕   session key  
 = ePoW [21]. The validation and creation of block is illustrated
in Fig. 6. These are the steps involved in between  and
HS(HS( ‘ ||  ) || HS( ‘ ||  ) ||
  || 
 ||   ||  ) is   which is discussed below:
Step 1: At first step,  assigned with public and private
shared to  ,  = HS(  
 ||
key (P Bkey , P Rkey ), where P Bkey is identified as public key
 ) and ‘
 = 
 ⊕ HS( 
 and P Rkey is identified as private key for nt h AV ( ). Next,
||  
 ||  ),   transmit the mes-  starts the process for signature validation.

sage ( ‘
 ,  ,  ,  ) to  Step 2: The  creates signature (! ) and sent to the
using secure channel. Further,   updates 
  for its validation.
with 
 in the database. Step 3: The  verify the signature and makes it
Step 4: On the receiving ( ‘
 ,  ,  , valid/invalid. If ! is validated successfully then,  gen-
 ) from   ,  checks  by erates request to join the network of blockchain using its
condition |  - ∗ | <= T S, where credential such as P Bkey and  .

Authorized licensed use limited to: VNR Vignana Jyothi Inst of Eng & Tech. Downloaded on March 10,2023 at 19:48:02 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
16498 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS, VOL. 23, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2022
Fig. 6. Validation and creation of new block.
Step 4: Further,  sent ! to its associated peers node
( ) for public key validation  .
Step 5: The peer nodes ( ) validates public key and
signature of  and send back as status of True/ False.
Step 6: If the status assigned with True, new block (Bm )
is created and added to the blockchain associated with P Bkey
and  . Further, actual data is stored into the IPFS based
secured distributed storage layer.
5) Data Creation and Updation of Block: This phase
describes data generation process. The entire process is sum-
marized in Fig. 7. These are the steps involved in the data
creation and block updation which is discussed below:
Step 1: At the first step, data ("") is generated by
the  and signed (! ) by P Rkey of  . After valid
signature of data, entire data gets converted as new transactions
(Tm ) including the credential ! , P Bkey ,  of  .
Further, Tm sent the details of signed data and credential to
the  for its validation and updation in the Bm .
Step 2: Further, the "" and ! is checked of associated
public key P Bkey and  . If all are matched successfully,
then Tm is added into a block Bm and distributed to the entire
blockchain network.
Step 3: The Bm gets updated into the blockchain network
by adding it, in the consecutive order.
C. Level 2: Deep-Learning Module for Privacy-Preservation
and Security
1) Long-Short Term Memory-AutoEncoder (LSTM-AE)-
Based Privacy: The authenticated data received from OBUs is
used in this module. The proposed DL module first, maps the
features categorical values into numeric ones. Then, min-max
normalization technique is employed to normalize the datasets
into a particular range such as between 0 and 1 as discussed
in [10]. Finally, the data is converted into new format using
the proposed LSTM-AE technique.
Authorized licensed use limited to: VNR Vignana Jyothi Inst of Eng & Tech. Downloaded on March 10,2023 at 19:48:02 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Fig. 7. Data updation and creation of block.
a) Long-short term memory (LSTM): The LSTM is
designed to overcome the issue of “gradient vanish or explode”
problem during back propagation faced by traditional Recur-
rent Neural Network (RNN). The LSTM structure produces
decision vectors in the first step and selects candidate infor-
mation. The vector generated is between 0 and 1, where values
closer to 0 are forgotten and values closer to 1 are kept. The
vector I is generated in the input gate by the hidden state h t −1
from the previous LSTM unit and the x t input of the current
t step.
It = fi (#i x t + #i h t −1 + bi ) . (1)
where f i is the activation function, #i denotes the weighted
matrix and bi is the bias among two connecting components.
The forget gate, Ft is generated and takes two input values
i.e., h t −1 as previous hidden state and x t as the current input
vector, to determine if prior unit state Ct −1 should be reserved
as
 
Ft = f g #g x t + #g h t −1 + bg . (2)
where f g , #g and bg denotes the activation function, weighted
matrix and bias of the forget gate, respectively. Then, the input
t . The steps used
gate updates the information in the cell state C

in generating Ct using x t and h t −1 are as follows
t = f c (#c x t + #c h t −1 + bc ) .
C (3)
The current cell state Ct is linked with the prior cell state
Ct −1 and the input candidate information Ct is calculated as
t It
Ct = Ct −1 Ft + C (4)
The output gate is responsible for generating a vector Ot to
determine the hidden state h t for the next timestep. In order
to make predictions, the h t consists the information about the
previous steps. The h t for the next timestep is calculated using
a two-step process:
Ot = f o (#o x t + #o h t −1 + bo ) . (5)
h t = Ot f h (Ct ) (6)
where f o , #o and bo is activation function, weighted matrix
and bias of the output gate, respectively and determines a part
of the cell state being outputted.
KUMAR et al.: PRIVACY-PRESERVING-BASED SECURE FRAMEWORK 16499

algorithm. The proposed IDS is executed by fog nodes in the

blockchain-based C-ITS network. Formally, for a given C-ITS
system with state S, encoded-input X , parameter θ , we have
a transition function as [36].

St +1 = F (Xt +1 , St , θ ) (11)

The goal is to identify a θ that minimizes total loss in

relation to desired outputs Ot∗ at each time step.


T 
T
 
LT = lt = l St , Ot∗ (12)
t =1 t =1
Fig. 8. The working architecture of our proposed deep-learning module for
providing privacy and security. In case of RNN, St = (Ot , Ht ), where Ot denotes activation
function of output layer and Ht represents activations of the
b) LSTM auto-encoder: The AutoEncoder (AE) has two hidden recurrent layer. Thus, the system takes the form
parts; encoder and decoder as illustrated in Fig 8. The encoder
uses a deterministic affine mapping function followed by Ht +1 = tanh (W X Xt +1 + W H Ht + B) (13)
nonlinearity to convert the input x t into a hidden representation Ot +1 = WO Ht +1 (14)
 
yt using below equation [35] lt +1 = l Ot +1 , Ot∗+1 (15)
yt = f (#t + b) (7) we have parameters θ = (WX , WH , B). The aim is to effi-
where # denotes the weight between input x t and hidden ciently calculate ∂LT /∂θ . This computation can be done using
representation yt and b is the bias. The decoder is used to the Backpropagation through time (BPTT) method. It, would
reconstruct the output xt using yt ; however, necessitate processing the entire sequence in both
  directions. This necessitates maintaining track of the entire
xt = f  # t + b (8) unfolded network, or, in other words, preserving the entire
history of inputs and activations. When very long sequences
where # represents weight between hidden representation yt
are processed with huge networks, this is impracticable since
and xt and b is the bias. xt is the reconstruction of x t . The
processing the entire sequence at each gradient step delays
aim of training an AE is to reduce the reconstruction error as
learning. In order to alleviate the problem truncated BPTT is
much as possible, which can be achieved by reducing the cost
used to train the RNN model [37]. Now, with truncation length
function J .
L < T , the gradient term becomes ∂lt +1 ∂∂F S (Xt +1 , St , θ )
1
p
every L time steps, namely
J= L [x t , xt ] (9) ⎧
p ∂l  
i=1 ⎪
⎪ St , Ot∗
⎨ if t is a multiple of L
∂S
where p denotes the number of input features, x t denotes the ∂
lt := (16)
t-th input feature, and xt corresponds to the reconstructed ⎪
⎪ ∂F
⎩ ∂lt +1 (Xt +1 , St , θ ) otherwise.
feature. The reconstruction error of the input signal x t is ∂S
represented by L [x t , xt ], which can be measured using mean This allows for online use of RNN: for example, at time
square error or cross entropy. The mean square error of L < T , the gradient estimate from the first subsequence
the input feature x t , (t = 1, 2, . . . , p) and the recovered t = 1 . . . , L is independent of anything. Further, in our
patch feature xt , (t = 1, 2, . . . , p) is used in this analysis. model, we introduce an attention mechanism to improve
Correspondingly, L [x t , xt ] can be computed as; the attack detection performance. For each hidden state Ht
L [x t , xt ] = x t − xt 2 (10) acquired at time step t by the RNN, the attention layer
is used to learn a weight t . With respect to the output
The LSTM-AE model incorporates the LSTM network with sequence H = (H1 , H2 , . . . H N ), the weighting vector a
the AE, which means LSTM does the encoding and decoding. H = (H1 , H2 , . . . H N ) is determined. The weighted sum
The LSTM-AE is forced to learn the most salient features of these N hidden states is used to calculate the attention
of the training data by constraining the latent space to be vector S:
smaller in dimension than the input. In summary, we have
used LSTM-AE to convert the authenticated C-ITS data into 
N
S= t Ht (17)
new format to prevent inference attack, in which the attacker
t =1
tries to infer whether an input is part of the model’s training
dataset and then tries to gain knowledge about end users. where the weighting factors t is calculated as
2) Attention-Based Recurrent Neural Network (A-RNN):  
exp UtT UW
The encoded data from LSTM-AE is used by the proposed t =   T  (18)
A-RNN-based IDS. In this work, for training an A-RNN, t exp Ut UW
we use Truncated Backpropagation Through Time (BPTT) Ut = tanh (WW Ht + BW ) (19)

Authorized licensed use limited to: VNR Vignana Jyothi Inst of Eng & Tech. Downloaded on March 10,2023 at 19:48:02 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
16500 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS, VOL. 23, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2022

TABLE I
A DOPTED LSTM-AE PARAMETERS

TABLE II
A DOPTED A-RNN-BASED IDS PARAMETERS

where WW and UW denote weight matrices and BW denotes

the bias. The outputs of the attention layer are sent to the
fully connected layer. The c-way softmax function generates
a probability over c class labels. The variable c is the number
of traffic classes in the dataset.

IV. E XPERIMENTAL R ESULTS AND E VALUATION

A. Experimental Design
The proposed framework was implemented using the
‘python programming language’ on Windows Tyrone PC with
Intel(R) Xeon(R) Silver 4114 CPU @ 2.20GHz 2.20GHz
(2 processors), with 128 GB RAM. Deep learning techniques
was implemented using TensorFlow library Keras. A private
blockchain was created using Ethereum and Solidity program-
ming language (version 6.0) and IPFS version 0.4.19 was
configured. As discussed in [10], different evaluation metrics
such as False Alarm Rate (FAR) ACcuracy (AC), Detection
Rate (DR), PRecision (PR), and F1 are used. The performance
of the proposed IDS for intrusion detection was conducted
using ToN-IoT [24], [26] and CICIDS-2017 [25], [27] datasets.
These datasets were split into 70%, and 30% training and test- Fig. 9. Privacy and security result analysis using blockchain and smart
ing sets. Finally, in both datasets feature mapping and normal- contracts services.
ization was performed, as discussed in [21], [38]. The A-RNN
performance before and after applying privacy-preservation we have illustrated the block mining time, block creation,
techniques was compared with some recent state-of-the-art the block access time. It can be observed that, the time increases
works. as the number of IoV increases as expected. The Fig. 9f
and Fig. 9g shows transaction signing time and contract
B. Blockchain Module Results and Explanations deployment time. The transaction sign ensures non-repudiation
To maintain the security and privacy in proposed framework in framework proposed. Fig. 9h shows the actual storage size
each IoT nodes must be registered against malicious activi- in KB for varying number of transactions in the framework.
ties. The registration time for different IoV nodes is shown The storage sizes are computed with IPFS secure and distrib-
in Fig. 9a. The Fig. 9b shows the actual IoV data upload time uted storage layer. The off-chain operations are performed to
with IPFS secured storage layer with number of transactions. make the framework more scalable. It can be observed that,
It can be observed that the upload time gets increased as the storage size (in KB) increases as the number of transactions
the number of transactions increases. In Fig. 9c, 9d, and 9e, increases.

Authorized licensed use limited to: VNR Vignana Jyothi Inst of Eng & Tech. Downloaded on March 10,2023 at 19:48:02 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
KUMAR et al.: PRIVACY-PRESERVING-BASED SECURE FRAMEWORK 16501

TABLE III
R ESULTS OF C LASS -W ISE P REDICTION (%) O BTAINED F ROM A-RNN-BASED IDS U SING T O N-I OT D ATASET

TABLE IV
R ESULTS OF C LASS -W ISE P REDICTION (%) O BTAINED F ROM A-RNN-BASED IDS U SING CICIDS-2017 D ATASET

Fig. 10. The accuracy vs loss for LSTM-AE technique using ToN-IoT dataset. Fig. 11. The accuracy vs loss for LSTM-AE technique using CICIDS-
2017 dataset.

C. Deep-Learning Module Results and Explanations

In this section, we analyse the impact of the pro-
posed DL-based privacy-preservation technique followed by
A-RNN-based IDS performance after and before applying
privacy-preservation technique. Based on trial-and-error exper-
iments, the adopted hyperparameters of LSTM-AE for two
datasets are shown in Table I. The architecture of LSTM-AE
is well-designed to handle time-series data. Figs. 10 and 11,
illustrates the ACcuracy (AC) vs loss obtained from LSTM-AE
technique with ToN-IoT and CICIDS-2017 datasets, respec-
tively. The LSTM-AE technique can efficiently learn from both
datasets and has obtained about 93.70% validation AC and
0.0065% loss, and 82.60% validation AC and 0.0149% loss
based on ToN-IoT and CICIDS-2017 datasets, respectively.
The role of LSTM-AE is not to detect these attack vectors.
Instead, the proposed framework uses LSTM-AE technique
to encode the given datasets into new shape, that can avoid
inference attacks. These encoded dataset would be further
used by the DL-based IDS for learning and classifying attack
behaviours.
The proposed two-level privacy efficiency is evaluated
as a utility system of intrusion detection using DL-based
A-RNN. Table II, shows the adopted hyperparameters of
A-RNN-based IDS for two datasets. The validation vs accu-
racy loss for A-RNN-based IDS using actual ToN-IoT dataset
is 99.46% and 0.0105% and with transformed dataset is
97.97% and 0.0124% respectively. Similarly, with actual
Fig. 12. ROC curves obtained from the proposed A-RNN-based IDS after
applying privacy-preservation technique on both datasets.
CICIDS-2017 dataset, these values are 98.51%, 0.0377%
and with transformed dataset it is 97.55% and 0.0503%
respectively. The performance of the proposed A-RNN-based
IDS is evaluated on the actual and transformed ToN-IoT
and CICIDS-2017 datasets in terms of class-wise prediction
results, i.e., PR, DR, F1 and FAR. Table III and Table IV
clearly depicts that the proposed A-RNN-based IDS have
learned benign and attack traffic signatures outstandingly.
With transformed and actual ToN-IoT dataset, for most of
the vectors, the A-RNN-based IDS has achieved PR, DR,
F1 values between 90%-100%. However, in both cases using
CICIDS-2017 datasets, for Bot and Web Attack, the proposed
IDS has shown lower values compared to other vectors. The
reason behind is obvious that the dataset carries very few
instances of these attacks. Finally, the per class FAR has been
reduced close to 0% for both datasets. The Receiver Operating

Authorized licensed use limited to: VNR Vignana Jyothi Inst of Eng & Tech. Downloaded on March 10,2023 at 19:48:02 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
16502 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS, VOL. 23, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2022
TABLE V
P ERFORMANCE C OMPARISON W ITH E XISTING S TATE - OF - THE -A RT
I NTRUSION D ETECTION S YSTEMS
Characteristic (ROC) values for proposed A-RNN-based
IDS is illustrated in Fig. 12. The AU-ROC value
obtained by the proposed A-RNN-based IDS, after apply-
ing privacy-preservation technique is illustrated in Fig. 12a
and Fig. 12b. The AU-ROC value is close to 1 for all classes
present in both dataset.
D. Comparisons and Discussions
Table V shows performance comparison in terms of accu-
racy with existing state-of-the-art approaches. It is seen most
of the techniques used Power datasets, which is outdated, and
do not contain modern attack and therefore have less practical
value for a modern IDS. The proposed framework is evaluated
using two modern datasets i.e., CICIDS-2017 and ToN-IoT.
Moreover, we see that with original and transformed datasets,
A-RNN-based IDS has achieved higher accuracy.
V. C ONCLUSION AND F UTURE W ORK
This paper studies the challenges of privacy, and security of
C-ITS data and suggested a framework for enhancing privacy
and security in C-ITS infrastructure by integrating blockchain
and deep-learning techniques. The proposed framework was
based on two modules. First a blockchain and smart contract
enabled security and privacy module was designed for large
scale C-ITS data. The underlying approach provides a secure
communication of data among the participating entities in the
C-ITS environment and prevents data poisoning attacks from
manipulating original datasets. The second module was based
on deep learning technique. This module uses LSTM-AE
for encoding data into a new format that prevents inference
attacks from gaining knowledge relative to original datasets
of C-ITS networks. An intrusion detection system based
on A-RNN technique was then evaluated before and after
applying two-level privacy techniques. The proposed IDS was
evaluated using ToN-IoT and CICIDS-2017 network datasets
and compared with some recent works to prove its perfor-
mance. Future extension will include evaluating the proposed
framework in real C-ITS environment and applying different
real-world datasets to evaluate frameworks scalability and
utility.
R EFERENCES
[1] P. Škorput, H. Vojvodić, and S. Mandžuka, “Cyber security in coop-
erative intelligent transportation systems,” in Proc. Int. Symp. ELMAR,
Sep. 2017, pp. 35–38.
Authorized licensed use limited to: VNR Vignana Jyothi Inst of Eng & Tech. Downloaded on March 10,2023 at 19:48:02 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
[2] E. B. Hamida, H. Noura, and W. Znaidi, “Security of cooperative intel-
ligent transport systems: Standards, threats analysis and cryptographic
countermeasures,” Electronics, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 380–423, 2015.
[3] M. Waqas et al., “Authentication of vehicles and road side units in
intelligent transportation system,” Comput., Mater. Continua, vol. 64,
no. 1, pp. 359–371, 2020.
[4] M. A. Javed, S. Zeadally, and E. B. Hamida, “Data analytics for cooper-
ative intelligent transport systems,” Veh. Commun., vol. 15, pp. 63–72,
Jan. 2019.
[5] W. Liu, Y. Tang, F. Yang, C. Zhang, D. Cao, and G.-J. Kim, “Internet of
Things based solutions for transport network vulnerability assessment in
intelligent transportation systems,” Comput., Mater. Continua, vol. 65,
no. 3, pp. 2511–2527, 2020.
[6] M. Wazid, P. Bagga, A. K. Das, S. Shetty, J. J. P. C. Rodrigues, and
Y. H. Park, “AKM-IoV: Authenticated key management protocol in fog
computing-based internet of vehicles deployment,” IEEE Internet Things
J., vol. 6, no. 5, pp. 8804–8817, Oct. 2019.
[7] P. Bagga, A. K. Sutrala, A. K. Das, and P. Vijayakumar, “Blockchain-
based batch authentication protocol for internet of vehicles,” J. Syst.
Archit., vol. 113, Feb. 2021, Art. no. 101877.
[8] L. Nie, Z. Ning, X. Wang, X. Hu, J. Cheng, and Y. Li, “Data-
driven intrusion detection for intelligent internet of vehicles: A deep
convolutional neural network-based method,” IEEE Trans. Netw. Sci.
Eng., vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 2219–2230, Oct. 2020.
[9] Q. Ali, N. Ahmad, A. Malik, G. Ali, and W. Rehman, “Issues, chal-
lenges, and research opportunities in intelligent transport system for
security and privacy,” Appl. Sci., vol. 8, no. 10, p. 1964, Oct. 2018.
[10] P. Kumar, G. P. Gupta, and R. Tripathi, “A distributed ensemble design
based intrusion detection system using fog computing to protect the
Internet of Things networks,” J. Ambient Intell. Humanized Comput.,
pp. 1–18, Nov. 2020.
[11] S. Garg, A. Singh, G. S. Aujla, S. Kaur, S. Batra, and N. Kumar,
“A probabilistic data structures-based anomaly detection scheme for
software-defined internet of vehicles,” IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst.,
vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 3557–3566, Jun. 2020.
[12] M. Keshk, B. Turnbull, N. Moustafa, D. Vatsalan, and K.-K. R. Choo,
“A privacy-preserving-framework-based blockchain and deep learning
for protecting smart power networks,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Informat.,
vol. 16, no. 8, pp. 5110–5118, Aug. 2020.
[13] M. Keshk, N. Moustafa, E. Sitnikova, and B. Turnbull, “Privacy-
preserving big data analytics for cyber-physical systems,” Wireless Netw.,
pp. 1–9, Dec. 2018.
[14] P. Kumar et al., “PPSF: A privacy-preserving and secure frame-
work using blockchain-based machine-learning for IoT-driven smart
cities,” IEEE Trans. Netw. Sci. Eng., early access, Jun. 16, 2021, doi:
10.1109/TNSE.2021.3089435.
[15] M. Keshk, E. Sitnikova, N. Moustafa, J. Hu, and I. Khalil, “An inte-
grated framework for privacy-preserving based anomaly detection for
cyber-physical systems,” IEEE Trans. Sustain. Comput., vol. 6, no. 1,
pp. 66–79, Jan. 2021.
[16] H. Gao, W. Huang, and X. Yang, “Applying probabilistic model checking
to path planning in an intelligent transportation system using mobility
trajectories and their statistical data,” Intell. Automat. Soft Comput.,
vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 547–559, Jan. 2019.
[17] M. B. Mollah et al., “Blockchain for the internet of vehicles towards
intelligent transportation systems: A survey,” IEEE Internet Things J.,
vol. 8, no. 6, pp. 4157–4185, Mar. 2021.
[18] S. Singh, A. S. M. S. Hosen, and B. Yoon, “Blockchain security attacks,
challenges, and solutions for the future distributed IoT network,” IEEE
Access, vol. 9, pp. 13938–13959, 2021.
[19] R. Kumar and R. Tripathi, “DBTP2SF: A deep blockchain-based trust-
worthy privacy-preserving secured framework in industrial Internet of
Things systems,” Trans. Emerg. Telecommun. Technol., vol. 32, no. 4,
p. e4222, Apr. 2021.
[20] S. Singh, P. K. Sharma, B. Yoon, M. Shojafar, G. H. Cho, and I.-H. Ra,
“Convergence of blockchain and artificial intelligence in IoT network
for the sustainable smart city,” Sustain. Cities Soc., vol. 63, Dec. 2020,
Art. no. 102364.
[21] R. Kumar, P. Kumar, R. Tripathi, G. P. Gupta, T. R. Gadekallu, and
G. Srivastava, “SP2F: A secured privacy-preserving framework for
smart agricultural unmanned aerial vehicles,” Comput. Netw., vol. 187,
Mar. 2021, Art. no. 107819.
[22] R. Kumar and R. Tripathi, “Implementation of distributed file storage
and access framework using IPFS and blockchain,” in Proc. 5th Int.
Conf. Image Inf. Process. (ICIIP), Nov. 2019, pp. 246–251.
KUMAR et al.: PRIVACY-PRESERVING-BASED SECURE FRAMEWORK
[23] P. Kumar, G. P. Gupta, and R. Tripathi, “Design of anomaly-based
intrusion detection system using fog computing for IoT network,” Autom.
Control Comput. Sci., vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 137–147, Mar. 2021.
[24] A. Alsaedi, N. Moustafa, Z. Tari, A. Mahmood, and A. Anwar,
“TON_IoT telemetry dataset: A new generation dataset of IoT and
IIoT for data-driven intrusion detection systems,” IEEE Access, vol. 8,
pp. 165130–165150, 2020.
[25] I. Sharafaldin, A. H. Lashkari, and A. A. Ghorbani, “Toward generating
a new intrusion detection dataset and intrusion traffic characterization,”
in Proc. 4th Int. Conf. Inf. Syst. Secur. Privacy, 2018, pp. 108–116.
[26] N. Moustafa. (2019). TON_IOT Datasets. Accessed: Feb. 10, 2020.
[Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.21227/fesz-dm97
[27] I. Sharafaldin. (2017). CIC-IDS2017 Datasets. Accessed: Mar. 15, 2019.
[Online]. Available: http://205.174.165.80/CICDataset/CIC-IDS-
2017/Dataset/
[28] G. Tripathi, M. A. Ahad, and M. Sathiyanarayanan, “The role of
blockchain in internet of vehicles (IoV): Issues, challenges and opportu-
nities,” in Proc. Int. Conf. Contemp. Comput. Informat. (IC I), Dec. 2019,
pp. 26–31.
[29] S. Kuutti, R. Bowden, Y. Jin, P. Barber, and S. Fallah, “A survey of
deep learning applications to autonomous vehicle control,” IEEE Trans.
Intell. Transp. Syst., vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 712–733, Feb. 2021.
[30] A. S. M. S. Hosen et al., “Blockchain-based transaction validation
protocol for a secure distributed IoT network,” IEEE Access, vol. 8,
pp. 117266–117277, 2020.
[31] Y. Wang, W. Meng, W. Li, J. Li, W.-X. Liu, and Y. Xiang, “A fog-based
privacy-preserving approach for distributed signature-based intrusion
detection,” J. Parallel Distrib. Comput., vol. 122, pp. 26–35, Dec. 2018.
[32] H. Sedjelmaci, S. M. Senouci, and N. Ansari, “Intrusion detection
and ejection framework against lethal attacks in UAV-aided networks:
A Bayesian game-theoretic methodology,” IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp.
Syst., vol. 18, no. 5, pp. 1143–1153, May 2017.
[33] L. Yang, A. Moubayed, I. Hamieh, and A. Shami, “Tree-based intelligent
intrusion detection system in internet of vehicles,” in Proc. IEEE Global
Commun. Conf. (GLOBECOM), Dec. 2019, pp. 1–6.
[34] S. Garg, K. Kaur, G. Kaddoum, F. Gagnon, N. Kumar, and Z. Han, “Sec-
IoV: A multi-stage anomaly detection scheme for internet of vehicles,”
in Proc. ACM MobiHoc Workshop Pervas. Syst. IoT Era (PERSIST-IoT),
2019, pp. 37–42.
[35] P. Kumar, R. Tripathi, and G. P. Gupta, “P2IDF: A privacy-preserving
based intrusion detection framework for software defined Internet of
Things-fog (SDIoT-Fog),” in Proc. Adjunct Int. Conf. Distrib. Comput.
Netw., Jan. 2021, pp. 37–42.
[36] M. A. Ferrag and L. Maglaras, “DeepCoin: A novel deep learning and
blockchain-based energy exchange framework for smart grids,” IEEE
Trans. Eng. Manage., vol. 67, no. 4, pp. 1285–1297, Nov. 2020.
[37] M. A. Ferrag and L. Maglaras, “DeliveryCoin: An IDS and blockchain-
based delivery framework for drone-delivered services,” Computers,
vol. 8, no. 3, p. 58, Aug. 2019.
[38] P. Kumar, G. P. Gupta, and R. Tripathi, “Toward design of an intelligent
cyber attack detection system using hybrid feature reduced approach
for IoT networks,” Arabian J. Sci. Eng., vol. 46, no. 4, pp. 3749–3778,
Apr. 2021.
Randhir Kumar (Student Member, IEEE) is cur-
rently pursuing the Ph.D. degree with the Depart-
ment of Information Technology, National Institute
of Technology, Raipur. He has published more than
25 research articles in the areas of blockchain tech-
nology and its framework. His research interests
include blockchain technology, information security,
and Web mining.
Prabhat Kumar (Student Member, IEEE) is cur-
rently pursuing the Ph.D. degree in information
technology with the National Institute of Technol-
ogy, Raipur, India. He earned his Ph.D. scholarship
position as a talented student. He has over ten pub-
lications in high ranked journals and conferences.
His research interests are security and privacy of
Internet of Things, software-defined networking, and
blockchain.
Authorized licensed use limited to: VNR Vignana Jyothi Inst of Eng & Tech. Downloaded on March 10,2023 at 19:48:02 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
16503
Rakesh Tripathi (Senior Member, IEEE) received
the Ph.D. degree in computer science and engi-
neering from the Indian Institute of Technology
Guwahati, India. He is currently an Assistant Pro-
fessor with the Department of Information Tech-
nology, National Institute of Technology, Raipur,
India. He has over ten years of experience in acad-
emic. He has published over 20 refereed articles.
His research interests include distributed systems,
network security, and blockchain. He served as a
reviewer for several journals.
Govind P. Gupta (Member, IEEE) received the
Ph.D. degree from the Indian Institute of Technol-
ogy, Roorkee, India, in 2014. He is currently an
Assistant Professor with the Department of Informa-
tion Technology, National Institute of Technology,
Raipur, India. His research interests include effi-
cient protocol design for wireless sensor networks,
the Internet of Things, and SDN. He is a Professional
Member of ACM.
Neeraj Kumar (Senior Member, IEEE) received
the Ph.D. degree in CSE from Shri Mata Vaishno
Devi University, Katra, Jammu and Kashmir, India.
He was a Post-Doctoral Research Fellow with
Coventry University, Coventry, U.K. He is currently
working as a Full Professor with the Department of
Computer Science and Engineering, Thapar Insti-
tute of Engineering and Technology (Deemed to
be University), Patiala, Punjab, India. He is also
with the School of Computer Science, University of
Petroleum and Energy Studies, Dehradun, Uttarak-
hand, India. He is an Adjunct Professor with King Abdulaziz University,
Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, and Asia University, Taiwan. He has published more
than 500 technical research papers in leading journals and conferences from
IEEE, Elsevier, Springer, and John Wiley. Some of his research findings
are published in top cited journals such as IEEE T RANSACTIONS ON
K NOWLEDGE AND D ATA E NGINEERING (TKDE), IEEE T RANSACTIONS ON
I NDUSTRIAL E LECTRONICS (TIE), IEEE T RANSACTIONS ON D EPENDABLE
AND S ECURE C OMPUTING (TDSC), IEEE T RANSACTIONS ON I NFORMA -
TION F ORENSICS AND S ECURITY (TIFS), IEEE T RANSACTIONS ON S ER -
VICES C OMPUTING (TSC), IEEE T RANSACTIONS ON S MART G RID (TSG),
IEEE T RANSACTIONS ON P OWER S YSTEMS (TPS), IEEE T RANSACTIONS
ON I NTELLIGENT T RANSPORTATION S YSTEMS (TITS), IEEE T RANSAC -
TIONS ON C ONSUMER E LECTRONICS (TCE), IEEE T RANSACTIONS ON
I NDUSTRIAL I NFORMATICS (TII), IEEE T RANSACTIONS ON V EHICULAR
T ECHNOLOGY (TVT), IEEE T RANSACTIONS ON M ULTIMEDIA (TMuM),
IEEE N ETWORK (Netw.), IEEE C OMMUNICATIONS L ETTERS (Comm.),
IEEE W IRELESS C OMMUNICATIONS (WC), IEEE I NTERNET OF T HINGS
J OURNAL (IoTJ), IEEE S YSTEMS J OURNAL (SJ), FGCS, JNCA, JPDC,
Information Sciences, and ComCom. He is an Associate Editor of IEEE
Communications Magazine, IEEE N ETWORK, IEEE T RANSACTIONS ON
S USTAINABLE C OMPUTING, Journal of Network and Computer Applications
(Elsevier), and International Journal of Communication Systems (Wiley).
He is one of highly cited authors in Web of Science in 2019 and 2020.
Mohammad Mehedi Hassan (Senior Member,
IEEE) received the Ph.D. degree in computer
engineering from Kyung Hee University, Seoul,
South Korea, in February 2011. He is currently
an Associate Professor with the Information Sys-
tems Department, College of Computer and Infor-
mation Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh,
Saudi Arabia. He has authored and coauthored
around more than 180 publications, including ref-
ereed IEEE/ACM/Springer/Elsevier journals, confer-
ence papers, books, and book chapters. His research
interests include edge/cloud computing, the Internet of Things, cyber security,
deep learning, artificial intelligence, body sensor networks, 5G networks, and
social networks. He was a recipient of a number of awards, including the Best
Journal Paper Award from the IEEE S YSTEMS J OURNAL in 2018, the Best
Paper Award from CloudComp Conference in 2014, and the Excellence in
Research Award from King Saud University (two times in a row, 2015 and
2016).