Information technology (IT) handles data and communication, whereas operational technology (OT) manages physical operations and machinery. OT is the hardware and software used in industrial control systems, like SCADA, to monitor and manage physical processes. The Internet of Things (IoT) is a network of interconnected devices and sensors that collect and exchange data over the internet. IoT security is concerned with protecting connected devices and their data, while OT security is concerned with systems controlling physical industrial processes (Pawar & Palivela, 2022; Pawar & Pawar, 2023; Pawar & Palivela, 2023).

The rise in IoT attacks is alarming for security professionals and organizations globally. In 2022, there were approximately 112 million IoT cyberattacks, up from about 32 million in 2018. The incidence of IoT malware increased by 87% year-over-year in the most recent year monitored (Petrosyan, 2023). In March 2021, hackers breached Verkada, a cloud-based video surveillance service, compromising access to private information and live feeds from over 150,000 cameras. Over 100 employees with “super admin” privileges accessed thousands of customer cameras, highlighting the risks of overprivileged users (BBC, 2021).

In another case, a woman died from delayed treatment after hackers attacked a hospital’s ICU system, potentially being the first fatality from a ransomware attack (Eddy, 2020). Notable IoT attacks include the attempted to poison Florida city’s water supply by altering its chemical levels (BBC, 2021), and disruption of heating in Lappeenranta, Finland, causing severe low temperatures during winter (Mathews, 2016).

The sheer increase in the number of IoT-connected devices because of technological advancement places an immense burden on security teams. To combat this escalating threat landscape, security experts look toward innovative and trending technologies that offer promising solutions. This blog discusses the IoT threat landscape and the impact that vulnerabilities can have on systems, data, and privacy. It also explores new approaches that could be considered for protecting IoT systems from evolving cyber threats.

Understanding the IoT Threat Landscape

IoT has revolutionized our daily interactions with the technology around us, significantly impacting businesses, particularly those with a solid digital presence. The IT and OT industries now rely heavily on IoT devices as a primary source for collecting data to manage and improve business operations. As the number of IoT devices continues to soar into billions, security vulnerabilities across the entire IoT network have become increasingly apparent.

Among the various vulnerabilities, the security of endpoint devices within the IoT network is a growing concern. Cybercriminals are actively targeting these weak points to gain unauthorized access and cause substantial damage. The absence of proper encryption in IoT endpoint devices makes them susceptible to breaches and privacy violations. Compromised IoT devices can be used in Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks to form botnets and launch large-scale attacks. Furthermore, inadequate device management and patching processes exacerbate the problem.

As the ecosystem of IoT endpoints expands, the threat landscape will continuously evolve, posing even more significant risks. Consequently, there is a pressing need for robust security measures, continuous monitoring, and custom security solutions to protect against potential threats.

The Vulnerabilities of IoT Networks

IoT empowers networks to offer immediate access to data and operations, enabling valuable data-driven insights. Nevertheless, this capability also attracts cybercriminals, granting them opportunities to exploit IoT devices’ broad array of vulnerabilities. Below are some prominent vulnerabilities that they may target (Fortinet, 2023; Guest, 2022; Arampatzis, 2023):

• Weak Passwords: The utilization of weak, default, or hardcoded passwords presents the most accessible pathway for attackers to compromise IoT devices, leading to the creation of extensive botnets and the spread of malware.
• Insecure Networks: Insecure network services on a device risk information confidentiality, integrity, authenticity, and availability. They also enable unauthorized remote-control access.
• Vulnerable API: If the API, cloud, or mobile interfaces are insecure, they can compromise the device and its associated components. Common causes of such vulnerabilities include inadequate authentication/authorization, weak or absent encryption, and insufficient input and output filtering.
• Outdated and Defunct Components: Failing to update the device, which neglects firmware validation, anti-rollback mechanisms, or security change notifications, becomes a significant threat vector for launching attacks against IoT devices.
• Unsecured Data Transfer and Storage: A lack of access control or encryption, either during data transmission or at rest, threatens the reliability and integrity of IoT applications. Securing and restricting access to data in the transport and storage layers of IoT networks is crucial to prevent unauthorized access by malicious individuals.
• Inadequate Device Management: Managing all devices throughout their lifecycle is a critical responsibility and a significant security challenge within the IoT ecosystem. Relying on default settings intended for simple device setup without considering the entire network’s security is highly insecure and provides attackers with an easy entry point. Additionally, mishandling unauthorized devices introduced into the IoT ecosystem can jeopardize access control and potentially intercept network traffic and sensitive information.
• Lack of Privacy: As IoT devices are endpoint devices that frequently collect personal and sensitive information from the user or their surrounding environment, the concern for potential leaks and misuse of such data is significant. Inadequate security measures can also result in data leaks, compromising user privacy. Hence, neglecting to safeguard this data can expose these organizations to potential fines, damage their reputation, and lead to business loss.
• Insufficient Physical Security: IoT devices are often deployed in remote environments instead of controlled stations, making them easy targets for attackers to access. This accessibility allows them to potentially target, disrupt, and tamper with the devices’ physical layer.
• Inadequate Authentication Capabilities: When an IoT device lacks proper authentication and access control mechanisms to verify legitimate users, it creates a vulnerability that external attackers and insider threat actors can exploit. This flaw enables unauthorized access to IoT endpoints and systems that should otherwise be restricted and protected.

The Impact on Compromised IoT Devices

When IoT devices are compromised due to vulnerabilities at the endpoint or other network layers, they can become tools for launching significant cyber attacks like DDoS or malware attacks, disrupting IoT network operations and services. Data and privacy across the network become vulnerable, resulting in data theft and unauthorized access. Furthermore, compromised IoT devices can be utilized to propagate malware to other assets on the network. The threats listed below represent just a few examples of the numerous risks targeting IoT devices and networks (Williams et al., 2022).

Hardware Trojan

This attack involves an attacker surveilling, altering, or hindering the data or communication within a circuit using a trojan. This stealthy manipulation occurs during the circuit’s design or fabrication, introducing malevolent modifications at the physical layer.

Side Channel Attack

A side-channel attack transpires when an attacker capitalizes on the inadvertent disclosure of physical information from a system while an application is running. The adversary conducts non-invasive hardware-based attacks by observing and quantifying power consumption, electromagnetic emissions, timing data, and acoustic signals. Subsequently, the acquired information can be analyzed to extract sensitive data, such as cryptographic keys.

Tampering

Tampering denotes the act of an attacker modifying the data associated with an integrated circuit (IC) after it has been deployed in an application. Many IoT devices are often situated in environments lacking physical safeguards, making them vulnerable to unauthorized access by attackers. Such intruders can exploit physical access or wireless means to tamper with the device’s software or firmware. By installing malicious hardware or software, the attacker can manipulate the behavior of the IC or the entire device.

Botnet

Botnets, specifically IoT botnets, are extensive networks of devices, such as routers, exploited for launching attacks. These botnets consolidate numerous centrally managed devices through a command-and-control (C&C) server. Resource-constrained IoT devices’ inherently weak security measures make them susceptible to cybercriminals, who can swiftly convert them into fully controlled botnets. These compromised botnets are then utilized for DDoS attacks, wherein the attackers manipulate the internal workings of the networking protocol to obstruct users from accessing the targeted service.

Spoofing

Device spoofing involves using specialized tools to deceive systems into believing that different devices are being used. In the context of IoT networks, when an attacker’s system masquerades as a legitimate IoT device or an authenticated user in order to gain access to a network, it is called IoT device spoofing. This deceptive act often involves manipulating the genuine user’s media access control (MAC) address or internet protocol (IP) address. Another form of spoofing is voice spoofing, where adversaries employ replay attacks to exploit smart devices’ voice user interface (VUI). By doing so, they can attempt to override authentications and gain unauthorized control or access (Antispoofing, 2023).

Eavesdropping

Eavesdropping is a security concern for smart gadgets that communicate through Wi-Fi or Bluetooth, as it exposes them to potential data breaches. This attack involves intercepting data in transit, which can later be exploited in spoofing attacks. By compromising the wireless channel, attackers can analyze the data’s semantics, engage in reverse engineering, and more. The primary vulnerability in eavesdropping arises from the link between users’ daily activities and the corresponding requests that IoT devices execute, providing valuable insights to malicious actors.

Replay Attack

A replay attack is a security protocol-targeted breach where legitimate data transmission is deceitfully duplicated or delayed. In this attack, captured packets are re-transmitted, tricking honest participants into believing that they have completed the protocol on an authenticated device. The danger of replay attacks lies in their elusive nature, making them difficult to detect. Moreover, they can be effective even if the original transmission was encrypted.

OnPath Attack

This refers to an attack in which the attacker positions themselves as a relay or proxy between a sender and a receiver during communication. By occupying this intermediate position, the attacker can intercept and manipulate the information exchanged between the sender and receiver. This significantly enables a MiTM attack on IoT endpoints when the link between the wireless device and the network is compromised, allowing the attacker to eavesdrop on remote devices.

Emerging Technologies for IoT Security

There are few cybersecurity standards like the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)-provided standard, which provide different recommended controls for IoT and OT. Also, specific to small and medium-sized companies, there is the Business Domain Specific Least Cybersecurity Controls Implementation (BDSLCCI) framework, which also provides IoT, OT, and IT controls to be implemented by organizations, considering those as mission-critical assets (Pawar & Palivela, 2022; Pawar & Pawar, 2023; Pawar & Palivela, 2023).

Safeguarding against IoT vulnerabilities is vital for security teams, IT professionals, and vertical industry experts. Numerous security software solutions for IoT networks exist, effectively mitigating cyber attacks and establishing secure environments. However, with the increasing demand for IoT technology, scaling and automating security capabilities have become imperative. Consequently, several novel technologies have emerged to ensure a comprehensive security approach for integrated IoT networks and devices.

Blockchain for Secure IoT Devices and Network

Blockchain security involves various measures and technologies designed to safeguard blockchain networks, ensuring the integrity, confidentiality, and availability of data within the system.
The principal security element in blockchain technology (BCT) is proof of work (PoW), utilized for appending new blocks. BCT’s high privacy level is achieved through changeable public keys, ensuring user identity protection. These characteristics make BCT ideal for offering distributed privacy and security in IoT. Blockchain technologies empower IoT architecture and units to be self-functional and independent entities in the physical layer. When combined with decentralized network topology, this uniqueness significantly enhances network security. Individual node independence thwarts threat actors from hacking multiple devices simultaneously, safeguarding the entire network (Pu, 2020).

Cloud for IoT

Enabling the integration of IoT devices with cloud computing technology facilitates seamless end-to-end processes and services across the network. This integration creates a closed-source network with enhanced access control and identity-driven security. Cloud solutions offer many security features, including access control, authorization, authentication, encryption, secure data transfer, and storage security for IoT devices and data. IoT cloud computing has multiple connectivity options, on-demand scaling, resource management, and more. As IoT devices and automation adoption increase, cloud solutions provide companies with robust authentication and encryption protocols, ensuring reliability in their operations.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML)

IoT’s diverse and complex nature and the evolving security threats pose challenges for traditional security methods in safeguarding IoT devices, applications, and networks. However, leveraging AI and ML technologies for behavior analysis and anomaly detection can offer a comprehensive and efficient security solution. By employing algorithms based on network traffic patterns, data scanning during transit becomes more effective, enhancing defense against malware. These technologies involve building data-based learning models that implement threat prevention techniques through identification, classification, and predictive security approaches.

Conclusion

The growing adoption of IoT technology has led to an increased number of devices, expanding the scope for vulnerabilities and opportunities for threat actors. Although security solutions exist to address IoT vulnerabilities, scaling traditional approaches poses challenges. Integrating IoT with blockchain and cloud computing, known for scalability, can benefit large-scale operations and storage. Similarly, leveraging AI ML technologies automates security capabilities and boosts threat detection and mitigation. Organizations should also choose cybersecurity strategies that will protect different layers of the organization, making a good cybersecurity posture for the IoT.

Reference

Arampatzis, A. (2023, July 27). Top 10 Vulnerabilities that Make IoT Devices Insecure. Venafi.
https://venafi.com/blog/top-10-vulnerabilities-make-iot-devices-insecure/

Antispoofing. (2023, August 01). Anti-Spoofing for IoT. Retrieved from:
https://antispoofing.org/anti-spoofing-for-iot/

BBC. (2021, February 08). Hacker Tries to Poison Water Supply of Florida City. BBC News.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-55989843

BBC. (2021, March 10). Hack of ‘150,000 Cameras’ Investigated by Camera Firm. BBC News.
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-56342525

Eddy, M., & Perlroth, N. (2020). Cyber Attack Suspected in German Woman’s Death. The New York Times.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/18/world/europe/cyber-attack-germany-ransomeware-death.html/

Fortinet. (2024). What Is an IoT Device Vulnerability? Retrieved from:
https://www.fortinet.com/resources/cyberglossary/iot-device-vulnerabilities/

Guest, T. (2022, September 14). Top IoT Security Risks and Vulnerabilities and How to Mitigate Them. BeyondTrust.
https://www.beyondtrust.com/blog/entry/top-iot-security-vulnerabilities/

Mathews, L. (2016, November 7). Hackers Use DDoS Attack to Cut Heat to Apartments. Forbes.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/leemathews/2016/11/07/ddos-attack-leaves-finnish-apartments-without-heat/

Pawar, S., & Palivela, H. (2022). LCCI: A framework for least cybersecurity controls to be implemented for small and medium enterprises (SMEs). International Journal of Information Management Data Insights, 2(1), 100080.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jjimei.2022.100080/

Pawar, S. A., & Palivela, H. (2023). Importance of least cybersecurity controls for Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) for better global Digitalised economy. In Smart Analytics, Artificial Intelligence and Sustainable Performance Management in a Global Digitalised Economy (pp. 21-53). Emerald Publishing Limited.
https://doi.org/10.1108/S1569-37592023000110B002/

Pawar, S., & Poonam, P. (2023, July 27). BDSLCCI – Business Domain Specific Least Cybersecurity Controls Implementation. Notionpress.
https://notionpress.com/read/bdslcci/

Petrosyan, A. (2023, May 03). Annual Number of IoT Attacks Global 2022. Statista.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1377569/worldwide-annual-internet-of-things-attacks/

Pu, S. (2020, April 16). Industrial Applications of Blockchain to IoT Data. Blockchain and Crypt Currency, 41.
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-981-15-3376-1_3

Williams, P., Dutta, I. K., Daoud, H., & Bayoumi, M. (2022, August). A survey on security in internet of things with a focus on the impact of emerging technologies. Internet of Things, 19, 100564.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2542660522000592