future internet

Review
Information Security Applications in Smart Cities:
A Bibliometric Analysis of Emerging Research
Thiago Poleto 1, * , Thyago Celso Cavalcante Nepomuceno 2 , Victor Diogho Heuer de Carvalho 3, * ,
Ligiane Cristina Braga de Oliveira Friaes 1 , Rodrigo Cleiton Paiva de Oliveira 1
and Ciro José Jardim Figueiredo 4

1 Department of Business Administration, Institute for Applied Social Sciences, Federal University of Pará,
Belém 66075-110, Brazil; [email protected] (L.C.B.d.O.F.); [email protected] (R.C.P.d.O.)
2 Department of Statistics, Center for Exact and Natural Sciences, Federal University of Pernambuco,
Recife 50670-901, Brazil; [email protected]
3 Technologies Axis, Campus do Sertão, Federal University of Alagoas, Delmiro Gouveia 57480-000, Brazil
4 Department of Engineering, Campus Angicos, Federal Rural University of Semi-Arid,
Angicos 59515-000, Brazil; [email protected]
* Correspondence: [email protected] (T.P.); [email protected] (V.D.H.d.C.)

Abstract: This paper aims to analyze the intellectual structure and research fronts in application
information security in smart cities to identify research boundaries, trends, and new opportunities
in the area. It applies bibliometric analyses to identify the main authors and their influences on
information security and the smart city area. Moreover, this analysis focuses on journals indexed
in Scopus databases. The results indicate that there is an opportunity for further advances in the
adoption of information security policies in government institutions. Moreover, the production
indicators presented herein are useful for the planning and implementation of information security
policies and the knowledge of the scientific community about smart cities. The bibliometric analysis
provides support for the visualization of the leading research technical collaboration networks among
authors, co-authors, countries, and research areas. The methodology offers a broader view of the
application information security in smart city areas and makes it possible to assist new research that
Citation: Poleto, T.; Nepomuceno, may contribute to further advances. The smart cities topic has been receiving much attention in
T.C.C.; de Carvalho, V.D.H.; Friaes,
recent years, but to the best of our knowledge, there is no research on reporting new possibilities for
L.C.B.d.O.; de Oliveira, R.C.P.;
advances. Therefore, this article may contribute to an emerging body of literature that explores the
Figueiredo, C.J.J. Information
nature of application information security and smart cities research productivity to assist researchers
Security Applications in Smart Cities:
in better understanding the current emerging of the area.
A Bibliometric Analysis of Emerging
Research. Future Internet 2023, 15, 393.
https://doi.org/10.3390/fi15120393 Keywords: information security; smart city; technical collaborations networks; applications; biblio-
metric analysis
Academic Editor: Francesco
Buccafurri

Received: 18 October 2023

Revised: 4 November 2023 1. Introduction
Accepted: 7 November 2023 The advancement of solutions and tools focused on information security for smart
Published: 1 December 2023 cities is gaining prominence worldwide [1–7]. Furthermore, there has been a noticeable
increase in the production of large volumes of data, agility in information exchange,
data analysis (Data Science), development of smart cities, and connectivity between var-
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
ious devices. These continuous interactions with internet-focused solutions (Internet of
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. Things—IoT) must be conducted in compliance with regulations [8–10]. However, they
This article is an open access article concurrently introduce profound challenges, especially in terms of data governance, and
distributed under the terms and there is a growing emphasis on safeguarding the integrity, confidentiality, and availability
conditions of the Creative Commons of data as it is generated, processed, and exchanged across diverse entities, spanning from
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// private organizations to public sectors and the general populace [11–14].
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ As public services gravitate towards interconnected digital ecosystems, we can identify
4.0/). significant potential benefits, such as streamlined operations and bolstered resilience in

Future Internet 2023, 15, 393. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi15120393 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/futureinternet

Future Internet 2023, 15, 393 2 of 36

critical infrastructures. Nonetheless, for metropolises and regions striving to transition into
the smart city paradigm, it is imperative to not only meticulously assess but also proactively
mitigate the inherent cybersecurity risks stemming from such integration [13–21]. While
no technology solution can guarantee complete security, communities need to implement
smart city technologies while considering the need to balance efficiency, innovation, and
cybersecurity [20,22–25].
This context demands promoting privacy protections, national security, and the secure
operation of infrastructure systems. Cities should tailor best practices to their specific
cybersecurity requirements, ensuring the protection of citizens’ private data as well as the
security of sensitive government and business information [20,24,26,27]. By promoting
protection through proper guidelines, communities can strive to create a safe and secure
environment while embracing the benefits of technological advancements [28].
In recent years, organizations have turned their attention to the increased risks that
the lack of information security causes in the evolution and survival of businesses, mainly
due to the large offer of technological devices and the growing access and dissemination
of data and information [29–32]. The lack of information security evidence many losses
for the different business stakeholders, especially when it negatively impacts the trust
of customers and suppliers, the efficiency of services, the availability of operations, the
credibility of the business, and the image of the company [33]. In this sense, organizations
have adopted strategies to prevent the occurrence of security flaws caused by Denial of
Service Attacks (DoS), hacking, malware, phishing, spoofing, ransomware, spamming, and
other types of cyberattacks [31,34–37]. Strategies, in general, are adopted to protect the
business performance and maintain operational efficiency at competitive levels [38]. Thus,
excellence in the cybersecurity process is essential to ensure the integrity, availability, and
confidentiality of business data and information [39,40].
The discussion over the importance of information security has been highlighted in
recent literature. The advancement of research in the area has considered aspects from risk
assessment to recovery and resilience of cybersecurity [41,42]. On many occasions, Informa-
tion Technology (IT) managers seek to analyze solutions to conduct operational strategies
aimed at protecting business [43]. In recent years, although many researchers [44–49] have
presented approaches to the importance, investment, and contribution of cybersecurity to
organizations, society, and government, there is still a gap in the current literature: there
are no studies that analyze the most influential works in the area of cybersecurity with an
integrated view.
In recent studies on smart cities, there is a growing interest in integrating innovative
technologies to optimize urban management and improve the quality of life for citizens.
However, upon reviewing the existing literature, a gap is identified in the systematic review
related to information security applications in this context. While many studies address
the benefits and potential implementations of these technologies, few delve deeply into
specific solutions to ensure data protection and user privacy. Given the critical importance
of information security in highly connected environments, such as smart cities, this gap
presents an opportunity for researchers and IT professionals to delve deeper and contribute
with insights and robust solutions to this emerging challenge.
One of the premises for understanding the application of information security in smart
city research activities is to analyze its manifestation in the form of scientific production.
In this sense, this paper aims to perform a bibliometric analysis to deepen knowledge of
new applications of information security in smart cities to identify the main groups of
researchers working collaboratively in the area. Moreover, this study provides a summary
of research patterns based on an institutional network to present a better understanding
of research advances and the latest content about information security in smart cities
published in journals during the period from 2015 to 2023. The relevant articles were
retrieved from the Scopus database.
The bibliometric analysis allows the visualization of the technical quality and im-
pact of research, as well as grouping authors and co-authors, identifying the relationship
Future Internet 2023, 15, 393 3 of 36

between studies through keywords and number of citations, and displaying intellectual
contributions from research fields, among other analyses. In addition, solutions and review
of smart cities opens many opportunities and scopes for open research.
This paper is structured as follows: Section 2 presents a theoretical reference with
related works about smart cities and information security research; Section 3 is devoted
to Materials and Methods; Section 4 presents the Findings and Discussion; Section 5
contributes to the theory and presents practical implications; the conclusion, limitations,
and further research are provided in Section 6.

2. Smart Cities and Information Security

Before starting a discussion about papers that have reviewed the literature on smart
cities, it is essential to address some concepts. A smart city is understood as an urban
area where electronic sensor technology is used to collect data from devices as well as
assets and citizens for analysis and processing of the data to manage and monitor public
infrastructures [50,51]. Smart cities are characterized by the following characteristics in
terms of digitalization: Internet of Things (IoT), Big Data, and Cloud Services to promote
integration [52,53].
At the heart of a smart city lies a tapestry of devices interconnected via wireless
networks, often operating on open network protocols or APIs [54–56]. These elements, by
their very design, can be susceptible to breaches, even by the smallest snippets of malicious
code [57–59]. Consequently, information security shifts beyond the individual user’s
realm and emerges as a communal imperative within the smart city landscape [60–62].
Moreover, the escalating intricacy of the system’s network infrastructures, magnified
by digital communication, interconnected devices, and diverse network architectures,
inevitably poses heightened security challenges [1,63–67].
The consequences of successful cyberattacks against smart cities can be severe and
wide-ranging. They may include disruptions to essential infrastructure services, substantial
financial losses, exposure of citizens’ private data, erosion of trust in smart systems, and
even physical harm or loss of life due to impacts on physical infrastructure. According
to Shin et al. [68], global spending on cybersecurity hardware, software, and services
has significantly grown in the past few years, and the annual cybersecurity investment
averages USD 1 billion by some financial and tech companies. Cyberattacks are a serious
threat to the successful implementation of smart cities-related services. Comprehensive
security mechanisms and a security-oriented mindset throughout the entire organization
are essential to avert and control this risk.
Table 1 presents the risk domain in information security to smart cities found in the lit-
erature, addressing different perspectives on provider and user application of technologies.
Upon examination of the table, it is evident that the identified domains encompass topics
that resonate with the discussions conducted by experts in the literature, as well as those
on Cloud computing, IoT, data interpretation, and smartphone devices. Moreover, the
highlighted risks emphasize the imperative need for acquiring deeper insights in advance,
specifically in the realm of information security within smart cities, a domain that is grow-
ing in significance. Nonetheless, it is worth acknowledging a potential drawback associated
with the abundance of published material, which serves as a catalyst for conducting the
systematic review presented in this paper to identify guidelines that serve as a contribution
to the theme.
The analysis of these works allows us to conclude that information security risk in
smart cities is still in the development stage in different devices. Thus, more comprehensive
and complete research and analysis of all recent publications in the field of information
security is necessary and still lacking. In this sense, a bibliometric study is a valuable
tool to present the interrelationships of researchers, their contributions, and the gaps to be
worked on.
Future Internet 2023, 15, 393 4 of 36

Table 1. Main detected information security risk domains according to literature.

Area Risk Domain References

Cloud threats [69–72]
Custodianship of keys [73]
Cloud computing (platform of
services over the internet, accessible Security of data [60,74–77]
by people and business companies)
Security attacks [75,78–85]
Lack of a data privacy policy [73,77,86–92]
Attacks on IoT devices [9,35,83,87,93–96]
Internet of Things (concerning
Lack of effective access controls [89,97–104]
devices that have an internet
connection and that can Protecting sensitive data [32,105–107]
communicate with the network
Botnet activities [35,108–110]
independently of human action).
Privileged user access [89,99,111]
Security reports [112–114]
Data interpretation (essentially the
representation of complex data and Discover sensitive data [115–118]
understand trends and Errors and inconsistency Decision [119–121]
follow patterns)
Privacy violations [122–126]
Security of data [127–130]

Smartphones (smart Smartphone threats [131,132]

communication mobile devices) Protecting sensitive data [133]
Lack of privacy of stakeholders [134,135]

Related Reviews
The literature on topics associated with information security, cybersecurity, and smart
cities contains some systematic literature reviews with very interesting content to assist
researchers and practitioners in their definitions in favor of new research and related practi-
cal developments. The swift progress of artificial intelligence and data-driven technologies
has opened new avenues for tackling intricate socioeconomic issues in the modern world
through the utilization of diverse datasets and the application of advanced analytical
techniques, fostering inclusive development and sustainable growth in smart cities [136].
The topic of cybersecurity has been a growing concern in scientific literature that
extends and is interlinked with many social issues. In the comprehensive review of appli-
cations in public security by de Carvalho and Costa [137] spanning materials published
between 2014 and the first half of 2021 across significant bibliographic databases like Sco-
pus, Web of Science, IEEE Xplore, and ACM Digital Library, the authors highlight the
adaptive techniques and mining techniques to enhance pirate software detection and other
security-related concerns.
Following, we present a set of seven systematic reviews related to the one presented
in this document, retrieved from the Scopus database. This set was selected based on its
impact, measured based on the number of citations.
Habibzadeh et al. [40] developed a survey that provides an overview of both the
theoretical and practical challenges and opportunities, considering not only their technical
dimensions but also addressing policy and governance concerns. Their study underscores
the need for collaborative efforts among different stakeholders to achieve sustainable and
secure smart city ecosystems. It offers a comprehensive examination, discussing security
and safety implications for critical infrastructures and the resulting policy considerations at
various levels. It also assesses privacy and security vulnerabilities inherent in smart city
architecture, along with a focus on common smart city applications.
The survey by Sanchez et al. [138] explored the recent advancements in the field of
device behavior fingerprinting, examining its applications, sources of behavioral data, and
Future Internet 2023, 15, 393 5 of 36

the techniques employed for processing and assessment. The reliability and performance
of emerging environments such as smart cities, Industry 4.0, and crowdsensing depend on
the proper functioning of fingerprint devices. This entails a comprehensive grasp of the
capabilities of these devices, including sensors and actuators, and the capability to identify
potential irregularities arising from cyberattacks, system failures, or misconfigurations.
The survey by Jimada-Ojuolape and Teh [139] provides a comprehensive review of
research that extends beyond assessing reliability at the component level and takes into
consideration the influence of Information and communication technology integrations
on the overall system reliability. The study presents some recommendations based on the
literature, which are based on either the adequacy aspect or the security aspect of reliability.
It also presents some technological challenges to the reliability of smart grids, going
from Infrastructure failures due to cyber–physical interdependencies, passing through
environmental aspects, such as the weather conditions, reaching combatting cybersecurity
vulnerabilities, such as intrusions/infiltrations.
Kim et al. [140] conducted a systematic and comprehensive investigation of au-
tonomous vehicles by analyzing 151 papers published between 2008 and 2019. They
categorized autonomous attacks into three main groups: those targeting the autonomous
control system, components of autonomous driving systems, and vehicle-to-everything
communications. Protection against these attacks was categorized into security architecture,
intrusion detection, and anomaly detection. With advancements in big data and commu-
nication technologies, there is a gradual evolution of techniques that employ artificial
intelligence and machine learning for anomaly detection. Their survey suggests that future
research in autonomous attacks and defenses should be closely integrated with artificial
intelligence, as it constitutes a critical component of smart cities.
Alotaibi and Barnawi [141] present a thorough examination of security considerations
for massive Internet of Things (IoT) within the context of 6G networks, with a particular
focus on Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS). The authors claim this is the inaugural survey to
encompass the amalgamation of Machine Learning (ML), Deep Learning (DL), and essential
networking technologies that underpin the forthcoming 6G infrastructure for securing
massive IoT. As future trends for 6G, they highlight self-adaptive intrusion detection
systems, the use of federated learning, self-supervised learning, quantum machine learning,
explainable artificial intelligence, transfer learning, and big data technologies, supporting
the development of intelligent protection platforms.
Raimundo and Rosário [142] examined the prevailing literature trends concerning
the opportunities and threats in Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) cybersecurity. They
have reviewed 70 pivotal articles identified through an extensive survey of the Scopus
database, intending to outline the ongoing discourse surrounding IIoT rather than propos-
ing specific technical remedies for network security issues. The study highlighted key
themes in the current debate on the involved topics, considering: (i) a cybersecurity axis,
observing platforms that may accommodate smart objects, issues related to smart grids in
IoT-controlled environments, critical technologies, best practices, policies, and frameworks;
(ii) a machine learning axis, to encompass artificial intelligence techniques in cybersecurity;
(iii) an IoT axis that considers the use of artificial intelligence combined to physical devices
supporting cybersecurity measures for systems protection; (iv) an Industry 4.0 (or IIoT) axis
covering industrial applications of IoT and artificial intelligence, also demanding concern
about the security of the systems involved; and (v) blockchain and cloud computing axis,
representing the decentralized architectures needed to run all the previous concepts plans
and technologies.
Yang et al. [143] developed a systematic overview of research related to these technolo-
gies, which includes four key components. First, they present a summary of urban sensor
concepts and applications. Second, they analyze the progress in multisource heterogeneous
urban sensor access technologies, encompassing communication protocols, data transmis-
sion formats, access standards, access technologies, and data transmission methods. Third,
they review data management technologies for urban sensors, focusing on data cleaning,
 Future Internet 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 38

Future Internet 2023, 15, 393 data cleaning, data compression, data storage, data indexing, and data querying. Fourth, 6 of 36
they address challenges associated with these technologies and propose viable solutions,
specifically in the realms of integrating massive Internet of Things (IoT), managing com-
putational load, optimizing energy consumption, and enhancing cybersecurity. Finally,
data compression, data storage, data indexing, and data querying. Fourth, they address
the paper concludes by summarizing their work and hinting at potential future develop-
challenges associated with these technologies and propose viable solutions, specifically in
ment directions.
the realms of integrating massive Internet of Things (IoT), managing computational load,
optimizing energy consumption, and enhancing cybersecurity. Finally, the paper concludes
3. Materials and Method
by summarizing their work and hinting at potential future development directions.
The bibliometric analysis uses statistical methods to evaluate the evolution of a par-
3.ticular research
Materials and area.
MethodIn this sense, it is possible to (i) evaluate the number of publications,
the The
levelbibliometric
of quality, the impact,
analysis and
uses the contribution
statistical methods of to the results;
evaluate the(ii) to carryof
evolution out a map-
a partic-
ping of the scientific activities of the authors; (iii) to understand networks
ular research area. In this sense, it is possible to (i) evaluate the number of publications, the of citations
based
level of on the authors;
quality, (iv)and
the impact, to obtain a real andof
the contribution detailed visualization
the results; (ii) to carryof out
the aresults
mapping and
ofintellectual
the scientific structures of the
activities of a authors;
scientific(iii)
domain; (v) to networks
to understand promote ofthe construction
citations based onof
knowledge;
the authors; (iv)(vi)to
to obtain
monitor the evolution
a real and detailedof avisualization
research fieldof and
the(vii) to clarify
results unexplored
and intellectual
research topics.
structures of a scientific domain; (v) to promote the construction of knowledge; (vi) to
In the past ten years,
monitor the evolution the advance
of a research of cybersecurity
field and (vii) to clarifyresearch
unexplored hasresearch
developed signifi-
topics.
cantly by influential authors in different journals and research areas.
In the past ten years, the advance of cybersecurity research has developed significantly The present study
byconsists of a authors
influential technicalinand structured
different analysis
journals of the progress
and research areas. Theof literature
present studyon cybersecu-
consists
ofrity, with theand
a technical objectives
structuredof presenting collaborations
analysis of the progress ofin the editorial
literature production with
on cybersecurity, of re-
searchers,
the objectives highlighting
of presentingnewcollaborations
insights on the inrole of information
the editorial security
production engineering high-
of researchers, in the
world, and
lighting newstimulating
insights ondevelopment on future research
the role of information securitylines. To directin
engineering the
theresearch,
world, someand
stimulating
questions are development
posed: on future research lines. To direct the research, some questions
are
• posed:
Q1—What are the patterns of information security applications found in research on smart
• Q1—What
cities? are the patterns of information security applications found in research on smart cities?
•• Q2—What
Q2—Whatare arethe
themost
mostdemanding
demandingareas
areasfor
forinformation
informationsecurity
securityininsmart
smartcities
citiesstudies?
studies?
•• Q3—What
Q3—What research has has the
themost
mostinfluence
influence
ononthethe application
application of information
of information security
security in
in smart
smart
cities?cities?
To
Toanswer
answerthese
thesequestions,
questions,this
thisstudy
studyadopts
adoptsaatheoretical
theoreticalapproach,
approach,aiming
aimingto toun-
un-
derstand
derstandthe
thestate-of-the-art
state-of-the-artinformation
informationsecurity
securityand
andsmart
smartcities
citiesresearch
researchfields
fieldsthrough
through
bibliometrics
bibliometricsand
andcontent
contentanalysis.
analysis.Figure
Figure11shows
showsthe
theresearch
researchdesign
designused
usedininthis
thispaper,
paper,
which consists of five steps.
which consists of five steps.

Figure 1. Research design.

Figure 1. Research design.

Step11starts
Step startswith
withthethedata
datasources
sourcesdefinition,
definition,considering
consideringthe
theScopus
Scopusdatabase,
database,fol-
fol-
lowedbyby
lowed search
search string
string creation.
creation. In study,
In this this study, two combinations
two combinations of keywords
of keywords were
were defined
to compose the search string: (I) “information security” and “smart city”; and (II) “cy-
berattacks” and “smart city”. These terms are broad and expand the knowledge about
 Figure 1. Research design.

Step 1 starts with the data sources definition, considering the Scopus database,
followed by search string creation. In this study, two combinations of keywords were
Future Internet 2023, 15, 393 7 of 36
defined to compose the search string: (I) “information security” and “smart city”; and (II)
“cyberattacks” and “smart city”. These terms are broad and expand the knowledge about
the different knowledge application areas of the theme. The search was applied to titles,
the different
abstracts, andknowledge
keywords of application areas of thearticles.
complete published theme. The search was applied to titles,
abstracts,
In Step and2, keywords
the dataset ofconsists
complete ofpublished
complete articles.
articles published in journals indexed in
Scopus,In Step 2, the
ranging dataset
from 2015consists
to 2023.ofWe complete
decidedarticles
to startpublished
searchinginfor journals
publishedindexed
resultsin
Scopus, ranging from 2015 to 2023. We decided to start searching for
from 2015 due to the high number of citations from one of the articles of greater relevance published results
from
to the2015
area,due to the high
published in thenumber of citations from one of the articles of greater relevance
same year.
to theThe
area, published in the same year.
work entitled “Cyber security challenges in smart cities: Safety, security and
The work
privacy”, entitled
indicated in the“Cyber security
reference challenges
list, has obtained in650
smart cities: toSafety,
citations security
date [15]. and
For this
privacy”, indicated in the reference list, has obtained 650 citations to
reason, we consider this time interval as the most relevant to collect data. A filter was used date [15]. For this
reason, we consider this time interval as the most relevant to collect
to remove articles that emerged from books, categorized. The purpose of using this filter data. A filter was
usedtotofocus
was removeon thearticles
articlethat
andemerged
conference from books,with
reviews categorized.
significantThe purpose
academic of using
impact and
this filter was to focus on the article and conference reviews with
relevance in the research platform. In addition, other categories of publications have alsosignificant academic
impact
been and relevance
removed, so the in the research
objective platform.the
is to identify Insectors
addition,andother categories
fields in whichofthere publications
are one
have also been removed, so the objective is to identify the sectors
or more surveys and the sectors and methods in which there are no surveys available. and fields in which
The
there aredatabase
Scopus one or morewas surveys
selectedand duethetosectors
the broadand methods
approachinofwhichindexedtheresources
are no surveys
among
available. The Scopus database was selected due to the broad approach of indexed sources
journals, conferences, and books, increasing the range of data collection for the
among journals, conferences, and books, increasing the range of data collection for the
bibliometrics analyses.
bibliometrics analyses.
As shown in Figure 2, there is a significant increase in articles on information security
As shown in Figure 2, there is a significant increase in articles on information security
and smart cities. The search results returned a total of 1978 articles, including conference
and smart cities. The search results returned a total of 1978 articles, including conference
papers (55.5%) and journal articles (44.5%).
papers (55.5%) and journal articles (44.5%).

Figure
Figure 2.
2. Trend
Trend line
line based
based on
on the
the number
number of
of publications
publications by
by year
year in
in the
the field
field of
ofinformation
information security
security
in
in smart
smart cities.
cities.

In Step
In Step 3,
3, the VOSViewer
VOSViewer software
software [144],
[144], which
which isis a text-mining
text-mining tool
tool that supports
supports
comprehensive and
comprehensive anduseful
usefulcompilation
compilation of metadata,
of metadata,supporting data data
supporting generation, and graph
generation, and
visualization,
graph was used
visualization, wasasused
a bibliometric analysis
as a bibliometric tool. tool.
analysis
In Step
In Step4,4,thethe
quantitative analysis
quantitative involved
analysis the implementation
involved of statistical,
the implementation network,
of statistical,
network, and content methods through the development of descriptive andcompris-
and content methods through the development of descriptive and cluster analyses cluster
ing information
analyses regarding
comprising articles, journals,
information regardingauthors, citations,
articles, references,
journals, and keywords
authors, citations,
in terms of and
references, annual progressininterms
keywords the field
of of cybersecurity
annual progress research. The of
in the field objective was to
cybersecurity
discover the
research. Theimplications
objective wasoftoquantitative
discover theresults in termsofofquantitative
implications the historical development
results in terms ofof
the application of information security and smart cities research field, its patterns, and
evolution to answer the three research questions.
Finally, in Step 5, qualitative analysis was used to investigate production indicators
(most productive authors, number of publications, types of authorship, area of training), the
international authors who constitute the research interface in the area or related areas, and
the information security and smart cities community. Also, the analysis of citations and their
different relationships contributed to the identification of epistemological, methodological,
Future Internet 2023, 15, 393 8 of 36

and theoretical influences in the domain investigated. From this, through distinctive
classifications and thesaurus, the universe of articles analyzed was categorized, which
allowed identifying the gaps regarding the study object and contributing to improving the
representation schemes on smart cities knowledge.

4. Findings and Discussion

The advancement of IT and the emergence and growth of the internet led organizations
to adopt new business models based on the potential market focused on creating and using
cyberspace information. This business model allows organizations to obtain advantages,
but on the other hand, they need to face several problems related to cyberspace security
management, which are currently quite prominent.
The first publication in the area is “Cyberspace Security Management,” published in
1999 by Chou et al. [145] in the journal of Industrial Management and Data Systems. This
first publication evidences the leading causes of Internet security incidents. It starts the
discussion about real concerns involving inherent risks, technology weaknesses, policy
weaknesses, unauthorized intruders, and legal issues often provoked by players, which
affect several business and government organizations in cyberspace. Chou et al. define
the users, business sectors, and regulatory agents as leading players that influence the
evolution of business and can interfere with principles of cybersecurity, such as confi-
dentiality, integrity, and availability of data and information. The contributions of Chou
et al. encourage the development of discussions on potential techniques, methodologies,
and investment in IT solutions that address issues related to cybersecurity. As a result,
several authors developed studies associated with the area and presented the results of a
significant impact on the literature. Therefore, an analytical study of the main trends in the
field, discussed in recent years, is suitable.

4.1. Identifying the Information Security Applications in Smart Cities Clusters of Research
through Bibliographic
To analyze and visualize the knowledge clusters of research on information security
applications
Future Internet 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW in smart cities, the graph of relation in Figure 3 was created, considering
9 ofthe
39
authors’ groups according to application theme.

Figure
Figure 3.
3. Clusters
Clusters of
of authors
authors according
according to
to applications
applications about
about information
information security in smart cities.

The depiction
The depiction of
of inter-publication
inter-publication relationships
relationships is
is facilitated
facilitated by
by the
the quantity
quantity of
of links
links
and the spatial proximity of nodes within the visual representation of Figure
and the spatial proximity of nodes within the visual representation of Figure 3. Each node 3. Each
node (circle)
(circle) on theon thecorresponds
map map corresponds to a publication,
to a publication, and the and thewithin
size size within this visualiza-
this visualization is
indicative of the volume of citations received by a respective publication. Proximity in the
visualization denotes a stronger correlation, as determined by co-citation patterns, be-
tween publications situated closely compared to those positioned at a greater distance
[137,146,147,148,149]. The linkages between nodes serve to elucidate co-occurrence
relationships, with closely associated term clusters forming tightly coupled groups
Future Internet 2023, 15, 393 9 of 36

tion is indicative of the volume of citations received by a respective publication. Prox-

imity in the visualization denotes a stronger correlation, as determined by co-citation
patterns, be-tween publications situated closely compared to those positioned at a greater
distance [137,146–149]. The linkages between nodes serve to elucidate co-occurrence rela-
tionships, with closely associated term clusters forming tightly coupled groups [146,149].
This ap-plication of VOSviewer’s co-occurrence analysis emerges as a robust method for
constructing conceptual maps, enabling the identification of pivotal ideas and themes
within a dataset and facilitating the visual representation of their interconnections in an
accessible manner [147,149].
Table 2 details the cluster’s compositions, separating them by name (related to the
application domain) and listing their sizes as well as the most representative articles.

Table 2. Cluster identification with related domain, size, and most representative articles.

Cluster
Cluster Name Size Representative Articles
Number/Color
Cluster 1/Red Smart Power Grid in Smart Cities 324 [3,55,71,83,99,111,150–215]
Cluster 2/Green Authentication in Smart Cities 241 [22,51,63,85,91,93,94,166,216–272]
Cluster 3/Blue Cyberattacks in Smart Cities 153 [1,4,273–293]
Cluster 4/Yellow Security platforms for Smart cities 121 [60,294–309]
Cluster 5/Pink Evaluation of threats to cybersecurity 99 [6,54,310–324]
Cluster 6/Purple Cybersecurity and society 78 [325–334]

Following, a description of each cluster is provided.

4.1.1. Cluster 1 (Red): Smart Power Grid in Smart Cities

One of the applications of information security is related to smart power grid mainte-
nance in smart cities. A smart power grid can offer support to a smart communications grid
since society increasingly requires information transfer infrastructure in daily activities [65].
Over the years, utilities have invested in communication networks to improve awareness of
the power grid assets and to control, automate, and integrate the service delivery systems.
The key point of integrating systems and working in real-time is connectivity. Most of the
time, the web facilitates systems integration and benefits society with this support.
On the other hand, the web environment allows targeted attacks and attempts to break
into the system. The North American Electric Reliability Corporation [335] highlighted
compliance concerns in strengthening essential cybersecurity across the entire power
system and emphasized that this requires a series of cybersecurity concerns [87,88,336,337].
For some authors, the smart grid needs to be observed and measured before being
controlled and automated [338]. To that end, the automation of the power substation helps
utilities add sophisticated protection and control functions while offering more visibility
into the performance and integrity of the network infrastructure. Also, it is essential to note
that the resilience of physical and electrical networks must also be improved according to
the flow of information, as critical operations can cause failures or can be combined with
physical attacks to create a blackout [339].
A reliable smart grid requires layered protection applications that consist of a cyber-
netic infrastructure that limits adversary access and limits the operation of the transmission
accurately during an attack.

4.1.2. Cluster 2 (Green): Authentication in Smart Cities

One of the mechanisms for protecting data and information is access control policies
for systems. Access control helps to prevent unauthorized people from entering the virtual
and/or physical environment and engaging in unauthorized behavior. By ensuring access
control, the integrity of employees and service providers is provided, as well as the integrity
of data and information [337].
Future Internet 2023, 15, 393 10 of 36

Over the years, the growing number of companies that select an outsourcing strategy
for managing the entire IT infrastructure has been noticed. This interest is often motivated
by the high investment in current IT security solutions, which require constant adaptations
to the environment [340]. On the other hand, this need for adjustments makes many
outsourced companies assume that their technology service providers are responsible
for data control. However, when it comes to information security and compliance, the
organization promoting the leading service remains responsible for all the information it
has, especially if the company wants to obtain more profitable results from the data.
In this context, the objective of managers is to ensure that the large volumes of data
collected and stored by their organizations can be used as instruments that help to generate
better business strategies, making companies more objective and eliminating any types
of confusion that may be caused by the total amount of information to be evaluated,
adopting control systems with different types of possibilities, which can be physical or
digital [219,341].

4.1.3. Cluster 3 (Blue): Cyberattacks in Smart Cities

The popularization of cloud computing encouraged the development of new busi-
nesses and reduced the need for high investment in IT infrastructure for small businesses,
in particular. On the other hand, cybersecurity has become a significant concern for these
companies. In the virtual environment, attackers create different threats to the systems
of different businesses, from financial services agencies to sizeable industrial control sys-
tems [252,342,343]. Attack methods vary widely, using simple techniques to exploit the
vulnerabilities of access and communication protocols or through combined operations for
the use of multiple web bots [344].
One of the strategies to combat these threats is intrusion detection, the most effective
security mechanism for detecting internal attacks that consists of the process of monitoring
and analyzing events that occur in a computer system or network in search of patterns of
possible security incidents. For the authors, these security incidents are violations or threats
to security policies defined as attempts to compromise the reliability, integrity, or availability
of system resources [345–348]. Many types of malware can be programmed to destabilize
the operation of a system, such as viruses, worms, Trojans, and backdoors [349,350].
One of the main concerns of the authors is that the automatic detection of known
and unknown kernel rootkits on virtual machines is becoming an urgent problem. For the
virtual environment, an Intrusion Prevention System (IPS) is considered an extension of the
Intrusion Detection System (IDS) and can be executed when threats or malicious activities
are detected [351]. Thus, there is a tendency for new solutions to be made available to
promote a kind of digital investigation and detect cybercrimes [352].

4.1.4. Cluster 4 (Yellow): Security Platforms for Smart Cities

For current businesses, one of the main assets is useful information. However, defining
the monetary value of threats to this information can be a complex process. Economic
decision models have been used to quantify the cyberattack process or demonstrate the
intruder’s detailed behaviors [353,354]. The advances in this area are mainly based on
structured ways to present the consequences of the inventions to the IT Manager and
recommend viable actions to avoid possible theft of information, for example, which
represent the highest external cost, followed by the costs associated with interrupting
operations of business [355].
To deal with rapidly evolving threats and risks, different approaches can be used to
perform the command injection attack on the cyber component in the SCADA system:
Model of the SQL Injection Attack, Model of the Secure Sockets Layer (SSL), Model of the
Address Resolution Protocol, Model of the Buffer Overflow Attack [64,356]. In this context,
dealing with an analytical decision model under conditions of uncertainty can be important
for IT managers when planning information security programs.
Future Internet 2023, 15, 393 11 of 36

4.1.5. Cluster 5 (Pink): Evaluation of Threats to Cybersecurity

The domain of cybersecurity threats is directly related to discussions about cyberse-
curity control and data in online services. Form IT advancement, new communication
technologies, and control methods may allow better regulation of the smart grid; how-
ever, they also introduce serious threats to cybersecurity. In the Digital Age, security is
the keyword. For the authors, having reliable data, systems, and people is indisputable
because cyberattacks happen frequently, and systems capable of preceding an attack are
essential [357].
Cyberattacks may also cause cascading failures in a power system, thus posing a
serious threat to national infrastructure. Because of this, the authors suggest that the
preconditions for managing cybersecurity risks are discovering incidents, collecting data,
and viewing that data [174,358]. Three principles support this management cycle: main-
taining the right data, robust IT infrastructure (systems), and an appropriate scope of
sharing (people).
Impact analysis of threats is necessary to analyze the consequences of interruptions in
the flow to protect and enable the evolution of business through technology, as well as to
monitor users, observe the behavior, and monitor the development of attacks. Therefore,
making potential threats clear can improve the protection shield and allow for new business
opportunities [341].
The idea of resilience against a cyberattack, in addition to helping to know how to
deal with a situation for which companies are not prepared, is to recognize the complexity
of a scenario and have a contingency plan and defenses at different levels of security. In
this way, it is possible to mitigate possible impacts resulting from cyberattacks [359].
In this sense, performing defensive security planning is essential, as the systems
will cease to function over time, generating large potential losses for companies. Hong
et al. [360] comment that investing in business cybersecurity is essential, given that criminals
focus on operating systems with security gaps that have not been fixed or that have not yet
been updated to a newer version. This vulnerability increases the risk and highlights the
importance of investing in a consistent monitoring process [361].
In several countries, cyber defense constitutes a national security framework in which
states establish policies at all levels (public and private) to guarantee individual freedoms
and to respond to aggressions and invasions by developing response and cooperation
systems [362]. Taking these security policies as a reference related to cyber resilience,
emerging countries can adopt the definition of tasks and missions to establish security
standards in the public and private environment, highlighting the specific criticality of the
IT infrastructure [363].

4.1.6. Cluster 6 (Purple): Cybersecurity and Society

One of the most recent discussions related to cybersecurity has involved the influence
of social aspects applied to the advancement of IT solutions [364]. Given the increase in
urbanization around the world, growing populations are overloading the social services
provided by the government, which in turn aims to facilitate the processes that citizens trust
and need. This aspect motivates the emergence of the concept related to the construction
of functional cities, which allow residents to have happier and healthier lives in a smart
environment. In so-called “cities of the future,” communities and organizations make
extensive use of information technology to ensure broad and efficient access to early
childhood education programs, professional recycling, and other vital social and citizenship
programs that can be digitally connected [365].
However, one of the central points of the discussion is that there is no human consensus
on ethics, especially on the sharing of information and space. Ethics is interpreted as a con-
cept applied to a given context and, therefore, extremely complex to be programmed [366].
For the authors, machines need to be programmed with the minimum ethics necessary to
avoid consequences in the future, but when human ethics is assumed, it does not seem to
be the best model for teaching machines [367]. This motivation stimulates the discussion
Future Internet 2023, 15, 393 12 of 36

about new ethics, something close to the consensus that would be used to program the
artificial intelligence of the future.
This cluster involves the relationship between cybersecurity incidents and understand-
ing of human behavior, in particular, incidents registered in business environments. For
the authors, the protection of confidential data in companies is fundamental for business
development and allows risks to be minimized [366]. This protection is based on two
factors: technical and human factors. In general, the functional element involves investing
in IT solutions that ensure access control mechanisms, user identification, antivirus systems,
and restricted access to components of the IT infrastructure. On the other hand, the human
factor refers to the user’s perception of information security related to the knowledge of
vulnerabilities and severity of risk regarding the lack of corruption of data and information,
information shared on the internet, practices, and experiences with information security in
the business environment.
The relationship between these factors raises a relevant discussion for the develop-
ment of protection strategies that ensure control over the influence of human behavior
in detriment to the investment of technical factors [342]. Cybersecurity strategies can
be developed based on the perception of human behavior in an integrated manner with
specialized solutions and IT governance to monitor the movement of confidential data that
can be transmitted outside the company. The destructive consequences of spills are clear,
but the risks caused by the human factor are often overlooked and can cause a company to
go bankrupt. A situation that can exemplify this loss is when a sales employee improperly
uses customer data, being able to use private information regarding business transactions
in an unworthy manner [366].
In this context, awareness must be an ongoing effort to educate employees about poli-
cies, threats to data and information security, and how to deal with them [368]. Protection
Motivation Theory can be applied to understand and develop a culture that motivates
employees to maintain safe practices in their daily lives and transform awareness training
into something personal. In addition to these theories, educational games can help support
the concepts of awareness and improve understanding of possible incidents and their
impacts on the organization and its business [128].

4.2. Top Authors with the Highest Number of Citations

Table 3 presents the 20 highly cited articles in information security and smart cities in
the Scopus database.

Table 3. The 20 most cited articles on information security and smart cities.

Total of
Index Author Title Reference
Citations
Towards fog-driven IoT eHealth:
Farahani et al.,
1 1001 Promises and challenges of IoT in [155]
2018
medicine and healthcare
Urban planning and building smart
Rathore et al.,
2 996 cities based on the Internet of Things [54]
2016
using Big Data analytics
Ancile: Privacy-preserving framework
Dagher et al., for access control and interoperability
3 746 [101]
2018 of electronic health records using
blockchain technology
Biswas et al., Securing smart cities Using
4 746 [369]
2016 Blockchain Technology
Elmaghraby Cyber security challenges in smart
5 640 [15]
et al., 2014 cities: Safety, security and privacy
Future Internet 2023, 15, 393 13 of 36

Table 3. Cont.

Total of
Index Author Title Reference
Citations
A Survey of Blockchain Technology
6 Xie et al., 2019 630 Applied to smart cities: Research [252]
Issues and Challenges
Zhang et al., Security and Privacy in smart city
7 620 [370]
2017 Applications: Challenges and Solutions
Classifying IoT Devices in Smart
Sivanathan
8 579 Environments Using Network [371]
et al., 2019
Traffic Characteristics
Block-VN: A Distributed
Sharma et al.,
9 500 Blockchain-Based Vehicular Network [372]
2017
Architecture in smart city
Khatoun et al., Smart cities: concepts, architectures,
10 473 [373]
2016 research opportunities
A Communications-Oriented
Djahel et al., Perspective on Traffic Management
11 436 [374]
2015 Systems for Smart cities: Challenges
and Innovative Approaches
Block IoT Intelligence: A
Singh et al.,
12 429 Blockchain-enabled Intelligent IoT [242]
2020
Architecture with Artificial Intelligence
Sharma et al., Blockchain-based hybrid network
13 411 [375]
2018 architecture for the smart city
Angelidou The Role of smart city Characteristics
14 390 [376]
et al., 2017 in the Plans of Fifteen Cities
Exploiting IoT and big data analytics:
Rathore et al.,
15 330 Defining Smart Digital City using [377]
2018
real-time urban data
An Efficient Algorithm for
Memos et al., Media-based Surveillance System
16 352 [188]
2018 (EAMSuS) in IoT smart
city Framework
Aloqaily et al., An intrusion detection system for
17 353 [56]
2019 connected vehicles in smart cities
Braun et al., Security and privacy challenges in
18 307 [7]
2018 smart cities
Blockchain-based authentication and
Esposito et al.,
19 297 authorization for smart [225]
2021
city applications
Heterogeneous ad hoc networks:
20 Qiu et al., 2017 215 [378]
Architectures, advances and challenges

These results show the importance and impact of smart city studies. Another important
fact is that in recent years, new challenges regarding application information security in
smart cities have emerged due to new technologies. As an output of the analytical process,
papers have addressed these new issues and consequently have a high potential for being
more cited in the future. For instance, the automation of vehicles in the field of intelligent
transport systems [379] and human beings as potential targets for cyberattacks or even
participating in a cyberattack with ethical implications for society.
Future Internet 2023, 15, 393 14 of 36

4.3. Most Active and Cited Journals

Journals play an essential role in the development of a research area. Table 4 reports
the most prominent journals in the number of publications on cybersecurity in the Scopus
database and their impact factor in 2022.

Table 4. Journals and Impact Factors for information security and smart cities related literature.

Subject Areas Source Impact Factor 2022 # of Article

Computers and Security 5.6 262
Future Generation Computer Systems 7.5 712
IEEE Access 3.9 139
IET Information Security 1.4 23
Computer Communications 6 323
Computer IEEE Security and Privacy 1.9 54
Science
Computers in Human Behavior 9.9 60
Information Technology and People 4.4 63
International Journal of
2.1 256
Communication Systems
International Journal of Software
Engineering and Knowledge 0.9 12
Engineering
Computer Law and Security Review 2.9 164
Technological Forecasting and Social
12 346
Change
Public Administration Review 8.3 13
Technology in Society 9.2 145
Journal of Intellectual Capital 6 64
Social Sciences
Behavior and Information
3.7 88
Technology
International Journal of Human
5.4 27
Computer Studies
Business Horizons 7.4 58
International Journal of Accounting
4.6 12
Information Systems
International Journal of Information
21 130
Management
Government Information Quarterly 7.8 157
Business, Information Technology for
Management 4.261 47
Development
and Accounting
European Journal of Operational
6.363 33
Research
Information Sciences 8.1 131
Energies 3.2 195
Sustainability 3.9 76
Energy
Energy Research and Social Science 6.7 151
Journal of Cleaner Production 11.1 465
 Future Internet 2023, 15, 393 15 of 36

It is worth mentioning that the top journals showing that the topic of information
Future Internet 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW and smart cities has attracted the attention of researchers from different fields.
security 16 of 39
Because smart city is a multidisciplinary field, scholars often struggle to figure out the most
appropriate outlet for their research that would have a significant impact. The information
reported in this table indicates this willingness to publish in each specific area.
4.4. Country Co-Citation Analysis
4.4. Country Co-Citation
In the next phase, Analysis
the collaboration networks among countries were highlighted, as
In theinnext
presented phase,
Figure the collaboration
4. The figure shows networks among of
the distribution countries were
countries highlighted,
with the most co-
as presented in Figure 4. The figure shows the distribution of countries
authorships. The clusters are indicated by circles and colors, explaining the proximity with the most of
co-authorships. The clusters are indicated by circles and colors, explaining
the countries and the associations between co-authorships, while the edges illustrate howthe proximity
of the countries and the associations between co-authorships, while the edges illustrate
researchers’ production is expanding. Notably, China (n = 462) presents the bigger
how researchers’ production is expanding. Notably, China (n = 462) presents the bigger
production, followed by India (n = 411), the United States (n = 239), the United Kingdom
production, followed by India (n = 411), the United States (n = 239), the United Kingdom
(n = 146), Saudi Arabia (n = 125), South Korea (n = 102), Pakistan (n = 93), Australia (n = 71),
(n = 146), Saudi Arabia (n = 125), South Korea (n = 102), Pakistan (n = 93), Australia (n = 71),
Italy
Italy (n
(n ==65),
65),Spain
Spain (n
(n ==63),
63),Canada
Canada (n(n ==54),
54),Taiwan
Taiwan (n(n ==51),
51),Brazil
Brazil(n
(n==49),
49),Malaysia
Malaysia(n =
46), Turkey (n = 45), United Arab Emirate (n = 38), and Iran (n
(n = 46), Turkey (n = 45), United Arab Emirate (n = 38), and Iran (n = 35). = 35).

Figure 4.
Figure Collaboration networks
4. Collaboration networkson
oninformation
informationsecurity and
security smart
and cities
smart among
cities countries.
among countries.
As can be seen, the research collaborations appear with a higher level of intensity
As can be seen, the research collaborations appear with a higher level of intensity
among countries of the European Union and those of North America. In addition, there is
among countries of network
also a collaboration the European
among Union
Asia, and
Norththose of North
America, andAmerica. In addition,
Europe. Research there is
collabo-
also a collaboration network among Asia, North America, and Europe.
ration in cybersecurity indicates the complexity of the interrelations and the opportunityResearch
collaboration in cybersecurity
for future cooperation. Also, theindicates the complexity
results allow of the
three inferences interrelations
to be and the
drawn: countries
opportunity for future cooperation. Also, the results allow three inferences to be
with the most cooperation may offer practical implications for society through the partner drawn:
countries with the most cooperation may offer practical implications for society
with industries; academic experts affiliated with these countries can provide knowledge through
the partner with
as references industries;
on the academic
issue; and experts affiliated
the contributions developedwith
bythese countries
the authors can can provide
serve as
guidelines for
knowledge as other researches.
references on the issue; and the contributions developed by the authors can
serve as guidelines for other researches.
4.5. Keyword Co-Occurrence Analysis
Figure 5Co-Occurrence
4.5. Keyword highlights the network
Analysis visualization for the most common terms used in the
authors’ keywords. The network reports the most relevant keywords of these items in
Figure 5 highlights the network visualization for the most common terms used in the
terms of occurrences and their interactions between documents. A total of 267 keywords
authors’ keywords. The network reports the most relevant keywords of these items in
emerged, with at least one occurrence [380,381]. From this network, 36 items are considered
terms of occurrences
independent, in whichand
casetheir interactions
the item does not between
bring anydocuments. A total of 267
significant contribution keywords
to design-
emerged, with at least one occurrence [380,381]. From this network, 36 items are
ing applicable queries and identifying pertinent empirical surveys. As expected, “Smart
considered independent, in which case the item does not bring any significant
contribution to designing applicable queries and identifying pertinent empirical surveys.
As expected, “Smart city,” “network security,” and “security systems” stand out as the
most common terms. However, upon closer examination of the other circles, correlations
 Future Internet 2023, 15, 393 16 of 36

Future Internet 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 17 of 39

city,” “network security,” and “security systems” stand out as the most common terms.
However, upon closer examination of the other circles, correlations emerge concerning the
topics presented in the paper. The blue cluster is associated with the analysis of surveil-
lance andlimited
provides the application of methods
information for recognition. The
about “cryptography” and green cluster
contract is related toThe
management. the red
analysis involving smart transportation. The purple cluster provides limited information
cluster focuses on urban livability and its interaction with technology. The remaining
about “cryptography” and contract management. The red cluster focuses on urban liv-
terms do not exhibit significant expressiveness to readiness.
ability and its interaction with technology. The remaining terms do not exhibit significant
expressiveness to readiness.

Figure 5.
Figure Most Relevant
5. Most Relevant Keywords.
Keywords.
Table 5 details the keywords with the highest occurrences and interactions based on
Table
the set 5 detailsarticles
of complete the keywords with
published the highest
in journals occurrences
indexed and
in Scopus, interactions
ranging based
from 2015 to on
the set of complete articles published in journals
2023, as based on the network shown in Figure 5. indexed in Scopus, ranging from 2015 to
2023, as based on the network shown in Figure 5.
Table 5. High-frequency keywords for searches in the area between 2015 and 2023.
Table 5. High-frequency keywords for searches in the area between 2015 and 2023.
High-Frequency Keywords Occurrences
High-Frequency Keywords Occurrences
Smart city 1146
Internet Smart city
of Things 699 1146
Internet of
Network Security Things 470 699
Security
Network Security 374 470
ComputerSecurity
Security 324 374
Cyber–Physical System 314
Computer Security 324
Data Information 291
Cyber–Physical
Blockchain System 198 314
Data Information
Energy Efficiency 174 291
EnergyBlockchain
Security 166 198
Cryptography
Energy Efficiency 156 174
GreenEnergy
Computing
Security 141 166
Information Security 139
Cryptography 156
Smart Grid 133
Green Computing
Sustainable Cities 131
141
Information
Urban DevelopmentSecurity 127 139
Urban Smart Grid
Planning 123 133
Accident Prevention, Attack
Sustainable Detection
Cities 119 131
Authentication, Authentication
Urban DevelopmentProtocols 117 127
Intelligent TransportationUrban
Systems, Information Exchanges
Planning 116 123
Accident Prevention, Attack Detection 119
Authentication, Authentication Protocols 117
Intelligent Transportation Systems, Information Exchanges 116
Privacy Preservation 115
Future Internet 2023, 15, 393 17 of 36

Table 5. Cont.

High-Frequency Keywords Occurrences

Privacy Preservation 115
Public Key Cryptography 110
Network Protocols, Security Vulnerabilities 102

These results demonstrate that among the articles published, the keywords smart city
and internet of things have the highest occurrence rates, which demonstrates the growing
interest of researchers in topics related to information security and smart cities.

4.6. Methods in Cybersecurity

Methods play an essential role in the development of a research area. We have
included Table 6 with 11 main cybersecurity methods applied in main areas such as
Computer Science, Engineering, Mathematics, Social Sciences, Business Management,
and Accounting.

Table 6. Cybersecurity methods and applications according to main areas.

Business,
Computer Social
Method Engineering Mathematics Management Total
Science Sciences
and Accounting
Risk Management 57 32 - 19 21 129
Machine Learning 48 17 7 9 11 101
Game Theory 28 17 9 8 2 64
Neural Network 17 15 4 - 5 41
Data Mining 25 5 2 - 5 37
Deep-Learning 18 7 3 1 2 33
Blockchain 17 8 3 2 3 33
Fuzzy Theory 16 6 5 - 2 29
Bayesian game 6 3 2 2 2 15
Software-Defined Networking 6 2 2 - 1 11
Natural Language Processing 4 2 - - 1 7

These results demonstrate that Management Risk and Machine Learning have a total
of 129 and 101 articles published, respectively. They allow the consideration of important
factors that can lead to better decision-making in information security, and smart cities
have become more widely used in actions focused on defense strategies.

5. Discussion
The discussion on information security and smart cities is not restricted to the area of
computer science. The concern about data and information security is multidisciplinary
and influences the evolution of different types of business. Health professionals, govern-
ment institutions, academic environments, and several other stakeholders benefit from
the opportunities for advancing research while they can take advantage of this study to
indicate potential solutions and improve the level of information security, predicting the
consequences of information loss [328,331]. For this, when planning on cybersecurity, it is
necessary to prioritize strategic processes, actions, and tools that will be implemented or
used, both for the organization, for the government/public administration, and for society
in smart cities [376].
Smart cities use information and communication technologies to improve the quality
of life of their inhabitants, making public services more efficient and creating innovative
solutions to urban challenges [15]. However, as cities become more connected and de-
pendent on technology systems, information security becomes an ever-increasing concern.
Citizens’ data, as well as operational information on critical city systems, can be at risk
Future Internet 2023, 15, 393 18 of 36

from cyberattacks. Therefore, smart cities must have a comprehensive information security
strategy to protect their systems and data [370]. This involves implementing cybersecurity
measures at all layers of the city’s infrastructure, from the communication network to IoT
(Internet of Things) devices and data management systems [54,370].
To decrease the probability of a cyber threat causing damage, some cyber security
measures should be implemented, such as Encryption, Authentication of users, Network
Security, Cyber security training, and Regular software updates [90,382,383]. These shared
vulnerabilities can be exploited by hackers and other malicious users to compromise
city security, directly affecting citizens’ lives. For example, a cyberattack on a traffic
management system can lead to severe congestion and delays in emergency services.
Some of the most common shared vulnerabilities in smart cities are weak passwords,
delayed software updates, and unsafe IoT devices. This work contributes to presenting
new information security technologies to minimize shared vulnerabilities in smart cities; it
is essential to adopt comprehensive cybersecurity measures.
A challenge for developing countries will be the integration of smart cities. The de-
cision to plan information security for the management of cities is essential to guarantee
engagement in municipal services through intelligent digital systems. So, the smart city
ecosystem requires new skills and competencies in various ways through strategic partner-
ships and contracts with service providers [373]. Maintaining a safe and smart city involves
creating a public/private infrastructure to carry out activities and provide technologies
that protect and protect citizens’ information [286].
Four main considerations should be address regarding smart cities security:
1. Strategies for artificial intelligence and shared communications are necessary, ensuring
opportune analysis of data/information flow through smart cities systems to detect
threads and ensure the secure delivery of what must be communicated from one end
to the other [22,384], and consequently providing the necessary confidentiality and
privacy in communications [385];
2. Physical and cyber threats come from many areas, including state-sponsored critical
infrastructure, criminals, natural disasters, and neglect of human agents [307,386,387],
all opening several security holes that must be foreseen in risk containment plans to
guarantee the integrity of the information that passes between the systems involved,
demanding a smart cybersecurity architecture that can cover these risks [292];
3. Integrated operational management activities and knowledge sharing to prevent,
mitigate, respond, and recover from incidents [388].
4. Acquiring emerging technologies that facilitate risk assessment ensures appropriate
physical security and cybersecurity measures [172].

5.1. Addressing the Research Questions

The literature review developed had three research questions as its core, as presented
in the methodological section. Based on literary findings, directions on these questions will
now be presented.
RQ1—What are the patterns of information security applications found in research on
smart cities?
This question can be addressed with the six clusters presented in Table 2, separating
each cluster according to the main application domain areas, as follows:
(a) Smart Grids and Power Supply: this cluster covers works that mention applications
that can cover information and cybersecurity on smart grids as a component of smart
city systems to ensure efficient, safe, and sustainable power supply for citizens [226].
Smart grids cover topics such as bulk generation, transmission, distribution, cus-
tomers, markets, service providers, and operations [78].
(b) Authentication as a security mechanism: this cluster covers applications regarding
the control access policies and strategies for data protection in smart city systems,
especially considering the large data volumes that are inherent to these systems [291].
Future Internet 2023, 15, 393 19 of 36

Authentication mechanisms are projected to ensure privacy, trust, and reliability in

the information and communication flows [51] to protect against invasion by attackers
masquerading as legitimate users of the system [85].
(c) Cyberattack prevention/detection in smart cities: this cluster focuses on strategies
to prevent or detect cyberattacks or vulnerabilities that may facilitate these attacks
in the smart cities context, observing the best practices and methods to be applied in
protecting involved systems [280]. The lack of these strategies can cause, for instance,
theft of a user’s sensitive data, utility fraud, and grid instability [1]. In other words,
this can be considered a cluster containing works presenting core concepts and tools
that are transversal to all other clusters.
(d) Security platforms for smart cities: this cluster involves not only technological plat-
forms but the whole organizational and business instances needed to promote security
to smart cities-related services and systems [60]. The main idea is to deliver quality of
life for the users of these services and systems, which are any citizen in a smart city
area [302]. Quick and efficient managerial decision-making is the main concept to en-
sure security platforms operate successfully in preventing risks from becoming events
negatively affecting smart city services delivery for citizens [302]. These platforms are
a means for aggregating concepts of the other five clusters, as can be understood by
the diagram in Figure 6 in the answer for RQ2, synthesizing the relationships between
all clusters of applications.
Future Internet 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 20 of 38
(e) Evaluation of threats to cybersecurity: this cluster deals with ways to evaluate threats
to the smart cities systems, facilitating, for example, the design and management
of security platforms and ensuring the necessary indicators and related analysis to
managerial
promote strategies
the detection andand reachingofthe
prevention technical[311,319].
cyberattacks level withIt the frameworks
covers from devicesof tech-
toniques/tools to ensure
threat evaluation cybersecurity
techniques, for people
which can be used[333].
in support of security measures
planning are
RQ2—What [6,54].
the most demanding areas for information security in smart cities studies?
(f) Cybersecurity and society: this is the most comprehensive cluster, involving all the el-
To answer
ements needed this
to question, Figure 6 wasfor
promote cybersecurity created
society,seeking to highlight
considering the as
smart cities dynamics
cyber– be-
tween the previously
physical observed
systems [328]. clusters.
It covers legal It
andshould beconcepts,
ethical noted that the diagram
passing in the figure
by managerial
doesstrategies
not present
and reaching the technical level with the frameworks of techniques/tools to 3, but
a composition of works/authors found in the literature as in Figure
the ensure
conceptual alignment
cybersecurity forand flow[333].
people between the clusters.

Figure
Figure 6. 6. Relationships
Relationships between
between the the concepts
concepts involved
involved inapplications
in the the applications clusters.
clusters.

Through this figure, we can see that the evaluation of threats to cybersecurity and
security platforms are great “providers” within the set since several sectors within smart
cities require constant monitoring and adequate analysis to detect threats, such as cyberat-
tacks, and these assessments are fundamental to support the structuring and operational-
Future Internet 2023, 15, 393 20 of 36

RQ2—What are the most demanding areas for information security in smart cities studies?
To answer this question, Figure 6 was created seeking to highlight the dynamics
between the previously observed clusters. It should be noted that the diagram in the figure
does not present a composition of works/authors found in the literature as in Figure 3, but
the conceptual alignment and flow between the clusters.
Through this figure, we can see that the evaluation of threats to cybersecurity and secu-
rity platforms are great “providers” within the set since several sectors within smart cities
require constant monitoring and adequate analysis to detect threats, such as cyberattacks,
and these assessments are fundamental to support the structuring and operationaliza-
tion of security platforms. In turn, security platforms constitute essential components
in smart cities to guarantee the dynamics of security in related systems, including smart
grids, providing means for continuous evaluation of threats and preventing any kind of
unauthorized access.
Another address that can be given to RQ2, as detected in the literature, is when it comes
to the service provision sector. The most notable is energy supply, which gained prominence
in a cluster that contained the largest number of jobs compared to the other clusters.
However, other sectors receive several mentions in the literature, with the healthcare area
being one of the most prominent. Table 3 indicates, for example, the work by Farahani
et al. [155] in the line of IoT in medicine and healthcare as the one with the highest number
of citations within the bibliographic base built for the bibliometric review. The third most
cited work, by Rathore et al. [101], is also related to healthcare, proposing a framework
based on blockchain for electronic health records. By the way, several of the works among
the most cited are about the blockchain and related technologies appear in seven works
(see [101,225,242,252,369,372,375]).
Blockchain, as a set of technologies for databases to ensure transparent data sharing,
can be considered a core concept for the project of security platforms and systems in
smart cities, being a transversal technical area that can be considered for smart grids and
healthcare information security. Other areas, such as urban planning and building [54],
transport/vehicles, and traffic control systems [56,372,374], can also be mentioned here as
highlighted, as they are critical for the proper operation of smart cities, delivering quality
of life and effective services to citizens.
RQ3—What research has the most influence on the application of information security and
smart cities?
This question is also easily answered by the list of works in Table 3. It is intertwined
with the comments made in the last two paragraphs of the previous section dedicated to
RQ2. Following, the objectives of the top five most cited works are presented.
Farahani et al. [155], with 1001 citations, presented a survey of IoT Health and put
forth a holistic eHealth ecosystem that encompasses various layers, including mobile health,
assisted living, e-medicine, implants, early warning systems, and population monitoring.
Rathore et al. [54], with 996 citations, presented the proposal of a complete smart city
architecture, also considering urban panning with data analysis on Big Data based on IoT.
Dagher et al. [101], with 746 citations, presented the proposal of a blockchain-powered
framework designed to enable secure, seamless, and efficient access to medical records for
patients, healthcare providers, and third parties while maintaining the privacy of sensitive
patient information.
Biswas et al. [369], also with 746 citations, introduced a security framework that
combines blockchain technology with smart devices, creating a secure communication
platform within a smart city.
Elmaghraby et al. [15], with 640 citations, presented a survey on cybersecurity chal-
lenges, exploring two interconnected challenges, namely security and privacy. Additionally,
they introduced a model for the interactions among individuals, servers, and IoT devices as
the key elements in a smart city, emphasizing the necessity to safeguard these interactions.
Future Internet 2023, 15, 393 21 of 36

5.2. Theoretical and Practical Implications

The results contribute to developing a practical perspective in computer science,
particularly providing a conceptual framework integrated with information security and
smart cities knowledge and leading research in the world. IT security professionals can take
advantage of this study by using this structure as a reference to design new solutions in
cybersecurity and formulate specific security policies to combat and prevent cyberattacks
in smart cities. Moreover, this study shows the importance of developing information
security strategies with a focus on user behavior in the city, characterized as the primary
agent that causes security failures in IT solutions. In addition, IT researchers can obtain
guidance to explore new fields of research, develop new trends and perspectives, develop
applications to fill gaps in the literature and provide attention to different types of problems
in information security and smart cities, which highlights the validity and relevance of
this work.
Clustering bibliometric networks through co-citation analysis has practical contribu-
tions to the business area. By integrating knowledge between the disciplines of information
and computing systems, managers and practitioners can quickly identify the most relevant
concepts and best practices concerning information security and smart cities and perception
of human behavior, smart power grid, online services, prevention systems for cyberattacks,
the critical cyber infrastructures, threats, resilience, and social prospects of cybersecurity, de-
signed by the clusters of co-citation analysis. As stated by [389], such a repository of terms
associated with the scientific literature is a strategic tool for the continuous improvement
of business, which can designate appropriate software features or necessary maintenance
for the security of information systems and support decision methods in the treatment
and prevention of information security incidents. This systematic view can also highlight
organizations’ responsibility of managers for smart city decisions related to control and
data privacy and potential correlations between data security and the organization’s value
judgments on security devices.
Although developments and research related to the creation of control software,
infrastructure improvement, risk prevention, and failure prevention, investment in IoT and
Data solutions Science have increased in the last ten years, as shown by the results of this
research, cybersecurity is still treated as a secondary element in government organizations
and institutions in developing countries. In this context, the acquisition of new IT solutions
must be considered a strategy as important as the investment in cybersecurity, as it can
directly affect the users’ perception of smart cities. Service providers must adhere to service-
level agreements regarding system operation, data generation, and the use and sharing
of information. Additionally, they should undergo privacy impact assessments to ensure
compliance with privacy regulations and protect individuals’ personal information. By
enforcing these requirements, organizations can ensure that service providers maintain a
high standard of service delivery, respect privacy rights, and safeguard sensitive data.
This research presents an integrative theoretical framework conceptualized in the
presentation of the state of the art on the scope of application and development of the term
“information security and smart cities.” The theoretical framework presented can provide
conceptual support to researchers and professionals in the field and can be used as a
reference for understanding the connections between the lines of research, the composition
of clusters of researchers, and the relationship between related areas, and can serve as a
conceptual basis for the cybersecurity planning project in different businesses.

6. Conclusions
This study reported the construction of a systematic review involving bibliometric as-
pects, oriented to the identification of the main applications of the information security and
smart cities concept, such as cybersecurity and human perception behavior, cybersecurity
and smart electrical network, cybersecurity control and data in services online and intrusion
detection for cybersecurity. The analysis, spanning articles from 2015 to 2023 in Scopus-
indexed journals, leveraged VOSviewer software for mapping global researchers and their
Future Internet 2023, 15, 393 22 of 36

contributions. The findings underscored the interdisciplinary nature of information security

and smart cities, emphasizing their relevance beyond computational sciences.
The study’s outcomes offer valuable insights for managers, professionals, and aca-
demics across diverse domains, highlighting opportunities for exploration within the
literature of cybersecurity in smart cities. The implications of information security and
smart cities extend beyond computational sciences, influencing business actions, social de-
velopment, and service enhancement. The results emphasize the need for interdisciplinary
approaches in cybersecurity research, indicating collaboration across engineering, adminis-
tration, psychology, economics, and law. Furthermore, the study advocates for a holistic
perspective in cybersecurity research, promoting interdisciplinarity and encompassing
ethical considerations for effective business strategies in the digital era.
Noteworthy findings include the identification of leading countries in cybersecurity
studies, with China, India, the United States, and the United Kingdom taking the forefront.
The study observes a lack of exploration in cybersecurity studies in developing nations,
often attributed to technological limitations. It also notes a growing trend of international
collaboration among researchers in the field. There is a need for research in cybersecurity
solutions, particularly in the context of virtual service systems such as telehealth services
within smart cities.
Although the work has a full scope in information security and smart cities, some
limitations can be mentioned, such as potential oversight of frontier applications during the
detailed analysis and the lack of considerations for cybersecurity software in this review.
This could be an exciting gap for future research, including a comprehensive assessment
of cybersecurity software options similar to the work of Daraio et al. [389] on efficiency
frontier applications.
There is a growing call for collective initiatives and educational campaigns centered
on information security. A deeper public understanding in this domain can catalyze a
stronger trust in the technologies underpinning smart cities, bolstering their adoption
and seamless integration into citizens’ daily lives. Information security is undeniably a
foundational pillar for the successful assimilation of these technologies. Consequently, it
becomes imperative to address not only the technical facets but also the subjective and
objective dimensions highlighted in this study, which impact the global landscape.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, T.P. and T.C.C.N.; methodology, T.P., L.C.B.d.O.F., R.C.P.d.O.
and T.C.C.N.; software, T.P.; validation, V.D.H.d.C., T.C.C.N. and C.J.J.F.; formal analysis, T.P. and
L.C.B.d.O.F.; investigation, T.P., R.C.P.d.O., T.C.C.N. and V.D.H.d.C.; resources, T.P.; data curation,
T.P.; writing—original draft preparation, T.P. and V.D.H.d.C.; writing—review and editing, V.D.H.d.C.
and C.J.J.F.; visualization, T.P.; supervision, T.C.C.N. and V.D.H.d.C.; project administration, T.P.;
funding acquisition, T.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Data Availability Statement: The data presented in this study is only contained in the article itself.
Acknowledgments: We want to acknowledge the support from the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento
de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES, Brazil), the Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico
e Tecnológico (CNPq, Brazil), the Universidade Federal do Pará (UFPA, Brazil), the Universidade
Federal de Alagoas (UFAL, Brazil), the Universidade Federal de Pernambuco (UFPE, Brazil), and the
Universidade Federal Rural do Semi-Árido (UFERSA, Brazil).
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Alfouzan, F.A.; Kim, K.; Alzahrani, N.M. An Efficient Framework for Securing the Smart City Communication Networks. Sensors
2022, 22, 3053. [CrossRef]
2. Belgaum, M.R.; Alansari, Z.; Jain, R.; Alshaer, J. A Framework for Evaluation of Cyber Security Challenges in Smart Cities.
In Proceedings of the Smart Cities Symposium, Zallaq, Bahrain, 22–23 April 2018; Institution of Engineering and Technology:
London, UK, 2018; p. 295.
Future Internet 2023, 15, 393 23 of 36

3. Sharma, G.; Kalra, S. A Secure Remote User Authentication Scheme for Smart Cities E-Governance Applications. J. Reliab. Intell.
Environ. 2017, 3, 177–188. [CrossRef]
4. Naqvi, N.; Ur Rehman, S.; Islam, Z. A Hyperconnected Smart City Framework. Australas. J. Inf. Syst. 2020, 24. Available online:
https://journal.acs.org.au/index.php/ajis/article/view/2531 (accessed on 17 October 2023). [CrossRef]
5. Arasteh, H.; Hosseinnezhad, V.; Loia, V.; Tommasetti, A.; Troisi, O.; Shafie-khah, M.; Siano, P. Iot-Based Smart Cities: A Survey.
In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE 16th International Conference on Environment and Electrical Engineering (EEEIC), Florence,
Italy, 7–10 June 2016; IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2016; pp. 1–6.
6. Mohamed, N.; Al-Jaroodi, J.; Jawhar, I.; Idries, A.; Mohammed, F. Unmanned Aerial Vehicles Applications in Future Smart Cities.
Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2020, 153, 119293. [CrossRef]
7. Braun, T.; Fung, B.C.M.; Iqbal, F.; Shah, B. Security and Privacy Challenges in Smart Cities. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2018, 39, 499–507.
[CrossRef]
8. Gourisetti, S.N.G.; Mylrea, M.; Patangia, H. Cybersecurity Vulnerability Mitigation Framework through Empirical Paradigm:
Enhanced Prioritized Gap Analysis. Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst. 2020, 105, 410–431. [CrossRef]
9. Nieto, A.; Acien, A.; Fernandez, G. Crowdsourcing Analysis in 5G IoT: Cybersecurity Threats and Mitigation. Mob. Netw. Appl.
2019, 24, 881–889. [CrossRef]
10. Gubbi, J.; Buyya, R.; Marusic, S.; Palaniswami, M. Internet of Things (IoT): A Vision, Architectural Elements, and Future Directions.
Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst. 2013, 29, 1645–1660. [CrossRef]
11. Ma, C. Smart City and Cyber-Security; Technologies Used, Leading Challenges and Future Recommendations. Energy Rep. 2021,
7, 7999–8012. [CrossRef]
12. Habib, M.Y.; Qureshi, H.A.; Khan, S.A.; Mansoor, Z.; Chishti, A.R. Cybersecurity and Smart Cities: Current Status and Future.
In Proceedings of the 2023 IEEE International Conference on Emerging Trends in Engineering, Sciences and Technology (ICES&T),
Bahawalpur, Pakistan, 9–11 January 2023; IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2023; pp. 1–7.
13. Behnam, A.; Azad, S.; Daneshvar, M.; Anvari-Moghaddam, A.; Marzband, M. Artificial Intelligence–Enabled Internet of Things
Technologies in Modern Energy Grids. In IoT Enabled Multi-Energy Systems; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2023;
pp. 69–86.
14. Kim, K.; Alshenaifi, I.M.; Ramachandran, S.; Kim, J.; Zia, T.; Almorjan, A. Cybersecurity and Cyber Forensics for Smart Cities:
A Comprehensive Literature Review and Survey. Sensors 2023, 23, 3681. [CrossRef]
15. Elmaghraby, A.S.; Losavio, M.M. Cyber Security Challenges in Smart Cities: Safety, Security and Privacy. J. Adv. Res. 2014, 5,
491–497. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
16. Xia, L.; Semirumi, D.T.; Rezaei, R. A Thorough Examination of Smart City Applications: Exploring Challenges and Solutions
throughout the Life Cycle with Emphasis on Safeguarding Citizen Privacy. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2023, 98, 104771. [CrossRef]
17. Anisetti, M.; Ardagna, C.; Bellandi, V.; Cremonini, M.; Frati, F.; Damiani, E. Privacy-Aware Big Data Analytics as a Service for
Public Health Policies in Smart Cities. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2018, 39, 68–77. [CrossRef]
18. Baig, Z.A.; Szewczyk, P.; Valli, C.; Rabadia, P.; Hannay, P.; Chernyshev, M.; Johnstone, M.; Kerai, P.; Ibrahim, A.; Sansurooah, K.;
et al. Future Challenges for Smart Cities: Cyber-Security and Digital Forensics. Digit. Investig. 2017, 22, 3–13. [CrossRef]
19. Caragliu, A.; Del Bo, C.F. Smart Innovative Cities: The Impact of Smart City Policies on Urban Innovation. Technol. Forecast. Soc.
Change 2019, 142, 373–383. [CrossRef]
20. Kitchin, R.; Dodge, M. The (In)Security of Smart Cities: Vulnerabilities, Risks, Mitigation, and Prevention. J. Urban Technol. 2019,
26, 47–65. [CrossRef]
21. Sharma, K.; Mukhopadhyay, A. Sarima-Based Cyber-Risk Assessment and Mitigation Model for A Smart City’s Traffic Manage-
ment Systems (Scram). J. Organ. Comput. Electron. Commer. 2022, 32, 1–20. [CrossRef]
22. Rao, P.M.; Deebak, B.D. Security and Privacy Issues in Smart Cities/Industries: Technologies, Applications, and Challenges.
J. Ambient Intell. Humaniz. Comput. 2023, 14, 10517–10553. [CrossRef]
23. Lai, C.S.; Jia, Y.; Dong, Z.; Wang, D.; Tao, Y.; Lai, Q.H.; Wong, R.T.K.; Zobaa, A.F.; Wu, R.; Lai, L.L. A Review of Technical
Standards for Smart Cities. Clean Technol. 2020, 2, 290–310. [CrossRef]
24. Yigitcanlar, T.; Kankanamge, N.; Vella, K. How Are Smart City Concepts and Technologies Perceived and Utilized? A Systematic
Geo-Twitter Analysis of Smart Cities in Australia. J. Urban Technol. 2021, 28, 135–154. [CrossRef]
25. Verhulsdonck, G.; Weible, J.L.; Helser, S.; Hajduk, N. Smart Cities, Playable Cities, and Cybersecurity: A Systematic Review. Int. J.
Hum. Comput. Interact. 2023, 39, 378–390. [CrossRef]
26. Boni, A.; López-Fogués, A.; Fernández-Baldor, Á.; Millan, G.; Belda-Miquel, S. Initiatives towards a Participatory Smart City. The
Role of Digital Grassroots Innovations. J. Glob. Ethics 2019, 15, 168–182. [CrossRef]
27. Xu, N.; Ding, Y.; Guo, J. Do Smart City Policies Make Cities More Innovative: Evidence from China. J. Asian Public Policy 2022, 15,
1–17. [CrossRef]
28. Habib, A.; Alsmadi, D.; Prybutok, V.R. Factors That Determine Residents’ Acceptance of Smart City Technologies. Behav. Inf.
Technol. 2020, 39, 610–623. [CrossRef]
29. Langer, L.; Skopik, F.; Smith, P.; Kammerstetter, M. From Old to New: Assessing Cybersecurity Risks for an Evolving Smart Grid.
Comput. Secur. 2016, 62, 165–176. [CrossRef]
30. Silva, M.M.; Costa, A.P.C.S.; de Gusmão, A.P.H. Continuous Cooperation: A Proposal Using a Fuzzy Multicriteria Sorting Method.
Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2014, 151, 67–75. [CrossRef]
Future Internet 2023, 15, 393 24 of 36

31. De Gusmão, A.P.H.; Silva, L.C.E.; Silva, M.M.; Poleto, T.; Costa, A.P.C.S. Information Security Risk Analysis Model Using Fuzzy
Decision Theory. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2016, 36, 25–34. [CrossRef]
32. Poleto, T.; Silva, M.M.; Clemente, T.R.N.; de Gusmão, A.P.H.; Araújo, A.P.D.B.; Costa, A.P.C.S. A Risk Assessment Framework
Proposal Based on Bow-Tie Analysis for Medical Image Diagnosis Sharing within Telemedicine. Sensors 2021, 21, 2426. [CrossRef]
33. Rodgers, W.; Alhendi, E.; Xie, F. The Impact of Foreignness on the Compliance with Cybersecurity Controls. J. World Bus. 2019,
54, 101012. [CrossRef]
34. De Gusmão, A.P.H.; Silva, M.M.; Poleto, T.; Silva, L.C.; Costa, A.P.C.S. Cybersecurity Risk Analysis Model Using Fault Tree
Analysis and Fuzzy Decision Theory. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2018, 43, 248–260. [CrossRef]
35. Makhdoom, I.; Abolhasan, M.; Lipman, J.; Liu, R.P.; Ni, W. Anatomy of Threats to the Internet of Things. IEEE Commun. Surv.
Tutor. 2019, 21, 1636–1675. [CrossRef]
36. Kruse, C.S.; Frederick, B.; Jacobson, T.; Monticone, D.K. Cybersecurity in Healthcare: A Systematic Review of Modern Threats
and Trends. Technol. Health Care 2017, 25, 1–10. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
37. Stamatellis, C.; Papadopoulos, P.; Pitropakis, N.; Katsikas, S.; Buchanan, W.J. A Privacy-Preserving Healthcare Framework Using
Hyperledger Fabric. Sensors 2020, 20, 6587. [CrossRef]
38. Cabaj, K.; Domingos, D.; Kotulski, Z.; Respício, A. Cybersecurity Education: Evolution of the Discipline and Analysis of Master
Programs. Comput. Secur. 2018, 75, 24–35. [CrossRef]
39. Li, X.; Shan, Z.; Liu, F.; Chen, Y.; Hou, Y. A Consistently-Executing Graph-Based Approach for Malware Packer Identification.
IEEE Access 2019, 7, 51620–51629. [CrossRef]
40. Habibzadeh, H.; Nussbaum, B.H.; Anjomshoa, F.; Kantarci, B.; Soyata, T. A Survey on Cybersecurity, Data Privacy, and Policy
Issues in Cyber-Physical System Deployments in Smart Cities. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2019, 50, 101660. [CrossRef]
41. Shin, S.; Lee, S.; Burian, S.J.; Judi, D.R.; McPherson, T. Evaluating Resilience of Water Distribution Networks to Operational
Failures from Cyber-Physical Attacks. J. Environ. Eng. 2020, 146, 04020003. [CrossRef]
42. Collier, Z.A.; Dimase, D.; Walters, S.; Tehranipoor, M.M.; Lambert, J.H.; Linkov, I. Cybersecurity Standards: Managing Risk and
Creating Resilience. Computer 2014, 47, 70–76. [CrossRef]
43. Cybersecurity, Critical Infrastructure. Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity. Proc. Annu. ISA Anal. Div.
Symp. 2018, 535, 9–25.
44. Ben-Asher, N.; Gonzalez, C. Effects of Cyber Security Knowledge on Attack Detection. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2015, 48, 51–61.
[CrossRef]
45. Boyson, S. Cyber Supply Chain Risk Management: Revolutionizing the Strategic Control of Critical IT Systems. Technovation 2014,
34, 342–353. [CrossRef]
46. Kawaguchi, H.; Tone, K.; Tsutsui, M. Estimation of the Efficiency of Japanese Hospitals Using a Dynamic and Network Data
Envelopment Analysis Model. Health Care Manag. Sci. 2014, 17, 101–112. [CrossRef]
47. Kim, Y.S.; Tague, P.; Lee, H.; Kim, H. A Jamming Approach to Enhance Enterprise Wi-Fi Secrecy through Spatial Access Control.
Wirel. Netw. 2015, 21, 2631–2647. [CrossRef]
48. Kritzinger, E.; Von Solms, S.H. Cyber Security for Home Users: A New Way of Protection through Awareness Enforcement.
Comput. Secur. 2010, 29, 840–847. [CrossRef]
49. Pfleeger, S.L.; Caputo, D.D. Leveraging Behavioral Science to Mitigate Cyber Security Risk. Comput. Secur. 2012, 31, 597–611.
[CrossRef]
50. Razzaq, A.; Sharif, A.; Ozturk, I.; Skare, M. Asymmetric Influence of Digital Finance, and Renewable Energy Technology
Innovation on Green Growth in China. Renew. Energy 2023, 202, 310–319. [CrossRef]
51. Asif, M.; Aziz, Z.; Bin Ahmad, M.; Khalid, A.; Waris, H.A.; Gilani, A. Blockchain-Based Authentication and Trust Management
Mechanism for Smart Cities. Sensors 2022, 22, 2604. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
52. Anomah, S.; Ayeboafo, B.; Aguabeng, O. A Conceptual Model for Comprehensive Assurance Review Engagements for Less
Developed Regulatory Environments. EDPACS 2023, 67, 1–29. [CrossRef]
53. Nandan, M.; Singh, A.; Mandayam, G. Social Value Creation and Social Innovation by Human Service Professionals: Evidence
from Missouri, USA. Adm. Sci. 2019, 9, 86. [CrossRef]
54. Rathore, M.M.; Ahmad, A.; Paul, A.; Rho, S. Urban Planning and Building Smart Cities Based on the Internet of Things Using Big
Data Analytics. Comput. Netw. 2016, 101, 63–80. [CrossRef]
55. Pohls, H.C.; Angelakis, V.; Suppan, S.; Fischer, K.; Oikonomou, G.; Tragos, E.Z.; Rodriguez, R.D.; Mouroutis, T. RERUM: Building
a Reliable IoT upon Privacy- and Security- Enabled Smart Objects. In Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE Wireless Communications and
Networking Conference Workshops (WCNCW), Istanbul, Turkey, 6–9 April 2014; IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2014; pp. 122–127.
56. Aloqaily, M.; Otoum, S.; Al Ridhawi, I.; Jararweh, Y. An Intrusion Detection System for Connected Vehicles in Smart Cities. Ad
Hoc Netw. 2019, 90, 101842. [CrossRef]
57. Chen, H.C.; You, I.; Weng, C.E.; Cheng, C.H.; Huang, Y.F. A Security Gateway Application for End-to-End M2M Communications.
Comput. Stand. Interfaces 2016, 44, 85–93. [CrossRef]
58. Cowley, J.A.; Greitzer, F.L.; Woods, B. Effect of Network Infrastructure Factors on Information System Risk Judgments. Comput.
Secur. 2015, 52, 142–158. [CrossRef]
59. Asri, S.; Pranggono, B. Impact of Distributed Denial-of-Service Attack on Advanced Metering Infrastructure. Wirel. Pers. Commun.
2015, 83, 2211–2223. [CrossRef]
Future Internet 2023, 15, 393 25 of 36

60. Ismagilova, E.; Hughes, L.; Rana, N.P.; Dwivedi, Y.K. Security, Privacy and Risks Within Smart Cities: Literature Review and
Development of a Smart City Interaction Framework. Inf. Syst. Front. 2022, 24, 393–414. [CrossRef]
61. Zhou, J. Artificial Intelligence-Based Recommendation and Application of Public Services in Smart Cities. Comput. Intell. Neurosci.
2022, 2022, 8958865. [CrossRef]
62. Mora, L.; Gerli, P.; Ardito, L.; Messeni Petruzzelli, A. Smart City Governance from an Innovation Management Perspective:
Theoretical Framing, Review of Current Practices, and Future Research Agenda. Technovation 2023, 123, 102717. [CrossRef]
63. Azzaoui, A.; El Singh, S.K.; Pan, Y.; Park, J.H. Block5GIntell: Blockchain for AI-Enabled 5G Networks. IEEE Access 2020, 8,
145918–145935. [CrossRef]
64. He, Y.; Zhang, M.; Yang, X.; Luo, J.; Chen, Y. A Survey of Privacy Protection and Network Security in User On-Demand
Anonymous Communication. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 54856–54871. [CrossRef]
65. Lin, H.; Chen, C.; Wang, J.; Qi, J.; Jin, D.; Kalbarczyk, Z.T.; Iyer, R.K. Self-Healing Attack-Resilient PMU Network for Power
System Operation. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 2018, 9, 1551–1565. [CrossRef]
66. Shin, J.; Son, H.; Khalil ur, R.; Heo, G. Development of a Cyber Security Risk Model Using Bayesian Networks. Reliab. Eng. Syst.
Saf. 2015, 134, 208–217. [CrossRef]
67. Verma, V.K.; Singh, S.; Pathak, N.P. Impact of Malicious Servers over Trust and Reputation Models in Wireless Sensor Networks.
Int. J. Electron. 2016, 103, 530–540. [CrossRef]
68. Gartner Gartner Forecasts Worldwide Public Cloud End-User Spending to Reach Nearly $600 Billion in 2023. Available online:
http://www.gartner.com/en/industries/high-tech. (accessed on 17 October 2023).
69. Luo, Y.; Xu, M.; Huang, K.; Wang, D.; Fu, S. Efficient Auditing for Shared Data in the Cloud with Secure User Revocation and
Computations Outsourcing. Comput. Secur. 2018, 73, 492–506. [CrossRef]
70. Butpheng, C.; Yeh, K.-H.; Xiong, H. Security and Privacy in IoT-Cloud-Based e-Health Systems—A Comprehensive Review.
Symmetry 2020, 12, 1191. [CrossRef]
71. Dinh, T.; Kim, Y. A Novel Location-Centric IoT-Cloud Based On-Street Car Parking Violation Management System in Smart Cities.
Sensors 2016, 16, 810. [CrossRef]
72. Marwan, M.; Kartit, A.; Ouahmane, H. Security Enhancement in Healthcare Cloud Using Machine Learning. Procedia Comput. Sci.
2018, 127, 388–397. [CrossRef]
73. NIST Big Data Public Working Group. Big Data Interoperability Framework: Security and Privacy; National Institute of Standards
and Technology: Gaithersburg, MD, USA, 2015; Volume 4, p. 75.
74. Bojanc, R.; Jerman-Blažič, B.; Tekavčič, M. Managing the Investment in Information Security Technology by Use of a Quantitative
Modeling. Inf. Process. Manag. 2012, 48, 1031–1052. [CrossRef]
75. Tweneboah-Koduah, S.; Skouby, K.E.; Tadayoni, R. Cyber Security Threats to IoT Applications and Service Domains. Wirel. Pers.
Commun. 2017, 95, 169–185. [CrossRef]
76. Aceto, G.; Persico, V.; Pescapé, A. The Role of Information and Communication Technologies in Healthcare: Taxonomies,
Perspectives, and Challenges. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 2018, 107, 125–154. [CrossRef]
77. Whitley, E.A. Informational Privacy, Consent and the “Control” of Personal Data. Inf. Secur. Tech. Rep. 2009, 14, 154–159.
[CrossRef]
78. Wang, W.; Lu, Z. Cyber Security in the Smart Grid: Survey and Challenges. Comput. Netw. 2013, 57, 1344–1371. [CrossRef]
79. El-Gayar, O.F.; Fritz, B.D. A Web-Based Multi-Perspective Decision Support System for Information Security Planning. Decis.
Support Syst. 2010, 50, 43–54. [CrossRef]
80. Chen, R.-M.; Hsieh, K.-T. Effective Allied Network Security System Based on Designed Scheme with Conditional Legitimate
Probability against Distributed Network Attacks and Intrusions. Int. J. Commun. Syst. 2012, 25, 672–688. [CrossRef]
81. Varadharajan, V.; Tupakula, U. Counteracting Security Attacks in Virtual Machines in the Cloud Using Property Based Attestation.
J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 2014, 40, 31–45. [CrossRef]
82. Jolly, P.K.; Batra, S. Security against Attacks and Malicious Code Execution in Mobile Agent Using IBF-CPABE Protocol. Wirel.
Pers. Commun. 2019, 107, 1155–1169. [CrossRef]
83. Chuang, Y.-H.; Lei, C.-L.; Shiu, H.-J. How to Design a Secure Anonymous Authentication and Key Agreement Protocol for
Multi-Server Environments and Prove Its Security. Symmetry 2021, 13, 1629. [CrossRef]
84. Bojanc, R.; Jerman-Blažič, B. Standard Approach for Quantification of the ICT Security Investment for Cybercrime Prevention.
In Proceedings of the 2008 Second International Conference on the Digital Society (ICDS), Saint Luce, Martinique, 10–15 February
2008; IEEE: New York, NY, USA; Volume 30, pp. 7–14. [CrossRef]
85. Saber, O.; Mazri, T. Smart City Security Issues: The Main Attacks and Countermeasures. Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spat.
Inf. Sci. 2021, 46, 465–472. [CrossRef]
86. Andriole, K.P. Security of Electronic Medical Information and Patient Privacy: What You Need to Know. J. Am. Coll. Radiol. 2014,
11, 1212–1216. [CrossRef]
87. Ullah, F.; Ali Babar, M. Architectural Tactics for Big Data Cybersecurity Analytics Systems: A Review. J. Syst. Softw. 2019, 151,
81–118. [CrossRef]
88. Kshetri, N. Blockchain’s Roles in Strengthening Cybersecurity and Protecting Privacy. Telecomm. Policy 2017, 41, 1027–1038.
[CrossRef]
Future Internet 2023, 15, 393 26 of 36

89. Daoudagh, S.; Marchetti, E.; Savarino, V.; Bernabe, J.B.; García-Rodríguez, J.; Moreno, R.T.; Martinez, J.A.; Skarmeta, A.F. Data
Protection by Design in the Context of Smart Cities: A Consent and Access Control Proposal. Sensors 2021, 21, 7154. [CrossRef]
90. Zhou, L.; Thieret, R.; Watzlaf, V.; Dealmeida, D.; Parmanto, B. A Telehealth Privacy and Security Self-Assessment Questionnaire
for Telehealth Providers: Development and Validation. Int. J. Telerehabil. 2019, 11, 3–14. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
91. Rehman, A.; Haseeb, K.; Saba, T.; Lloret, J.; Ahmed, Z. Mobility Support 5G Architecture with Real-Time Routing for Sustainable
Smart Cities. Sustainability 2021, 13, 9092. [CrossRef]
92. Nabi, F. Designing a Framework Method for Secure Business Application Logic Integrity in E-Commerce Systems. Int. J. Netw.
Secur. 2011, 12, 29–41. [CrossRef]
93. Ikrissi, G.; Mazri, T. Iot-Based Smart Environments: State of the Art, Security Threats and Solutions. Int. Arch. Photogramm.
Remote Sens. Spat. Inf. Sci. 2021, 46, 279–286. [CrossRef]
94. Awan, K.A.; Ud Din, I.; Almogren, A.; Almajed, H. AgriTrust—A Trust Management Approach for Smart Agriculture in
Cloud-Based Internet of Agriculture Things. Sensors 2020, 20, 6174. [CrossRef]
95. Raoof, A.; Matrawy, A. The Effect of Buffer Management Strategies on 6LoWPAN’s Response to Buffer Reservation Attacks.
In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Communications, Paris, France, 21–25 May 2017; pp. 1–7. [CrossRef]
96. Sohal, A.S.; Sandhu, R.; Sood, S.K.; Chang, V. A Cybersecurity Framework to Identify Malicious Edge Device in Fog Computing
and Cloud-of-Things Environments. Comput. Secur. 2018, 74, 340–354. [CrossRef]
97. Sasaki, T.; Morita, Y.; Jada, A. Access Control Architecture for Smart City IoT Platform. In Proceedings of the 2019 18th IEEE
International Conference on Trust, Security and Privacy in Computing and Communications/13th IEEE International Conference
On Big Data Science And Engineering (TrustCom/BigDataSE), Rotorua, New Zealand, 5–8 August 2018; IEEE: New York, NY,
USA, 2019; pp. 717–722.
98. Wang, F.; Luo, W. Assessing Spatial and Nonspatial Factors for Healthcare Access: Towards an Integrated Approach to Defining
Health Professional Shortage Areas. Health Place 2005, 11, 131–146. [CrossRef]
99. Banerjee, S.; Roy, S.; Odelu, V.; Das, A.K.; Chattopadhyay, S.; Rodrigues, J.J.P.C.; Park, Y. Multi-Authority CP-ABE-Based User
Access Control Scheme with Constant-Size Key and Ciphertext for IoT Deployment. J. Inf. Secur. Appl. 2020, 53, 102503. [CrossRef]
100. Di Francesco Maesa, D.; Mori, P.; Ricci, L. A Blockchain Based Approach for the Definition of Auditable Access Control Systems.
Comput. Secur. 2019, 84, 93–119. [CrossRef]
101. Dagher, G.G.; Mohler, J.; Milojkovic, M.; Marella, P.B. Ancile: Privacy-Preserving Framework for Access Control and Interoper-
ability of Electronic Health Records Using Blockchain Technology. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2018, 39, 283–297. [CrossRef]
102. Ferreira, D.C.; Marques, R.C. Do Quality and Access to Hospital Services Impact on Their Technical Efficiency? Omega 2019, 86,
218–236. [CrossRef]
103. Kang, M.; Robards, F.; Luscombe, G.; Sanci, L.A.; Hawke, C.I.; Steinbeck, K.S.; Jan, S.; Kong, M.J.; Usherwood, T.P. Understanding
Access and Equity: Associations between Barriers to Health Care and Social Marginalisation. J. Adolesc. Heal. 2018, 62, S28–S29.
[CrossRef]
104. Shi, M.; Jiang, R.; Hu, X.; Shang, J. A Privacy Protection Method for Health Care Big Data Management Based on Risk Access
Control. Health Care Manag. Sci. 2019, 23, 427–442. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
105. Hsu, C.; Zeng, B.; Zhang, M. A Novel Group Key Transfer for Big Data Security Q. Appl. Math. Comput. 2014, 249, 436–443.
[CrossRef]
106. Moreno-Sanchez, R.; Hayden, M.; Janes, C.; Anderson, G. A Web-Based Multimedia Spatial Information System to Document
Aedes Aegypti Breeding Sites and Dengue Fever Risk along the US-Mexico Border. Heal. Place 2006, 12, 715–727. [CrossRef]
107. Mendonça Silva, M.; Poleto, T.; Silva, L.C.E.; Henriques De Gusmao, A.P.; Cabral Seixas Costa, A.P. A Grey Theory Based
Approach to Big Data Risk Management Using FMEA. Math. Probl. Eng. 2016, 2016, 9175418. [CrossRef]
108. Wang, J.; Paschalidis, I.C. Botnet Detection Based on Anomaly and Community Detection. IEEE Trans. Control Netw. Syst. 2017, 4,
392–404. [CrossRef]
109. Singh, K.; Guntuku, S.C.; Thakur, A.; Hota, C. Big Data Analytics Framework for Peer-to-Peer Botnet Detection Using Random
Forests. Inf. Sci. 2014, 278, 488–497. [CrossRef]
110. Kim, D.W.; Yan, P.; Zhang, J. Detecting Fake Anti-Virus Software Distribution Webpages. Comput. Secur. 2015, 49, 95–106.
[CrossRef]
111. Alotaibi, S.S. Registration Center Based User Authentication Scheme for Smart E-Governance Applications in Smart Cities. IEEE
Access 2019, 7, 5819–5833. [CrossRef]
112. Deypir, M.; Horri, A. Instance Based Security Risk Value Estimation for Android Applications. J. Inf. Secur. Appl. 2018, 40, 20–30.
[CrossRef]
113. Pérez-González, D.; Preciado, S.T.; Solana-Gonzalez, P. Organizational Practices as Antecedents of the Information Security
Management Performance. Inf. Technol. People 2019, 32, 1262–1275. [CrossRef]
114. Rebollo, O.; Mellado, D.; Fernández-Medina, E. A Systematic Review of Information Security Governance Frameworks in the
Cloud Computing Environment. J. Univers. Comput. Sci. 2012, 18, 798–815. [CrossRef]
115. Arslan, O.; Çepni, M.S.; Etiler, N. Spatial Analysis of Perinatal Mortality Rates with Geographic Information Systems in Kocaeli,
Turkey. Public Health 2013, 127, 369–379. [CrossRef]
116. Wu, D.; Wu, D.D. Risk-Based Robust Evaluation of Hospital Efficiency. IEEE Syst. J. 2019, 13, 1906–1914. [CrossRef]
Future Internet 2023, 15, 393 27 of 36

117. Ben-Arieh, D.; Gullipalli, D.K. Data Envelopment Analysis of Clinics with Sparse Data: Fuzzy Clustering Approach. Comput. Ind.
Eng. 2012, 63, 13–21. [CrossRef]
118. Verri Lucca, A.; Augusto Silva, L.; Luchtenberg, R.; Garcez, L.; Mao, X.; García Ovejero, R.; Miguel Pires, I.; Luis Victória Barbosa,
J.; Reis Quietinho Leithardt, V. A Case Study on the Development of a Data Privacy Management Solution Based on Patient
Information. Sensors 2020, 20, 6030. [CrossRef]
119. Golmohammadi, D.; Mellat-Parast, M. Developing a Grey-Based Decision-Making Model for Supplier Selection. Int. J. Prod. Econ.
2012, 137, 191–200. [CrossRef]
120. Ferdous, R.; Khan, F.; Sadiq, R.; Amyotte, P.; Veitch, B. Handling Data Uncertainties in Event Tree Analysis. Process Saf. Environ.
Prot. 2009, 87, 283–292. [CrossRef]
121. Cao, Z.; Lumineau, F. Revisiting the Interplay between Contractual and Relational Governance: A Qualitative and Meta-Analytic
Investigation. J. Oper. Manag. 2015, 33–34, 15–42. [CrossRef]
122. Liu, Q.; Zhou, T.; Cai, Z.; Yuan, Y.; Xu, M.; Qin, J.; Ma, W. Turning Backdoors for Efficient Privacy Protection against Image
Retrieval Violations. Inf. Process. Manag. 2023, 60, 103471. [CrossRef]
123. Martin, K. The Penalty for Privacy Violations: How Privacy Violations Impact Trust Online. J. Bus. Res. 2018, 82, 103–116.
[CrossRef]
124. Bansal, G.; Zahedi, F.M. Trust Violation and Repair: The Information Privacy Perspective. Decis. Support Syst. 2015, 71, 62–77.
[CrossRef]
125. Melnik, T. Avoiding Violations of Patient Privacy With Social Media. J. Nurs. Regul. 2013, 3, 39–46. [CrossRef]
126. Liu, M.; Luo, Y.; Yang, C.; Pang, S.; Puthal, D.; Ren, K.; Zhang, X. Privacy-Preserving Matrix Product Based Static Mutual
Exclusive Roles Constraints Violation Detection in Interoperable Role-Based Access Control. Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst. 2020, 109,
457–468. [CrossRef]
127. Tamjidyamcholo, A.; Bin Baba, M.S.; Shuib, N.L.M.; Rohani, V.A. Evaluation Model for Knowledge Sharing in Information
Security Professional Virtual Community. Comput. Secur. 2014, 43, 19–34. [CrossRef]
128. Anwar, M.; He, W.; Ash, I.; Yuan, X.; Li, L.; Xu, L. Gender Difference and Employees’ Cybersecurity Behaviors. Comput. Hum.
Behav. 2017, 69, 437–443. [CrossRef]
129. Jalali, M.S.; Razak, S.; Gordon, W.; Perakslis, E.; Madnick, S. Health Care and Cybersecurity: Bibliometric Analysis of the
Literature. J. Med. Internet Res. 2019, 21, e12644. [CrossRef]
130. Huber, T.L.; Fischer, T.A.; Dibbern, J.; Hirschheim, R. A Process Model of Complementarity and Substitution of Contractual and
Relational Governance in IS Outsourcing. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 2013, 30, 81–114. [CrossRef]
131. Manimaran, S.; Sastry, V.N.; Gopalan, N.P. SBTDDL: A Novel Framework for Sensor-Based Threats Detection on Android
Smartphones Using Deep Learning. Comput. Secur. 2022, 118, 102729. [CrossRef]
132. Cano Bejar, A.H.; Ray, S.; Huang, Y.H. Fighting for the Status Quo: Threat to Tech Self-Esteem and Opposition to Competing
Smartphones. Inf. Manag. 2023, 60, 103748. [CrossRef]
133. Tams, S.; Legoux, R.; Léger, P.-M. Smartphone Withdrawal Creates Stress: A Moderated Mediation Model of Nomophobia, Social
Threat, and Phone Withdrawal Context. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2018, 81, 1–9. [CrossRef]
134. Pang, H.; Ruan, Y. Can Information and Communication Overload Influence Smartphone App Users’ Social Network Exhaustion,
Privacy Invasion and Discontinuance Intention? A Cognition-Affect-Conation Approach. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2023, 73, 103378.
[CrossRef]
135. De Prisco, R.; De Santis, A.; Malandrino, D.; Zaccagnino, R. An Improved Privacy Attack on Smartphones Exploiting the
Accelerometer. J. Inf. Secur. Appl. 2023, 75, 103479. [CrossRef]
136. Nepomuceno, T.C.C. Parametric and Non-Parametric Data-Driven Analytics for Socioeconomic Challenges in a Contemporary
World. Socioecon. Anal. 2023, 1, 1–4. [CrossRef]
137. De Carvalho, V.D.H.; Costa, A.P.C.S. Exploring Text Mining and Analytics for Applications in Public Security: An in-Depth Dive
into a Systematic Literature Review. Socioecon. Anal. 2023, 1, 5–55. [CrossRef]
138. Sanchez, P.M.S.; Valero, J.M.J.; Celdran, A.H.; Bovet, G.; Perez, M.G.; Perez, G.M. A Survey on Device Behavior Fingerprinting:
Data Sources, Techniques, Application Scenarios, and Datasets. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 2021, 23, 1048–1077. [CrossRef]
139. Jimada-Ojuolape, B.; Teh, J. Surveys on the Reliability Impacts of Power System Cyber–Physical Layers. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2020,
62, 102384. [CrossRef]
140. Kim, K.; Kim, J.S.; Jeong, S.; Park, J.-H.; Kim, H.K. Cybersecurity for Autonomous Vehicles: Review of Attacks and Defense.
Comput. Secur. 2021, 103, 102150. [CrossRef]
141. Alotaibi, A.; Barnawi, A. Securing Massive IoT in 6G: Recent Solutions, Architectures, Future Directions. Internet Things 2023,
22, 100715. [CrossRef]
142. Raimundo, R.J.; Rosário, A.T. Cybersecurity in the Internet of Things in Industrial Management. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 1598.
[CrossRef]
143. Yang, F.; Hua, Y.; Li, X.; Yang, Z.; Yu, X.; Fei, T. A Survey on Multisource Heterogeneous Urban Sensor Access and Data
Management Technologies. Meas. Sens. 2022, 19, 100061. [CrossRef]
144. van Eck, N.J.; Waltman, L.; Dekker, R.; van den Berg, J. A Comparison of Two Techniques for Bibliometric Mapping: Multidimen-
sional Scaling and VOS. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 2010, 61, 2405–2416. [CrossRef]
145. Chou Yen, D.; Lin, B.; Hong-Lam, C.P.D. Cyberspace Security Management. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 1999, 99, 353–361. [CrossRef]
Future Internet 2023, 15, 393 28 of 36

146. Nepomuceno, T.C.C.; Piubello Orsini, L.; de Carvalho, V.D.H.; Poleto, T.; Leardini, C. The Core of Healthcare Efficiency:
A Comprehensive Bibliometric Review on Frontier Analysis of Hospitals. Healthcare 2022, 10, 1316. [CrossRef]
147. van Eck, N.J.; Waltman, L. Visualizing Bibliometric Networks. In Measuring Scholarly Impact; Ding, Y., Rousseau, R., Wolfram, D.,
Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2014; pp. 285–320. ISBN 978-3-319-10377-8.
148. van Eck, N.J.; Waltman, L. Software Survey: VOSviewer, a Computer Program for Bibliometric Mapping. Scientometrics 2010, 84,
523–538. [CrossRef]
149. Satarova, B.; Siddiqui, T.; Raza, H.; Abbasi, N.; Kydyrkozha, S. A Systematic Review of “The Performance of Knowledge
Organizations and Modelling Human Action”. Socioecon. Anal. 2023, 1, 56–77. [CrossRef]
150. Ahmad, F.; Adnane, A.; Franqueira, V.; Kurugollu, F.; Liu, L. Man-In-The-Middle Attacks in Vehicular Ad-Hoc Networks:
Evaluating the Impact of Attackers’ Strategies. Sensors 2018, 18, 4040. [CrossRef]
151. Abi Sen, A.A.; Eassa, F.A.; Jambi, K.; Yamin, M. Preserving Privacy in Internet of Things: A Survey. Int. J. Inf. Technol. 2018, 10,
189–200. [CrossRef]
152. Ahmad, F.; Franqueira, V.N.L.; Adnane, A. TEAM: A Trust Evaluation and Management Framework in Context-Enabled Vehicular
Ad-Hoc Networks. IEEE Access 2018, 6, 28643–28660. [CrossRef]
153. Ahmad, F.; Kurugollu, F.; Adnane, A.; Hussain, R.; Hussain, F. MARINE: Man-in-the-Middle Attack Resistant Trust Model in
Connected Vehicles. IEEE Internet Things J. 2020, 7, 3310–3322. [CrossRef]
154. Ahmad, F.; Kurugollu, F.; Kerrache, C.A.; Sezer, S.; Liu, L. NOTRINO: A NOvel Hybrid TRust Management Scheme for
INternet-of-Vehicles. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2021, 70, 9244–9257. [CrossRef]
155. Farahani, B.; Firouzi, F.; Chang, V.; Badaroglu, M.; Constant, N.; Mankodiya, K. Towards Fog-Driven IoT EHealth: Promises and
Challenges of IoT in Medicine and Healthcare. Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst. 2018, 78, 659–676. [CrossRef]
156. Gaba, G.S.; Hedabou, M.; Kumar, P.; Braeken, A.; Liyanage, M.; Alazab, M. Zero Knowledge Proofs Based Authenticated Key
Agreement Protocol for Sustainable Healthcare. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2022, 80, 103766. [CrossRef]
157. Javed, M.; Ben Hamida, E.; Znaidi, W. Security in Intelligent Transport Systems for Smart Cities: From Theory to Practice. Sensors
2016, 16, 879. [CrossRef]
158. Garcia-Font, V.; Garrigues, C.; Rifà-Pous, H. A Comparative Study of Anomaly Detection Techniques for Smart City Wireless
Sensor Networks. Sensors 2016, 16, 868. [CrossRef]
159. Garcia-Font, V.; Garrigues, C.; Rifà-Pous, H. Attack Classification Schema for Smart City WSNs. Sensors 2017, 17, 771. [CrossRef]
160. Beltran, V.; Skarmeta, A.F.; Ruiz, P.M. An ARM-Compliant Architecture for User Privacy in Smart Cities: SMARTIE—Quality by
Design in the IoT. Wirel. Commun. Mob. Comput. 2017, 2017, 1–13. [CrossRef]
161. Chatzigiannakis, I.; Vitaletti, A.; Pyrgelis, A. A Privacy-Preserving Smart Parking System Using an IoT Elliptic Curve Based
Security Platform. Comput. Commun. 2016, 89–90, 165–177. [CrossRef]
162. Chen, C.-T.; Lee, C.-C.; Lin, I.-C. Efficient and Secure Three-Party Mutual Authentication Key Agreement Protocol for WSNs in
IoT Environments. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0232277. [CrossRef]
163. Das, A.K.; Bera, B.; Wazid, M.; Jamal, S.S.; Park, Y. On the Security of a Secure and Lightweight Authentication Scheme for Next
Generation IoT Infrastructure. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 71856–71867. [CrossRef]
164. Jain, S.K.; Kesswani, N.; Agarwal, B. Security, Privacy and Trust: Privacy Preserving Model for Internet of Things. Int. J. Intell. Inf.
Database Syst. 2020, 13, 249. [CrossRef]
165. Kamil, I.A.; Ogundoyin, S.O. A Big Data Anonymous Batch Verification Scheme with Conditional Privacy Preservation for Power
Injection over Vehicular Network and 5G Smart Grid Slice. Sustain. Energy Grids Netw. 2019, 20, 100260. [CrossRef]
166. Singh, S.; Pise, A.; Alfarraj, O.; Tolba, A.; Yoon, B. A Cryptographic Approach to Prevent Network Incursion for Enhancement of
QoS in Sustainable Smart City Using MANET. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2022, 79, 103483. [CrossRef]
167. Khan, Z.A. Using Energy-Efficient Trust Management to Protect IoT Networks for Smart Cities. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2018, 40, 1–15.
[CrossRef]
168. Li, X.; Shen, X. Blockchain Technology-Based Electronic Payment Strategy for City Mobile Pass Cards. Mob. Inf. Syst. 2022,
2022, 4085036. [CrossRef]
169. Garcia-Font, V. SocialBlock: An Architecture for Decentralized User-Centric Data Management Applications for Communications
in Smart Cities. J. Parallel Distrib. Comput. 2020, 145, 13–23. [CrossRef]
170. Gong, B.; Liu, J.; Guo, S. A Trusted Attestation Scheme for Data Source of Internet of Things in Smart City Based on Dynamic
Trust Classification. IEEE Internet Things J. 2021, 8, 16121–16141. [CrossRef]
171. Ghahramani, M.; Javidan, R.; Shojafar, M. A Secure Biometric-Based Authentication Protocol for Global Mobility Networks in
Smart Cities. J. Supercomput. 2020, 76, 8729–8755. [CrossRef]
172. Gaur, M.S.; Kumar, S.; Gaur, N.K.; Sharma, P.S. Persuasive Factors and Weakness for Security Vulnerabilities in BIG IOT Data in
Healthcare Solution. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2021, 2007, 12046. [CrossRef]
173. Gope, P.; Amin, R.; Hafizul Islam, S.K.; Kumar, N.; Bhalla, V.K. Lightweight and Privacy-Preserving RFID Authentication Scheme
for Distributed IoT Infrastructure with Secure Localization Services for Smart City Environment. Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst. 2018,
83, 629–637. [CrossRef]
174. Islam, S.K.H.; Obaidat, M.S.; Vijayakumar, P.; Abdulhay, E.; Li, F.; Reddy, M.K.C. A Robust and Efficient Password-Based
Conditional Privacy Preserving Authentication and Group-Key Agreement Protocol for VANETs. Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst.
2018, 84, 216–227. [CrossRef]
Future Internet 2023, 15, 393 29 of 36

175. Hassan, A.M.; Awad, A.I. Urban Transition in the Era of the Internet of Things: Social Implications and Privacy Challenges. IEEE
Access 2018, 6, 36428–36440. [CrossRef]
176. Kumar, A.; Abhishek, K.; Liu, X.; Haldorai, A. An Efficient Privacy-Preserving ID Centric Authentication in IoT Based Cloud
Servers for Sustainable Smart Cities. Wirel. Pers. Commun. 2021, 117, 3229–3253. [CrossRef]
177. Lee, J.; Kim, G.; Das, A.K.; Park, Y. Secure and Efficient Honey List-Based Authentication Protocol for Vehicular Ad Hoc Networks.
IEEE Trans. Netw. Sci. Eng. 2021, 8, 2412–2425. [CrossRef]
178. Li, X.; Liu, T.; Obaidat, M.S.; Wu, F.; Vijayakumar, P.; Kumar, N. A Lightweight Privacy-Preserving Authentication Protocol for
VANETs. IEEE Syst. J. 2020, 14, 3547–3557. [CrossRef]
179. Li, X.; Sangaiah, A.K.; Kumari, S.; Wu, F.; Shen, J.; Khan, M.K. An Efficient Authentication and Key Agreement Scheme with User
Anonymity for Roaming Service in Smart City. Pers. Ubiquitous Comput. 2017, 21, 791–805. [CrossRef]
180. Liu, W.; Wang, X.; Peng, W. Secure Remote Multi-Factor Authentication Scheme Based on Chaotic Map Zero-Knowledge Proof
for Crowdsourcing Internet of Things. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 8754–8767. [CrossRef]
181. Malik, V.; Singh, S. Security Risk Management in IoT Environment. J. Discret. Math. Sci. Cryptogr. 2019, 22, 697–709. [CrossRef]
182. Khattak, H.A.; Farman, H.; Jan, B.; Din, I.U. Toward Integrating Vehicular Clouds with IoT for Smart City Services. IEEE Netw.
2019, 33, 65–71. [CrossRef]
183. Rauf, A.; Wang, Z.; Sajid, H.; Ali Tahir, M. Secure Route-Obfuscation Mechanism with Information-Theoretic Security for Internet
of Things. Sensors 2020, 20, 4221. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
184. Qureshi, K.N.; Qayyum, S.; Ul Islam, M.N.; Jeon, G. A Secure Data Parallel Processing Based Embedded System for Internet
of Things Computer Vision Using Field Programmable Gate Array Devices. Int. J. Circuit Theory Appl. 2021, 49, 1450–1469.
[CrossRef]
185. Salameh, H.B.; Almajali, S.; Ayyash, M.; Elgala, H. Security-Aware Channel Assignment in IoT-Based Cognitive Radio Networks
for Time-Critical Applications. In Proceedings of the 2017 Fourth International Conference on Software Defined Systems (SDS),
Valencia, Spain, 8–11 May 2017; IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2017; pp. 43–47.
186. Reddy, A.G.; Suresh, D.; Phaneendra, K.; Shin, J.S.; Odelu, V. Provably Secure Pseudo-Identity Based Device Authentication for
Smart Cities Environment. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2018, 41, 878–885. [CrossRef]
187. Liu, X.; Wang, J.; Yang, Y.; Cao, Z.; Xiong, G.; Xia, W. Inferring Behaviors via Encrypted Video Surveillance Traffic by Machine
Learning. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE 21st International Conference on High Performance Computing and Communi-
cations, IEEE 17th International Conference on Smart City, IEEE 5th International Conference on Data Science and Systems
(HPCC/SmartCity/DSS), Zhangjiajie, China, 10–12 August 2019; IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2019; pp. 273–280.
188. Memos, V.A.; Psannis, K.E.; Ishibashi, Y.; Kim, B.-G.; Gupta, B.B. An Efficient Algorithm for Media-Based Surveillance System
(EAMSuS) in IoT Smart City Framework. Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst. 2018, 83, 619–628. [CrossRef]
189. Mohanta, B.K.; Jena, D.; Satapathy, U.; Ramasubbareddy, S. Collaborative Decision Making System in Intelligent Transportation
System Using Distributed Blockchain Technology. Int. J. Veh. Inf. Commun. Syst. 2022, 7, 64. [CrossRef]
190. Meshram, C.; Ibrahim, R.W.; Deng, L.; Shende, S.W.; Meshram, S.G.; Barve, S.K. A Robust Smart Card and Remote User
Password-Based Authentication Protocol Using Extended Chaotic Maps under Smart Cities Environment. Soft Comput. 2021, 25,
10037–10051. [CrossRef]
191. Zakaria, H.; Abu Bakar, N.A.; Hassan, N.H.; Yaacob, S. IoT Security Risk Management Model for Secured Practice in Healthcare
Environment. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2019, 161, 1241–1248. [CrossRef]
192. Pangestuti, D.D.; Susanto, T.D.; Trisunarno, L. Measuring Smart Cities: Identification of Smart Society Indicators in Indonesia.
In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management (IEEM), Kuala
Lumpur, Malaysia, 12–16 December 2021; IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2021; pp. 1245–1249.
193. Nikooghadam, M.; Amintoosi, H.; Islam, S.K.H.; Moghadam, M.F. A Provably Secure and Lightweight Authentication Scheme
for Internet of Drones for Smart City Surveillance. J. Syst. Archit. 2021, 115, 101955. [CrossRef]
194. Tanveer, M.; Khan, A.U.; Shah, H.; Chaudhry, S.A.; Naushad, A. PASKE-IoD: Privacy-Protecting Authenticated Key Establishment
for Internet of Drones. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 145683–145698. [CrossRef]
195. Tamizharasi, G.S.; Sultanah, H.P.; Balamurugan, B. IoT-Based E-Health System Security: A Vision Archictecture Elements and
Future Directions. In Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference of Electronics, Communication and Aerospace Technology
(ICECA), Coimbatore, India, 20–22 April 2017; IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2017; pp. 655–661.
196. Verde, L.; De Pietro, G.; Alrashoud, M.; Ghoneim, A.; Al-Mutib, K.N.; Sannino, G. Leveraging Artificial Intelligence to Improve
Voice Disorder Identification Through the Use of a Reliable Mobile App. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 124048–124054. [CrossRef]
197. Wazid, M.; Das, A.K.; Bhat, K.V.; Vasilakos, A.V. LAM-CIoT: Lightweight Authentication Mechanism in Cloud-Based IoT
Environment. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 2020, 150, 102496. [CrossRef]
198. Umar, M.; Islam, S.K.H.; Mahmood, K.; Ahmed, S.; Ghaffar, Z.; Saleem, M.A. Provable Secure Identity-Based Anonymous
and Privacy-Preserving Inter-Vehicular Authentication Protocol for VANETS Using PUF. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2021, 70,
12158–12167. [CrossRef]
199. Wu, F.; Li, X.; Xu, L.; Kumari, S.; Lin, D.; Rodrigues, J.J.P.C. An Anonymous and Identity-Trackable Data Transmission Scheme for
Smart Grid under Smart City Notion. Ann. Telecommun. 2020, 75, 307–317. [CrossRef]
200. Bagga, P.; Sutrala, A.K.; Das, A.K.; Vijayakumar, P. Blockchain-Based Batch Authentication Protocol for Internet of Vehicles. J. Syst.
Archit. 2021, 113, 101877. [CrossRef]
Future Internet 2023, 15, 393 30 of 36

201. Vijayakumar, P.; Azees, M.; Chang, V.; Deborah, J.; Balusamy, B. Computationally Efficient Privacy Preserving Authentication and
Key Distribution Techniques for Vehicular Ad Hoc Networks. Clust. Comput. 2017, 20, 2439–2450. [CrossRef]
202. Wu, F.; Li, X.; Xu, L.; Kumari, S. A Privacy-Preserving Scheme with Identity Traceable Property for Smart Grid. Comput. Commun.
2020, 157, 38–44. [CrossRef]
203. Sutrala, A.K.; Obaidat, M.S.; Saha, S.; Das, A.K.; Alazab, M.; Park, Y. Authenticated Key Agreement Scheme With User Anonymity
and Untraceability for 5G-Enabled Softwarized Industrial Cyber-Physical Systems. IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst. 2022, 23,
2316–2330. [CrossRef]
204. Sharma, G.; Kalra, S. Advanced Multi-Factor User Authentication Scheme for E-Governance Applications in Smart Cities. Int. J.
Comput. Appl. 2019, 41, 312–327. [CrossRef]
205. Simic, M.; Stankovic, M.; Orlic, V.D. Physical Layer Communication Security in Smart Cities: Challenges and Threats Identification.
In Proceedings of the 2021 15th International Conference on Advanced Technologies, Systems and Services in Telecommunications
(TELSIKS), Nis, Serbia, 20–22 October 2021; IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2021; pp. 209–218.
206. Hamalainen, M.; Tyrvainen, P. A Framework for IoT Service Experiment Platforms in Smart-City Environments. In Proceedings
of the 2016 IEEE International Smart Cities Conference (ISC2), Trento, Italy, 12–15 September 2016; IEEE: New York, NY, USA,
2016; pp. 1–8.
207. Taher, B.H.; Liu, H.; Abedi, F.; Lu, H.; Yassin, A.A.; Mohammed, A.J. A Secure and Lightweight Three-Factor Remote User
Authentication Protocol for Future IoT Applications. J. Sens. 2021, 2021, 8871204. [CrossRef]
208. Sylla, T.; Chalouf, M.A.; Krief, F.; Samaké, K. SETUCOM: Secure and Trustworthy Context Management for Context-Aware
Security and Privacy in the Internet of Things. Secur. Commun. Netw. 2021, 2021, 6632747. [CrossRef]
209. Xie, Q.; Hwang, L. Security Enhancement of an Anonymous Roaming Authentication Scheme with Two-Factor Security in Smart
City. Neurocomputing 2019, 347, 131–138. [CrossRef]
210. Wu, H.; Li, L.; Liu, Y.; Wu, X. Vehicle-Based Secure Location Clustering for IoT-Equipped Building and Facility Management in
Smart City. Build. Environ. 2022, 214, 108937. [CrossRef]
211. Sanober, S.; Aldawsari, M.; Karimovna, A.D.; Ofori, I. Blockchain Integrated with Principal Component Analysis: A Solution to
Smart Security against Cyber-Attacks. Secur. Commun. Netw. 2022, 2022, 8649060. [CrossRef]
212. Zhang, J.; Zong, Y.; Yang, C.; Miao, Y.; Guo, J. LBOA: Location-Based Secure Outsourced Aggregation in IoT. IEEE Access 2019, 7,
43869–43883. [CrossRef]
213. Zhang, H.; Babar, M.; Tariq, M.U.; Jan, M.A.; Menon, V.G.; Li, X. SafeCity: Toward Safe and Secured Data Management Design for
IoT-Enabled Smart City Planning. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 145256–145267. [CrossRef]
214. Wei, C. Copyright Protection and Data Reliability of AI-Written Literary Creations in Smart City. Secur. Commun. Netw. 2022,
2022, 6498468. [CrossRef]
215. Banerjee, S.; Odelu, V.; Das, A.K.; Srinivas, J.; Kumar, N.; Chattopadhyay, S.; Choo, K.-K.R. A Provably Secure and Lightweight
Anonymous User Authenticated Session Key Exchange Scheme for Internet of Things Deployment. IEEE Internet Things J. 2019, 6,
8739–8752. [CrossRef]
216. Haseeb, K.; Ud Din, I.; Almogren, A.; Ahmed, I.; Guizani, M. Intelligent and Secure Edge-Enabled Computing Model for
Sustainable Cities Using Green Internet of Things. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2021, 68, 102779. [CrossRef]
217. Lever, K.E.; Kifayat, K. Identifying and Mitigating Security Risks for Secure and Robust NGI Networks. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2020,
59, 102098. [CrossRef]
218. Mishra, A.K.; Puthal, D.; Tripathy, A.K. GraphCrypto: Next Generation Data Security Approach towards Sustainable Smart City
Building. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2021, 72, 103056. [CrossRef]
219. Wang, Z.; Jiang, D.; Wang, F.; Lv, Z.; Nowak, R. A Polymorphic Heterogeneous Security Architecture for Edge-Enabled Smart
Grids. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2021, 67, 102661. [CrossRef]
220. Duraisamy, A.; Subramaniam, M. Attack Detection on IoT Based Smart Cities Using IDS Based MANFIS Classifier and Secure
Data Transmission Using IRSA Encryption. Wirel. Pers. Commun. 2021, 119, 1913–1934. [CrossRef]
221. Deebak, B.D.; AL-Turjman, F. A Robust and Distributed Architecture for 5G-Enabled Networks in the Smart Blockchain Era.
Comput. Commun. 2022, 181, 293–308. [CrossRef]
222. Dwivedi, S.K.; Amin, R.; Vollala, S.; Chaudhry, R. Blockchain-Based Secured Event-Information Sharing Protocol in Internet of
Vehicles for Smart Cities. Comput. Electr. Eng. 2020, 86, 106719. [CrossRef]
223. Ferreira, C.M.S.; Garrocho, C.T.B.; Oliveira, R.A.R.; Silva, J.S.; Cavalcanti, C.F.M.D.C. IoT Registration and Authentication in
Smart City Applications with Blockchain. Sensors 2021, 21, 1323. [CrossRef]
224. Guan, Z.; Si, G.; Zhang, X.; Wu, L.; Guizani, N.; Du, X.; Ma, Y. Privacy-Preserving and Efficient Aggregation Based on Blockchain
for Power Grid Communications in Smart Communities. IEEE Commun. Mag. 2018, 56, 82–88. [CrossRef]
225. Esposito, C.; Ficco, M.; Gupta, B.B. Blockchain-Based Authentication and Authorization for Smart City Applications. Inf. Process.
Manag. 2021, 58, 102468. [CrossRef]
226. Kumari, A.; Tanwar, S. Secure Data Analytics for Smart Grid Systems in a Sustainable Smart City: Challenges, Solutions, and
Future Directions. Sustain. Comput. Inform. Syst. 2020, 28, 100427. [CrossRef]
227. Kuppa, K.; Dayal, A.; Gupta, S.; Dua, A.; Chaudhary, P.; Rathore, S. ConvXSS: A Deep Learning-Based Smart ICT Framework
against Code Injection Attacks for HTML5 Web Applications in Sustainable Smart City Infrastructure. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2022,
80, 103765. [CrossRef]
Future Internet 2023, 15, 393 31 of 36

228. Kumari, A.; Gupta, R.; Tanwar, S. Amalgamation of Blockchain and IoT for Smart Cities Underlying 6G Communication:
A Comprehensive Review. Comput. Commun. 2021, 172, 102–118. [CrossRef]
229. Ma, C.; Zeng, S.; Li, D. A New Algorithm for Backlight Image Enhancement. In Proceedings of the 2020 International Conference
on Intelligent Transportation, Big Data & Smart City (ICITBS), Vientiane, Laos, 11–12 January 2020; IEEE: New York, NY, USA,
2020; pp. 840–844.
230. Ma, R.; Lam, P.T.I.; Leung, C.K. Reliability Analysis of a Smart Parking Information System: The Case of Hong Kong. Wirel. Pers.
Commun. 2021, 119, 1681–1701. [CrossRef]
231. Gohari, S.; Ahlers, D.F.; Nielsen, B.; Junker, E. The Governance Approach of Smart City Initiatives. Evidence from Trondheim,
Bergen, and Bodø. Infrastructures 2020, 5, 31. [CrossRef]
232. Huang, C.-Y.; Chiang, Y.-H.; Tsai, F. An Ontology Integrating the Open Standards of City Models and Internet of Things for
Smart-City Applications. IEEE Internet Things J. 2022, 9, 20444–20457. [CrossRef]
233. Huh, J.-H.; Kim, S.-K. The Blockchain Consensus Algorithm for Viable Management of New and Renewable Energies.
Sustainability 2019, 11, 3184. [CrossRef]
234. Jamil, F.; Cheikhrouhou, O.; Jamil, H.; Koubaa, A.; Derhab, A.; Ferrag, M.A. PetroBlock: A Blockchain-Based Payment Mechanism
for Fueling Smart Vehicles. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 3055. [CrossRef]
235. Kamal, R.; Hemdan, E.E.; El-Fishway, N. Forensics Chain for Evidence Preservation System: An Evidence Preservation Forensics
Framework for Internet of Things-based Smart City Security Using Blockchain. Concurr. Comput. Pract. Exp. 2022, 34, e7062.
[CrossRef]
236. Khan, Z.; Abbasi, A.G.; Pervez, Z. Blockchain and Edge Computing–Based Architecture for Participatory Smart City Applications.
Concurr. Comput. Pract. Exp. 2020, 32, e5566. [CrossRef]
237. Jan, A.; Parah, S.A.; Malik, B.A. IEFHAC: Image Encryption Framework Based on Hessenberg Transform and Chaotic Theory for
Smart Health. Multimed. Tools Appl. 2022, 81, 18829–18853. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
238. Roldán-Gómez, J.J.; Garcia-Aunon, P.; Mazariegos, P.; Barrientos, A. SwarmCity Project: Monitoring Traffic, Pedestrians, Climate,
and Pollution with an Aerial Robotic Swarm. Pers. Ubiquitous Comput. 2022, 26, 1151–1167. [CrossRef]
239. Salkuti, S.R. Smart Cities: Understanding Policies, Standards, Applications and Case Studies. Int. J. Electr. Comput. Eng. 2021,
11, 3137. [CrossRef]
240. Sharma, P.K.; Ryu, J.H.; Park, K.Y.; Park, J.H.; Park, J.H. Li-Fi Based on Security Cloud Framework for Future IT Environment.
Hum. Centric Comput. Inf. Sci. 2018, 8, 23. [CrossRef]
241. Mukherjee, A.; Sahoo, S.; Halder, R. A Blockchain-Based Integrated and Interconnected Hybrid Platform for Smart City Ecosystem.
Peer Peer Netw. Appl. 2022, 15, 2116–2141. [CrossRef]
242. Singh, S.K.; Rathore, S.; Park, J.H. Block IoT Intelligence: A Blockchain-Enabled Intelligent IoT Architecture with Artificial
Intelligence. Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst. 2020, 110, 721–743. [CrossRef]
243. Otuoze, A.O.; Mustafa, M.W.; Mohammed, O.O.; Saeed, M.S.; Surajudeen-Bakinde, N.T.; Salisu, S. Electricity Theft Detection by
Sources of Threats for Smart City Planning. IET Smart Cities 2019, 1, 52–60. [CrossRef]
244. Omar, A.; Al Jamil, A.K.; Khandakar, A.; Uzzal, A.R.; Bosri, R.; Mansoor, N.; Rahman, M.S. A Transparent and Privacy-Preserving
Healthcare Platform With Novel Smart Contract for Smart Cities. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 90738–90749. [CrossRef]
245. Joshi, S.; Dubey, D.M.; Kumar Mishra, D.D. An Approach Using Trust Management with Next-Generation IoT Networks for
Healthcare, Agriculture and Sustainable Development Goals. J. Univ. Shanghai Sci. Technol. 2021, 23, 87. [CrossRef]
246. Pujol, F.A.; Mora, H.; Pertegal, M.L. A Soft Computing Approach to Violence Detection in Social Media for Smart Cities. Soft
Comput. 2020, 24, 11007–11017. [CrossRef]
247. Rehman, A.; Haseeb, K.; Saba, T.; Kolivand, H. M-SMDM: A Model of Security Measures Using Green Internet of Things with
Cloud Integrated Data Management for Smart Cities. Environ. Technol. Innov. 2021, 24, 101802. [CrossRef]
248. Pereira, J.; Batista, T.; Cavalcante, E.; Souza, A.; Lopes, F.; Cacho, N. A Platform for Integrating Heterogeneous Data and
Developing Smart City Applications. Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst. 2022, 128, 552–566. [CrossRef]
249. Alonso, Á.; Fernández, F.; Marco, L.; Salvachúa, J. IAACaaS: IoT Application-Scoped Access Control as a Service. Futur. Internet
2017, 9, 64. [CrossRef]
250. Yuvaraj, N.; Praghash, K.; Raja, R.A.; Karthikeyan, T. An Investigation of Garbage Disposal Electric Vehicles (GDEVs) Integrated
with Deep Neural Networking (DNN) and Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) in Smart City Management System (SCMS).
Wirel. Pers. Commun. 2022, 123, 1733–1752. [CrossRef]
251. Wang, D.; Bai, B.; Lei, K.; Zhao, W.; Yang, Y.; Han, Z. Enhancing Information Security via Physical Layer Approaches in
Heterogeneous IoT With Multiple Access Mobile Edge Computing in Smart City. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 54508–54521. [CrossRef]
252. Xie, J.; Tang, H.; Huang, T.; Yu, F.R.; Xie, R.; Liu, J.; Liu, Y. A Survey of Blockchain Technology Applied to Smart Cities: Research
Issues and Challenges. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 2019, 21, 2794–2830. [CrossRef]
253. Xu, Z.; Luo, M.; Vijayakumar, P.; Peng, C.; Wang, L. Efficient Certificateless Designated Verifier Proxy Signature Scheme Using
UAV Network for Sustainable Smart City. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2022, 80, 103771. [CrossRef]
254. Xu, R.; Chen, Y. Fed-DDM: A Federated Ledgers Based Framework for Hierarchical Decentralized Data Marketplaces. In Proceed-
ings of the 2021 International Conference on Computer Communications and Networks (ICCCN), Athens, Greece, 19–22 July
2021; IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2021; pp. 1–8.
Future Internet 2023, 15, 393 32 of 36

255. Yazdinejad, A.; Srivastava, G.; Parizi, R.M.; Dehghantanha, A.; Choo, K.-K.R.; Aledhari, M. Decentralized Authentication of
Distributed Patients in Hospital Networks Using Blockchain. IEEE J. Biomed. Heal. Inform. 2020, 24, 2146–2156. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
256. Yahaya, A.S.; Javaid, N.; Javed, M.U.; Shafiq, M.; Khan, W.Z.; Aalsalem, M.Y. Blockchain-Based Energy Trading and Load
Balancing Using Contract Theory and Reputation in a Smart Community. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 222168–222186. [CrossRef]
257. Al-Aswad, H.; El-Medany, W.M.; Balakrishna, C.; Ababneh, N.; Curran, K. BZKP: Blockchain-Based Zero-Knowledge Proof
Model for Enhancing Healthcare Security in Bahrain IoT Smart Cities and COVID-19 Risk Mitigation. Arab J. Basic Appl. Sci. 2021,
28, 154–171. [CrossRef]
258. Al-Muhtadi, J.; Saleem, K.; Al-Rabiaah, S.; Imran, M.; Gawanmeh, A.; Rodrigues, J.J.P.C. A Lightweight Cyber Security Framework
with Context-Awareness for Pervasive Computing Environments. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2021, 66, 102610. [CrossRef]
259. Alasbali, N.; Azzuhri, S.R.B.; Salleh, R.B.; Kiah, M.L.M.; Shariffuddin, A.A.A.S.A.; Kamel, N.M.I.B.N.M.; Ismail, L. Rules of Smart
IoT Networks within Smart Cities towards Blockchain Standardization. Mob. Inf. Syst. 2022, 2022, 9109300. [CrossRef]
260. Alasbali, N.; Azzuhri, S.R.B.; Salleh, R. Stakeholders’ Viewpoints toward Blockchain Integration within IoT-Based Smart Cities.
J. Sens. 2021, 2021, 4680021. [CrossRef]
261. Alharthi, A.; Ni, Q.; Jiang, R. A Privacy-Preservation Framework Based on Biometrics Blockchain (BBC) to Prevent Attacks in
VANET. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 87299–87309. [CrossRef]
262. Abishu, H.N.; Seid, A.M.; Yacob, Y.H.; Ayall, T.; Sun, G.; Liu, G. Consensus Mechanism for Blockchain-Enabled Vehicle-to-Vehicle
Energy Trading in the Internet of Electric Vehicles. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2022, 71, 946–960. [CrossRef]
263. Abbas, K.; Tawalbeh, L.A.; Rafiq, A.; Muthanna, A.; Elgendy, I.A.; Abd El-Latif, A.A. Convergence of Blockchain and IoT for
Secure Transportation Systems in Smart Cities. Secur. Commun. Netw. 2021, 2021, 5597679. [CrossRef]
264. Abou-Nassar, E.M.; Iliyasu, A.M.; El-Kafrawy, P.M.; Song, O.-Y.; Bashir, A.K.; El-Latif, A.A.A. DITrust Chain: Towards Blockchain-
Based Trust Models for Sustainable Healthcare IoT Systems. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 111223–111238. [CrossRef]
265. Chaudhary, R.; Jindal, A.; Aujla, G.S.; Aggarwal, S.; Kumar, N.; Choo, K.-K.R. BEST: Blockchain-Based Secure Energy Trading in
SDN-Enabled Intelligent Transportation System. Comput. Secur. 2019, 85, 288–299. [CrossRef]
266. Cha, J.; Singh, S.K.; Kim, T.W.; Park, J.H. Blockchain-Empowered Cloud Architecture Based on Secret Sharing for Smart City.
J. Inf. Secur. Appl. 2021, 57, 102686. [CrossRef]
267. Botello, J.V.; Mesa, A.P.; Rodríguez, F.A.; Díaz-López, D.; Nespoli, P.; Mármol, F.G. BlockSIEM: Protecting Smart City Services
through a Blockchain-Based and Distributed SIEM. Sensors 2020, 20, 4636. [CrossRef]
268. Dar, M.A.; Askar, A.; Bhat, S.A. Blockchain Based Secure Data Exchange between Cloud Networks and Smart Hand-Held
Devices for Use in Smart Cities. In Proceedings of the 2022 International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Information and
Communication (ICAIIC), Jeju Island, Republic of Korea, 21–24 February 2022; IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2022; pp. 457–460.
269. Alsaffar, N.; Medany, W.M.; El Ali, H. Low Complexity Cybersecurity Architecture for the Development of ITS in Smart Cities.
Int. J. Electron. Secur. Digit. Forensics 2021, 13, 571. [CrossRef]
270. Alsammak, I.L.H.; Alomari, M.F.; Shakir Nasir, I.; Itwee, W.H. A Model for Blockchain-Based Privacy-Preserving for Big Data
Users on the Internet of Thing. Indones. J. Electr. Eng. Comput. Sci. 2022, 26, 974. [CrossRef]
271. Babiker Mohamed, M.; Matthew Alofe, O.; Ajmal Azad, M.; Singh Lallie, H.; Fatema, K.; Sharif, T. A Comprehensive Survey on
Secure Software-defined Network for the Internet of Things. Trans. Emerg. Telecommun. Technol. 2022, 33, e4391. [CrossRef]
272. Han, D.; Zhu, Y.; Li, D.; Liang, W.; Souri, A.; Li, K.-C. A Blockchain-Based Auditable Access Control System for Private Data in
Service-Centric IoT Environments. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 2022, 18, 3530–3540. [CrossRef]
273. Moustaka, V.; Theodosiou, Z.; Vakali, A.; Kounoudes, A.; Anthopoulos, L.G. Enhancing Social Networking in Smart Cities:
Privacy and Security Borderlines. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2019, 142, 285–300. [CrossRef]
274. Mohanty, S.P.; Kougianos, E.; Guturu, P. SBPG: Secure Better Portable Graphics for Trustworthy Media Communications in the
IoT. IEEE Access 2018, 6, 5939–5953. [CrossRef]
275. Mugarza, I.; Amurrio, A.; Azketa, E.; Jacob, E. Dynamic Software Updates to Enhance Security and Privacy in High Availability
Energy Management Applications in Smart Cities. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 42269–42279. [CrossRef]
276. Safa, N.S.; Mitchell, F.; Maple, C.; Azad, M.A.; Dabbagh, M. Privacy Enhancing Technologies ( <scp>PETs</Scp> ) for Connected
Vehicles in Smart Cities. Trans. Emerg. Telecommun. Technol. 2020, 49, 715–728. [CrossRef]
277. Yang, W.; Lam, P.T.I. Evaluating Non-Market Costs of ICT Involving Data Transmission in Smart Cities. Build. Res. Inf. 2021, 49,
715–728. [CrossRef]
278. Wang, Z.; Xu, J.; He, X.; Wang, Y. Analysis of Spatiotemporal Influence Patterns of Toxic Gas Monitoring Concentrations in an
Urban Drainage Network Based on IoT and GIS. Pattern Recognit. Lett. 2020, 138, 237–246. [CrossRef]
279. Wu, F.; Xu, T.; Guo, J.; Huang, B.; Xu, C.; Wang, J.; Li, X. Deep Siamese Cross-Residual Learning for Robust Visual Tracking. IEEE
Internet Things J. 2021, 8, 15216–15227. [CrossRef]
280. Vogiatzaki, M.; Zerefos, S.; Hoque Tania, M. Enhancing City Sustainability through Smart Technologies: A Framework for
Automatic Pre-Emptive Action to Promote Safety and Security Using Lighting and ICT-Based Surveillance. Sustainability 2020,
12, 6142. [CrossRef]
281. Zhang, Y.J.; Alazab, M.; Muthu, B. Machine Learning-Based Holistic Privacy Decentralized Framework for Big Data Security and
Privacy in Smart City. Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 2021, 48, 4141. [CrossRef]
Future Internet 2023, 15, 393 33 of 36

282. Zhang, M.; Wang, X.; Sathishkumar, V.E.; Sivakumar, V. Machine Learning Techniques Based on Security Management in Smart
Cities Using Robots. Work 2021, 68, 891–902. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
283. Lv, Y.; Su, D. Blockchain Security Technology Based on the Asynchronous Transmission Mode of IoT Technology in Smart Cities.
Wirel. Pers. Commun. 2021, 126, 1965–1980. [CrossRef]
284. Chaturvedi, K.; Matheus, A.; Nguyen, S.H.; Kolbe, T.H. Securing Spatial Data Infrastructures for Distributed Smart City
Applications and Services. Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst. 2019, 101, 723–736. [CrossRef]
285. Al-Turjman, F.; Zahmatkesh, H.; Shahroze, R. An Overview of Security and Privacy in Smart Cities’ IoT Communications. Trans.
Emerg. Telecommun. Technol. 2022, 33, e3677. [CrossRef]
286. Dahmane, W.M.; Ouchani, S.; Bouarfa, H. Towards a Reliable Smart City through Formal Verification and Network Analysis.
Comput. Commun. 2021, 180, 171–187. [CrossRef]
287. Miao, Y.; Ma, J.; Jiang, Q.; Li, X.; Sangaiah, A.K. Verifiable Keyword Search over Encrypted Cloud Data in Smart City. Comput.
Electr. Eng. 2018, 65, 90–101. [CrossRef]
288. Maltezos, E.; Lioupis, P.; Dadoukis, A.; Karagiannidis, L.; Ouzounoglou, E.; Krommyda, M.; Amditis, A.A. Video Analytics
System for Person Detection Combined with Edge Computing. Computation 2022, 10, 35. [CrossRef]
289. Miraftabzadeh, S.A.; Rad, P.; Choo, K.-K.R.; Jamshidi, M. A Privacy-Aware Architecture at the Edge for Autonomous Real-Time
Identity Reidentification in Crowds. IEEE Internet Things J. 2018, 5, 2936–2946. [CrossRef]
290. Gopi, R.; Muthusamy, P.; Suresh, P.G.; Santhosh Kumar, C.G.V.; Pustokhina, I.A.; Pustokhin, D.; Shankar, K. Optimal Confidential
Mechanisms in Smart City Healthcare. Comput. Mater. Contin. 2022, 70, 4883–4896. [CrossRef]
291. Li, X.; Niu, J.; Kumari, S.; Wu, F.; Choo, K.-K.R. A Robust Biometrics Based Three-Factor Authentication Scheme for Global
Mobility Networks in Smart City. Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst. 2018, 83, 607–618. [CrossRef]
292. Sengan, S.; Subramaniyaswamy, V.; Nair, S.K.; Indragandhi, V.; Manikandan, J.; Ravi, L. Enhancing Cyber–Physical Systems with
Hybrid Smart City Cyber Security Architecture for Secure Public Data-Smart Network. Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst. 2020, 112,
724–737. [CrossRef]
293. Tanveer, M.; Khan, A.U.; Alkhayyat, A.; Chaudhry, S.A.; Zikria, Y.B.; Kim, S.W. REAS-TMIS: Resource-Efficient Authentication
Scheme for Telecare Medical Information System. IEEE Access 2022, 10, 23008–23021. [CrossRef]
294. Xu, C.; Lin, H.; Wu, Y.; Guo, X.; Lin, W. An SDNFV-Based DDoS Defense Technology for Smart Cities. IEEE Access 2019, 7,
137856–137874. [CrossRef]
295. Makkar, A. SecureEngine: Spammer Classification in Cyber Defence for Leveraging Green Computing in Sustainable City. Sustain.
Cities Soc. 2022, 79, 103658. [CrossRef]
296. Rahouti, M.; Xiong, K.; Xin, Y. Secure Software-Defined Networking Communication Systems for Smart Cities: Current Status,
Challenges, and Trends. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 12083–12113. [CrossRef]
297. Sharma, R.; Arya, R. A Secure Authentication Technique for Connecting Different IoT Devices in the Smart City Infrastructure.
Clust. Comput. 2022, 25, 2333–2349. [CrossRef]
298. Shen, J.; Liu, D.; Sun, X.; Wei, F.; Xiang, Y. Efficient Cloud-Aided Verifiable Secret Sharing Scheme with Batch Verification for
Smart Cities. Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst. 2020, 109, 450–456. [CrossRef]
299. Li, D.; Deng, L.; Lee, M.; Wang, H. IoT Data Feature Extraction and Intrusion Detection System for Smart Cities Based on Deep
Migration Learning. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2019, 49, 533–545. [CrossRef]
300. Li, D.; Deng, L.; Liu, W.; Su, Q. Improving Communication Precision of IoT through Behavior-Based Learning in Smart City
Environment. Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst. 2020, 108, 512–520. [CrossRef]
301. Lim, Y.; Edelenbos, J.; Gianoli, A. Smart Energy Transition: An Evaluation of Cities in South Korea. Informatics 2019, 6, 50.
[CrossRef]
302. Subakti, P.; Putra, Y.H. Integration of TOGAF 9.1 ADM in Enterprise Architecture Smart City Design in the Tourism Domain with
ISO 27001. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2020, 879, 12029. [CrossRef]
303. Bawany, N.Z.; Shamsi, J.A. SEAL: SDN Based Secure and Agile Framework for Protecting Smart City Applications from DDoS
Attacks. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 2019, 145, 102381. [CrossRef]
304. Basmi, W.; Boulmakoul, A.; Karim, L.; Lbath, A. Modern Approach to Design a Distributed and Scalable Platform Architecture
for Smart Cities Complex Events Data Collection. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2020, 170, 43–50. [CrossRef]
305. Chatterjee, S.; Kar, A.K. Effects of Successful Adoption of Information Technology Enabled Services in Proposed Smart Cities of
India. J. Sci. Technol. Policy Manag. 2018, 9, 189–209. [CrossRef]
306. Chmielarz, W.; Zborowski, M.; Fandrejewska, A.; Atasever, M. The Contribution of Socio-Cultural Aspects of Smartphone
Applications to Smart City Creation. Poland–Turkey Comparison. Energies 2021, 14, 2821. [CrossRef]
307. Hassan, S.-U.; Shabbir, M.; Iqbal, S.; Said, A.; Kamiran, F.; Nawaz, R.; Saif, U. Leveraging Deep Learning and SNA Approaches
for Smart City Policing in the Developing World. Int. J. Inf. Manage. 2021, 56, 102045. [CrossRef]
308. Colla, M.; Santos, G.D. Public Safety Decision-Making in the Context of Smart and Sustainable Cities. Procedia Manuf. 2019, 39,
1937–1945. [CrossRef]
309. Manfreda, A.; Ljubi, K.; Groznik, A. Autonomous Vehicles in the Smart City Era: An Empirical Study of Adoption Factors
Important for Millennials. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2021, 58, 102050. [CrossRef]
Future Internet 2023, 15, 393 34 of 36

310. Sinaeepourfard, A.; Garcia, J.; Masip-Bruin, X.; Marin-Tordera, E. Data Preservation through Fog-to-Cloud (F2C) Data Man-
agement in Smart Cities. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE 2nd International Conference on Fog and Edge Computing (ICFEC),
Washington, DC, USA, 1–3 May 2018; IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2018; pp. 1–9.
311. Yandri, E.; Hendroko Setyobudi, R.; Susanto, H.; Abdullah, K.; Adhi Nugroho, Y.; Krido Wahono, S.; Wijayanto, F.; Nurdiansyah,
Y. Conceptualizing Indonesia’s ICT-Based Energy Security Tracking System with Detailed Indicators from Smart City Extension.
E3S Web Conf. 2020, 188, 7. [CrossRef]
312. Gandhi, B.M.K. A Prototype for IoT Based Car Parking Management System for Smart Cities. Indian J. Sci. Technol. 2016, 9, 1–6.
[CrossRef]
313. Patil, B. Novel NDN Based Routing Protocol for IoT Empowered Savvy City Applications. J. Adv. Res. Dyn. Control Syst. 2020, 12,
235–243. [CrossRef]
314. Rodriguez-Hernandez, M.A.; Gomez-Sacristan, A.; Gomez-Cuadrado, D. SimulCity: Planning Communications in Smart Cities.
IEEE Access 2019, 7, 46870–46884. [CrossRef]
315. Schleicher, J.M.; Vögler, M.; Inzinger, C.; Dustdar, S. Modeling and Management of Usage-Aware Distributed Datasets for Global
Smart City Application Ecosystems. PeerJ Comput. Sci. 2017, 3, e115. [CrossRef]
316. Yang, Y.-S.; Lee, S.-H.; Chen, G.-S.; Yang, C.-S.; Huang, Y.-M.; Hou, T.-W. An Implementation of High Efficient Smart Street Light
Management System for Smart City. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 38568–38585. [CrossRef]
317. Denker, A. Protection of Privacy and Personal Data in the Big Data Environment of Smart Cities. Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote
Sens. Spat. Inf. Sci. 2021, 46, 181–186. [CrossRef]
318. Huang, Z.; Peng, Y.; Li, J.; Tong, F.; Zhu, K.; Peng, L. Secrecy Enhancing of SSK Systems for IoT Applications in Smart Cities. IEEE
Internet Things J. 2021, 8, 6385–6392. [CrossRef]
319. Guo, Y.; Zou, K.; Liu, C.; Sun, Y. Study on the Evolutionary Game of Information Security Supervision in Smart Cities under
Different Reward and Punishment Mechanisms. Discret. Dyn. Nat. Soc. 2022, 2022, 8122630. [CrossRef]
320. Gopinath, M.P.; Tamizharasi, G.S.; Kavisankar, L.; Sathyaraj, R.; Karthi, S.; Aarthy, S.L.; Balamurugan, B. A Secure Cloud-Based
Solution for Real-Time Monitoring and Management of Internet of Underwater Things (IOUT). Neural Comput. Appl. 2019, 31,
293–308. [CrossRef]
321. Ali, Z.; Alzahrani, B.A.; Barnawi, A.; Al-Barakati, A.; Vijayakumar, P.; Chaudhry, S.A. TC-PSLAP: Temporal Credential-Based
Provably Secure and Lightweight Authentication Protocol for IoT-Enabled Drone Environments. Secur. Commun. Netw. 2021,
2021, 9919460. [CrossRef]
322. Alam, R.G.G.; Ibrahim, H. Cybersecurity Strategy for Smart City Implementation. Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spat. Inf.
Sci. 2019, 42, 3–6. [CrossRef]
323. Ayala-Ruiz, D.; Castillo Atoche, A.; Ruiz-Ibarra, E.; Osorio de la Rosa, E.; Vázquez Castillo, J. A Self-Powered PMFC-Based
Wireless Sensor Node for Smart City Applications. Wirel. Commun. Mob. Comput. 2019, 2019, 8986302. [CrossRef]
324. Sharma, S.; Ghanshala, K.K.; Mohan, S. Blockchain-Based Internet of Vehicles (IoV): An Efficient Secure Ad Hoc Vehicular
Networking Architecture. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE 2nd 5G World Forum (5GWF), Dresden, Germany, 30 October–2
September 2019; IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2019; pp. 452–457.
325. Pacheco, J.; Benitez, V.H.; Pan, Z. Security Framework for IoT End Nodes with Neural Networks. Int. J. Mach. Learn. Comput.
2019, 9, 381–386. [CrossRef]
326. Peixoto, J.P.J.; Costa, D.G. Wireless Visual Sensor Networks for Smart City Applications:A Relevance-Based Approach for Multiple
Sinks Mobility. Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst. 2017, 76, 51–62. [CrossRef]
327. Satamraju, K.P.; Malarkodi, B. A Secured and Authenticated Internet of Things Model Using Blockchain Architecture. In Pro-
ceedings of the 2019 TEQIP III Sponsored International Conference on Microwave Integrated Circuits, Photonics and Wireless
Networks (IMICPW), Tiruchirappalli, India, 22–24 May 2019; IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2019; pp. 19–23.
328. Puliafito, A.; Tricomi, G.; Zafeiropoulos, A.; Papavassiliou, S. Smart Cities of the Future as Cyber Physical Systems: Challenges
and Enabling Technologies. Sensors 2021, 21, 3349. [CrossRef]
329. Turchet, L.; Fazekas, G.; Lagrange, M.; Ghadikolaei, H.S.; Fischione, C. The Internet of Audio Things: State of the Art, Vision, and
Challenges. IEEE Internet Things J. 2020, 7, 10233–10249. [CrossRef]
330. Gao, W.; Yu, W.; Liang, F.; Hatcher, W.G.; Lu, C. Privacy-Preserving Auction for Big Data Trading Using Homomorphic Encryption.
IEEE Trans. Netw. Sci. Eng. 2020, 7, 776–791. [CrossRef]
331. Hassan, M.; Jincai, C.; Iftekhar, A.; Cui, X. Future of the Internet of Things Emerging with Blockchain and Smart Contracts. Int. J.
Adv. Comput. Sci. Appl. 2020, 11, 631–635. [CrossRef]
332. Dutta, M.; Granjal, J. Towards a Secure Internet of Things: A Comprehensive Study of Second Line Defense Mechanisms. IEEE
Access 2020, 8, 127272–127312. [CrossRef]
333. Jararweh, Y.; Al-Ayyoub, M.; Al-Zoubi, D.; Benkhelifa, E. An Experimental Framework for Future Smart Cities Using Data Fusion
and Software Defined Systems: The Case of Environmental Monitoring for Smart Healthcare. Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst. 2020,
107, 883–897. [CrossRef]
334. Karthick Raghunath, K.M.; Koti, M.S.; Sivakami, R.; Vinoth Kumar, V.; NagaJyothi, G.; Muthukumaran, V. Utilization of IoT-
Assisted Computational Strategies in Wireless Sensor Networks for Smart Infrastructure Management. Int. J. Syst. Assur. Eng.
Manag. 2022, 1–7. Available online: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13198-021-01585-y (accessed on 17 October 2023).
[CrossRef]
Future Internet 2023, 15, 393 35 of 36

335. NERC. Annual Report; NERC: Washington, DC, USA, 2019; Volume 61.
336. Poleto, T.; de Oliveira, R.C.P.; da Silva, A.L.B.; de Carvalho, V.D.H. Using Fuzzy Cognitive Map Approach for Assessing
Cybersecurity for Telehealth Scenario. In Trends and Innovations in Information Systems and Technologies; Rocha, Á., Adeli, H., Reis,
L.P., Costanzo, S., Orovic, I., Moreira, F., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 828–837.
337. Rahim, N.H.A.; Hamid, S.; Kiah, L.M.; Shamshirband, S.; Furnell, S. A Systematic Review of Approaches to Assessing Cybersecu-
rity Awareness. Kybernetes 2015, 44, 606–622. [CrossRef]
338. Hao, S.; Wang, W.; Yan, Y.; Bruzzone, L. Class-Wise Dictionary Learning for Hyperspectral Image Classification. Neurocomputing
2017, 220, 121–129. [CrossRef]
339. Molzahn, D.K.; Wang, J. Detection and Characterization of Intrusions to Network Parameter Data in Electric Power Systems.
IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 2019, 10, 3919–3928. [CrossRef]
340. Kott, A.; Alberts, D.S.; Wang, C. Will Cybersecurity Dictate the Outcome of Future Wars. Computer 2015, 48, 98–101. [CrossRef]
341. Wang, X.; Luo, H.; Qin, X.; Feng, J.; Gao, H.; Feng, Q. Evaluation of Performance and Impacts of Maternal and Child Health
Hospital Services Using Data Envelopment Analysis in Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, China: A Comparison Study
among Poverty and Non-Poverty County Level Hospitals. Int. J. Equity Health 2016, 15, 131. [CrossRef]
342. Liu, M.; Li, K.; Chen, T. Security Testing of Web Applications: A Search-Based Approach for Detecting SQL Injection Vulnerabilities.
In Proceedings of the 2019 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference Companion, Prague, Czech Republic, 13–17 July
2019; pp. 417–418.
343. Liu, M.; Li, K.; Chen, T. Security Testing of Web Applications. In Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation
Conference Companion on–GECCO ’19, Prague, Czech Republic, 13–17 July 2019; ACM Press: New York, NY, USA, 2019;
pp. 417–418.
344. Liu, N.; Zhang, J.; Liu, W. A Security Mechanism of Web Services-Based Communication for Wind Power Plants. IEEE Trans.
Power Deliv. 2008, 23, 1930–1938. [CrossRef]
345. Feng, N.; Wang, H.J.; Li, M. A Security Risk Analysis Model for Information Systems: Causal Relationships of Risk Factors and
Vulnerability Propagation Analysis. Inf. Sci. 2014, 256, 57–73. [CrossRef]
346. Farley, R.; Wang, X. Exploiting VoIP Softphone Vulnerabilities to Disable Host Computers: Attacks and Mitigation. Int. J. Crit.
Infrastruct. Prot. 2014, 7, 141–154. [CrossRef]
347. Ten, C.W.; Liu, C.C.; Manimaran, G. Vulnerability Assessment of Cybersecurity for SCADA Systems. IEEE Trans. Power Syst.
2008, 23, 1836–1846. [CrossRef]
348. Fournaris, A.P.; Fraile, L.P.; Koufopavlou, O. Exploiting Hardware Vulnerabilities to Attack Embedded System Devices: A Survey
of Potent Microarchitectural Attacks. Electronics 2017, 6, 52. [CrossRef]
349. Kao, D.Y.; Wang, S.J.; Fu-Yuan Huang, F. SoTE: Strategy of Triple-E on Solving Trojan Defense in Cyber-Crime Cases. Comput.
Law Secur. Rev. 2010, 26, 52–60. [CrossRef]
350. Mimo, E.M.; McDaniel, T. 3D Privacy Framework: The Citizen Value Driven Privacy Framework. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE
International Smart Cities Conference (ISC2), Paphos, Cyprus, 7–10 September 2021; IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2021; pp. 1–7.
351. Hu, G.; Xiao, D.; Xiang, T.; Bai, S.; Zhang, Y. A Compressive Sensing Based Privacy Preserving Outsourcing of Image Storage and
Identity Authentication Service in Cloud. Inf. Sci. 2017, 387, 132–145. [CrossRef]
352. Foroutan, S.A.; Salmasi, F.R. Detection of False Data Injection Attacks against State Estimation in Smart Grids Based on a Mixture
Gaussian Distribution Learning Method. IET Cyber Phys. Syst. Theory Appl. 2017, 2, 161–171. [CrossRef]
353. Alami, H.; Gagnon, M.-P.; Ag Ahmed, M.A.; Fortin, J.-P. Digital Health: Cybersecurity Is a Value Creation Lever, Not Only a
Source of Expenditure. Heal. Policy Technol. 2019, 8, 319–321. [CrossRef]
354. Paul, J.A.; Wang, X. (Jocelyn) Socially Optimal IT Investment for Cybersecurity. Decis. Support Syst. 2019, 122, 113069. [CrossRef]
355. Enoch, S.Y.; Ge, M.; Hong, J.B.; Alzaid, H.; Kim, D.S. A Systematic Evaluation of Cybersecurity Metrics for Dynamic Networks.
Comput. Netw. 2018, 144, 216–229. [CrossRef]
356. Zhang, J.; Dong, Q. Efficient ID-Based Public Auditing for the Outsourced Data in Cloud Storage. Inf. Sci. 2016, 343–344, 1–14.
[CrossRef]
357. Xin, Y.; Kong, L.; Liu, Z.; Chen, Y.; Li, Y.; Zhu, H.; Gao, M.; Hou, H.; Wang, C. Machine Learning and Deep Learning Methods for
Cybersecurity. IEEE Access 2018, 6, 35365–35381. [CrossRef]
358. Montesdioca, G.P.Z.; Maçada, A.C.G. Measuring User Satisfaction with Information Security Practices. Comput. Secur. 2015, 48,
267–280. [CrossRef]
359. Ten, C.W.; Ginter, A.; Bulbul, R. Cyber-Based Contingency Analysis. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2016, 31, 3040–3050. [CrossRef]
360. Hong, J.; Liu, C.C.; Govindarasu, M. Integrated Anomaly Detection for Cyber Security of the Substations. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid
2014, 5, 1643–1653. [CrossRef]
361. Hong, J.; Nuqui, R.F.; Kondabathini, A.; Ishchenko, D.; Martin, A. Cyber Attack Resilient Distance Protection and Circuit Breaker
Control for Digital Substations. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 2019, 15, 4332–4341. [CrossRef]
362. Sterlini, P.; Massacci, F.; Kadenko, N.; Fiebig, T.; Van Eeten, M. Governance Challenges for European Cybersecurity Policies:
Stakeholder Views. IEEE Secur. Priv. 2020, 18, 46–54. [CrossRef]
363. Charlet, K.; King, H. The Future of Cybersecurity Policy. IEEE Secur. Priv. 2020, 18, 8–10. [CrossRef]
Future Internet 2023, 15, 393 36 of 36

364. Vattapparamban, E.; Güvenç, I.; Yurekli, A.I.; Akkaya, K.; Uluaǧaç, S. Drones for Smart Cities: Issues in Cybersecurity, Privacy,
and Public Safety. In Proceedings of the International Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing Conference, IWCMC,
Paphos, Cyprus, 5–9 September 2016; pp. 216–221. [CrossRef]
365. Khatoun, R.; Zeadally, S. Cybersecurity and Privacy Solutions in Smart Cities. IEEE Commun. Mag. 2017, 55, 51–59. [CrossRef]
366. Zimmermann, V.; Renaud, K. Moving from a “human-as-Problem” to a “human-as-Solution” Cybersecurity Mindset. Int. J. Hum.
Comput. Stud. 2019, 131, 169–187. [CrossRef]
367. Woods, D.W.; Moore, T. Does Insurance Have a Future in Governing Cybersecurity? IEEE Secur. Priv. 2020, 18, 21–27. [CrossRef]
368. Maddux, J.E.; Rogers, R.W. Protection Motivation and Self-Efficacy: A Revised Theory of Fear Appeals and Attitude Change.
J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 1983, 19, 469–479. [CrossRef]
369. Biswas, K.; Muthukkumarasamy, V. Securing Smart Cities Using Blockchain Technology. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE
18th International Conference on High Performance Computing and Communications, IEEE 14th International Conference
on Smart City, IEEE 2nd International Conference on Data Science and Systems (HPCC/SmartCity/DSS), Sydney, Australia,
12–14 December 2016; IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2016; pp. 1392–1393.
370. Zhang, K.; Ni, J.; Yang, K.; Liang, X.; Ren, J.; Shen, X.S. Security and Privacy in Smart City Applications: Challenges and Solutions.
IEEE Commun. Mag. 2017, 55, 122–129. [CrossRef]
371. Sivanathan, A.; Gharakheili, H.H.; Loi, F.; Radford, A.; Wijenayake, C.; Vishwanath, A.; Sivaraman, V. Classifying IoT Devices in
Smart Environments Using Network Traffic Characteristics. IEEE Trans. Mob. Comput. 2019, 18, 1745–1759. [CrossRef]
372. Sharma, P.K.; Moon, S.Y.; Park, J.H. Block-VN: A Distributed Blockchain Based Vehicular Network Architecture in Smart City.
J. Inf. Process. Syst. 2017, 13, 184–195. [CrossRef]
373. Khatoun, R.; Zeadally, S. Smart Cities: Concepts, Architectures, Research Opportunities. Commun. ACM 2016, 59, 46–57.
[CrossRef]
374. Djahel, S.; Doolan, R.; Muntean, G.-M.; Murphy, J. A Communications-Oriented Perspective on Traffic Management Systems for
Smart Cities: Challenges and Innovative Approaches. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 2015, 17, 125–151. [CrossRef]
375. Sharma, P.K.; Park, J.H. Blockchain Based Hybrid Network Architecture for the Smart City. Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst. 2018, 86,
650–655. [CrossRef]
376. Angelidou, M. The Role of Smart City Characteristics in the Plans of Fifteen Cities. J. Urban Technol. 2017, 24, 3–28. [CrossRef]
377. Rathore, M.M.; Paul, A.; Hong, W.-H.; Seo, H.; Awan, I.; Saeed, S. Exploiting IoT and Big Data Analytics: Defining Smart Digital
City Using Real-Time Urban Data. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2018, 40, 600–610. [CrossRef]
378. Qiu, T.; Chen, N.; Li, K.; Qiao, D.; Fu, Z. Heterogeneous Ad Hoc Networks: Architectures, Advances and Challenges. Ad Hoc
Netw. 2017, 55, 143–152. [CrossRef]
379. Petit, J.; Shladover, S.E. Potential Cyberattacks on Automated Vehicles. IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst. 2015, 16, 546–556.
[CrossRef]
380. Nepomuceno, T.C.C.; Silva, W.M.N.; Nepomuceno, K.T.C.; Barros, I.K.F. A DEA-Based Complexity of Needs Approach for
Hospital Beds Evacuationduring the COVID-19 Outbreak. J. Healthc. Eng. 2020, 2020, 8857553. [CrossRef]
381. Daraio, C.; Kerstens, K.; Nepomuceno, T.; Sickles, R.C. Empirical Surveys of Frontier Applications: A Meta-Review. Int. Trans.
Oper. Res. 2020, 27, 709–738. [CrossRef]
382. Watzlaf, V.J.M.; Zhou, L.; DeAlmeida, D.R.; Hartman, L.M. A Systematic Review of Research Studies Examining Telehealth
Privacy and Security Practices Used By Healthcare Providers. Int. J. Telerehabil. 2017, 9, 39–58. [CrossRef]
383. Schukat, M. Securing Critical Infrastructure. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Digital Technologies, Zilina,
Slovakia, 9–11 July 2014; pp. 298–304.
384. Zhu, K.; Ying, S.; Ding, W.; Zhang, N.; Zhu, D. IVKMP: A Robust Data-Driven Heterogeneous Defect Model Based on Deep
Representation Optimization Learning. Inf. Sci. 2022, 583, 332–363. [CrossRef]
385. Ferraz, F.S.; Guimaraes Ferraz, C.A. More than Meets the Eye in Smart City Information Security: Exploring Security Issues
Far beyond Privacy Concerns. In Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE 11th International Conference on Ubiquitous Intelligence and
Computing and 2014 IEEE 11th International Conference on Autonomic and Trusted Computing and 2014 IEEE 14th International
Conference on Scalable Computing and Communications and Its Associated Workshops, Bali, Indonesia, 9–12 December 2014;
IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2014; pp. 677–685.
386. Zheng, K.; Albert, L.A.; Luedtke, J.R.; Towle, E. A Budgeted Maximum Multiple Coverage Model for Cybersecurity Planning and
Management. IISE Trans. 2019, 51, 1303–1317. [CrossRef]
387. Santos, J.R.; Haimes, Y.Y.; Lian, C. A Framework for Linking Cybersecurity Metrics to the Modeling of Macroeconomic Interde-
pendencies. Risk Anal. 2007, 27, 1283–1297. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
388. Bergström, E.; Lundgren, M.; Ericson, Å. Revisiting Information Security Risk Management Challenges: A Practice Perspective.
Inf. Comput. Secur. 2019, 27, 358–372. [CrossRef]
389. Daraio, C.; Kerstens, K.H.J.; Nepomuceno, T.C.C.; Sickles, R. Productivity and Efficiency Analysis Software: An Exploratory
Bibliographical Survey of the Options. J. Econ. Surv. 2019, 33, 85–100. [CrossRef]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.