CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW
2.0 Introduction
In this chapter, we explore past technologies used to protect networks traditionally. These are
methods that were implemented in order to protect the likes of LTE, 3G and the previous
generations. This chapter examines the evolution of mobile network security from earlier
generations to 6G.

2.1 Overview of Wireless Communication Generations

With the tremendous technical advancements over the last few decades and the emerging
technologies for the Internet of Things, wireless communication systems are the Eureka
counterparts of our day. T. S. Rappaport et.al [1] states that there are currently five (5)
generations of mobile wireless cellular communications systems in use, with the fifth
generation (5G) wireless network being the most recent. Since 1980, a new generation of
wireless cellular communication systems has emerged roughly every ten years.; the second
generation followed in 1992; the third generation (3G) debuted in 2001; and the fourth
generation (4G), also known as long-term evolution (LTE), debuted in 2011 [1]. In general,
wireless communications have advanced tremendously over the past ten years, which has
fuelled the growth of data-hungry applications like online gaming, multimedia, and high-
definition video streaming.
Now that 5G communications have been standardised, the system is being implemented
globally. As of April 2019, South Korea was the first country to implement widespread 5G
rollout, with about 85 cities and 86,000 5G base stations. Nonetheless, six cities—Seoul, Busan,
Daegu, and others—were home to 85% of the 5G base stations. These cities have dispersed
architectures using 3.5 GHz (sub-6) spectrum, and their deployed data rate speeds range from
193 to 430 Mbit/s. By the end of 2025, it is anticipated that over 65% of the world's population
will have access to 5G ultrafast 5G Internet coverage.
The volume of wireless data traffic and the number of linked devices, however, are predicted to
increase to a hundred times the amount of equipment in a given cubic metre. Furthermore, apps
that consume a lot of data, like those that send holographic films, require a spectrum bandwidth
that isn't available in the mm-wave spectrum at the moment. This scenario poses challenging
problems for the required security. In addition, the proliferation of diverse mobile applications,
particularly those powered by artificial intelligence (AI) technology, has sparked intense debate
over how wireless communications will develop in the future. Achieving end-to-end, attack-
proof wireless data communication necessitates numerous spectrum bandwidth preventive
measures, resulting in a reduction in available spectrum data for data transmission

2.1.1 Evolution of Network Security, a generational analysis

The first generation, known as analogue FM cellular systems, debuted in 1981. This is often
referred to as 1G, lacked security as it was built with connectivity primarily in mind. 1g lacked
security by all definitions. It was susceptible to eavesdropping via Man-In-The-Middle attacks
[2]. The second generation network brought about encryption [3]. The security relied on a
single shared secret, known as the Ki in 3GPP standards, which must be securely stored both
within the network operator's infrastructure and in the subscriber's device. The Ki is a 16-octet
value that must remain confidential, accessible only to those directly involved in the
authentication process. Within the network, all subscriber IMSIs and Ki values are stored in a
network component called the Authentication Centre (AuC), typically located alongside the
HLR. The HLR/AuC is housed within the network operator's facilities, making unauthorized
physical access challenging. Additionally, Ki values are usually encrypted in the AuC, using
encryption keys that are not even available to authorized personnel, making it extremely
difficult for attackers to obtain the clear text of these secret keys.
On the subscriber side, the challenge was to securely store sensitive information, particularly
the Ki, while ensuring that no individual, including the subscriber, could access this
information. The solution needed to fulfil several requirements:
 Store data in non-volatile memory to ensure it persists even when power is off.
 Execute the authentication algorithm on the same platform as the Ki, so the Ki never
leaves the device.
 Provide basic computing capabilities for running authentication algorithms.
 Protect access to key functions with a subscriber passcode (PIN).
 Restrict certain information to the operator using additional passcodes.
 Be small enough to fit into handsets.
 Consume minimal power.
The outcome of meeting these requirements was the creation of the Universal Integrated Circuit
Card (UICC), commonly known as the SIM card, a remarkable technological achievement that
has become integral to the success of mobile phones. [4]
The third-generation network saw the advent of security techniques like stronger encryption
algorithms, enhanced mutual authentication protocols between devices and networks, and
improved integrity protection. These innovations were designed to safeguard user data, prevent
unauthorized access, and ensure the confidentiality of communications. Additionally, the
introduction of more secure key management processes and the implementation of sophisticated
encryption methods, such as the use of KASUMI and SNOW 3G ciphers [5], significantly
bolstered the overall security of mobile communications. ”kasumi” is a block cipher used
primarily in the encryption and integrity protection of mobile communications, particularly
within 3G networks. It is an optimized and slightly modified version of the MISTY1 algorithm,
tailored to meet the performance and security requirements of mobile networks. These
measures were critical in addressing the evolving threats of the digital age, ensuring that user
data remained protected as mobile networks became more ubiquitous and integral to daily life.

After a decade in 4G, more perimeter-based approaches to network security were implemented
to address the growing complexity and diversity of network traffic. These approaches focused
on securing the boundaries of the network, such as firewalls and intrusion detection systems, to
prevent unauthorized access and protect against external threats. As mobile networks became
more interconnected and reliant on IP-based technologies, the need for robust perimeter
defences grew. This led to the deployment of advanced security gateways, deep packet
inspection [6], and network segmentation techniques to monitor and control traffic at the
network's edge. However, while perimeter security played a crucial role in safeguarding 4G
networks, it also highlighted the limitations of traditional security models in the face of
increasingly sophisticated cyber threats and the rise of mobile devices, leading to a shift toward
more holistic, zero-trust security models in later generations [7].

When the fifth generation of GSM networks (5G) was implemented in South Korea first, it not
only showcased the country’s technological prowess but also highlighted the critical importance
of advanced security measures. As 5G networks introduced faster speeds, lower latency, and the
capability to connect billions of devices, the security landscape became more complex. South
Korea’s early adoption required robust encryption protocols, sophisticated network slicing
techniques, and enhanced authentication mechanisms to safeguard against new vulnerabilities
introduced by the expanded attack surface [8]. This focus on security set a precedent for the
global rollout of 5G [9], underscoring the need for stronger, more adaptive security frameworks
to protect against the evolving threats in an increasingly interconnected digital world.
6th generation networks, offering enhanced capabilities such as terahertz (THz)
communication, holographic communication, and advanced AI-driven network management,
are often characterized with larger volumes of traffic as they expect to connect our world even
more[10]. The majority of this traffic will be the surge of IoT devices [11]. With this much
increased connectivity, security enforcement becomes ever more important [12]. A number of
approaches have been investigated on the implementation of low latency, least resource
demanding and highly efficient security practices as the edge devices in a 6g network will have
little compute resources and at the same time play very crucial roles the likes of autonomous
driving, smart cities, remote surgery among other crucial IoT applications[13].

2.1.2 Investigating Security Approaches to 6G

Evidently the best features of the past generational networks has been built around encryption
but as encryption algorithms mature, their implementation may become more difficult
especially in systems with inadequate computational resources. Also, as development of
quantum computing advances, encryption as a concept may break down [14]. Recently, AI
algorithms have the ability to expertly detect network flaws, which would be useful in 6G
networks as Zero Trust Architectures may end up being implored.

2.2 Theoretical Framework

2.2.1 Fuzzy Algorithm Approach

Fuzzy logic is a versatile and adaptable approach to trust assessment, providing a way to
quantify uncertainty in a variety of contexts. Fuzzy logic, which is based on human decision-
making processes, introduces a truth concept that takes into account inaccuracies and
uncertainties, increasing reasoning flexibility.
The components of a fuzzy logic system include:
Fuzzification: In this first step, input and output variables, such as reliability and behaviour, are
defined using linguistic terms. This linguistic approach recognises the inherent ambiguity and
imprecision in trust-related data.
Rule Base Construction: Creating a rule base entails developing linguistic rules that connect
input variables to output and express relationships between trust factors (for example, if
reliability is high and behaviour is consistent, trust is high).
Fuzzy Inference: The system computes a degree of trust based on inputs using these rules and
fuzzy logic operators (e.g., AND, OR), taking into account the linguistic terms and associated
rules. This process allows for more nuanced and flexible evaluations.
Defuzzification: Converting the fuzzy output to a discrete value (e.g., low, medium, high trust)
makes practical use or decision making easier, ensuring that the final trust level is
understandable and actionable.

The fuzzy logic system effectively manages the inherent uncertainty and imprecision in trust
evaluation, providing an adaptive and nuanced approach to determining trust levels, especially
in complex systems such as 6G networks. The node trust in the fuzzy logic model can be
evaluated using a variety of input parameters.
In previous sections, we discussed the benefits and drawbacks of various methods. We now
apply the same analysis to fuzzy logic algorithms. Fuzzy logic algorithms have distinct
advantages and disadvantages inherent in the method. However, these characteristics can vary
significantly when fuzzy logic is combined with other methods.

Advantages of Fuzzy Logic: The fuzzy logic methodology has several advantages for
evaluating trust in 6G networks. It enables trust evaluation based on experience, plausibility,
and location accuracy, all of which are critical components in trust assessment. Furthermore,
fuzzy logic systems have found widespread use in a variety of fields, including web services,
cloud computing, and social networks, demonstrating their adaptability and utility. Furthermore,
fuzzy logic facilitates the development of classification criteria for assessing trust, resulting in a
more structured approach to trust evaluation and improved detection capabilities.
Disadvantages of Fuzzy Logic: Despite its utility in other network applications, using fuzzy
logic to assess trust in 6G networks has some drawbacks. It is difficult to precisely characterise
and interpret language variables and fuzzy rules, which may result in uncertainty and
imprecision in trust assessment. Furthermore, fuzzy logic may increase computing overhead
and complexity, affecting the real-time decision-making capabilities required for 6G networks.
Addressing these challenges and ensuring reliable and robust trust management in 6G networks
requires careful consideration, especially when fuzzy algorithms are incorporated into IoT trust
management techniques.
Investigating the Use of Fuzzy Logic Algorithms in Trust Assessment across Various Network
Environments:

1)Cloud Network

Kesarwani et al [15] proposed fuzzy logic for calculating trust values between cloud users and
service providers. The study recommends two trust-based access control models: user-based
and cloud service provider-based. These models identify trusted resources for users and grant
access based on their trust levels. The models combine elasticity and performance evaluations
to determine trust values, which control access permissions to cloud resources. The paper also
introduces subjective trust models based on user and service provider behaviour, which
improves the accuracy and reliability of trust assessments in cloud computing settings. The
results show that the proposed trust-based access control models improve security, resource
allocation, and access control in cloud computing environments.
Rahman et al [16] proposed a fuzzy-based trust evaluation framework for fog computing. Fuzzy
logic is used to assess trust based on a variety of factors, including performance, reliability,
security, price, and reputation. The framework selects fogs using a fuzzy-based filtering
algorithm that considers trust evaluation criteria such as availability, quality of service, security,
user feedback, and cost. The article emphasises the importance of continuous improvement in
trust evaluation mechanisms.
Soleymani et al [17] proposed a new trust management framework for multi-cloud
environments that incorporates fuzzy logic principles for trust calculation as well as subjective
and objective trust evaluations. The model handles ambiguity in trust-related parameters and
feedback data, enabling a more adaptable approach. The study's simulation validation confirms
the effectiveness of the components, emphasising the importance of feedback evaluation and
trust negotiation in improving trust values and security in multi-cloud environments.

2)IoT
Bernabe et al [18] proposed fuzzy logic algorithms for estimating trust values for IoT devices
across multiple dimensions. The system includes a fuzzy control system (FCS) that analyses
analogue input values and generates trust values. This model improves security by taking into
account security evidence derived from transaction data. The system employs fuzzy logic to
deal with the ambiguity and uncertainty of information in IoT environments, as well as a
lightweight and adaptable access control mechanism based on Distributed Capability-Based
Access Control (DCBAC). The system's performance is evaluated based on trust expectations,
reward requests, fuzzy trust quantification, authentication, token validation, and full trust
processing.
Hashemi [19] proposed the FDTM-IoT, a dynamic, comprehensive, and hierarchical trust model
aimed at improving routing security in IoT networks. It assesses trustworthiness across multiple
dimensions, such as service quality, peer-to-peer communication quality, and contextual
information. The model is intended to be versatile and adaptable to changing environmental
conditions. Fuzzy logic is used to handle uncertainty, which strengthens trust decisions. The
model is integrated into the Routing Protocol for Low Power and Lossy Networks (RPL)
protocol, which improves security and network performance. Performance evaluations
demonstrate the model's effectiveness in improving routing security in dynamic IoT
environments.
Yu et al [20] introduce a fuzzy attribute trust algorithm as a supplementary approach to address
trust evaluation challenges in Artificial Intelligence of Things (AIoT) networks. The fuzzy
algorithm addresses the lack of interaction records and uncertainty in AIoT environments,
allowing for a more accurate evaluation of smart terminals’ trust values. It also mitigates
mismatches between trust values and the real-time state of smart terminals. The fuzzy algorithm
is scalable and adaptable, allowing for the addition of new fuzzy factors to accommodate
different application scenarios. The model’s performance is competitive with existing
approaches, demonstrating its effectiveness in addressing trust evaluation challenges in AIoT
networks. The model’s performance, adaptability, and scalability contribute to its potential for
enhancing the trustworthiness of smart terminals in AIoT environments

3)Mobile Network
Ma et al [21] proposed a fuzzy comprehensive evaluation approach for measuring trust in
dynamic trust management scenarios. The authors suggested a trust quantification technique
that takes into account fuzziness and uncertainty in trust connections, making it more resilient
and applicable in dynamic and open network contexts. The algorithm's usefulness is proved by
simulation results, which show alignment with entity behaviour. The fuzzy comprehensive
evaluation method helps with trust management by giving a systematic and effective
methodology to assessing trust values, making it useful in decision-making processes across
industries and organisations. The research emphasises the need of taking fuzziness and
ambiguity into account when quantifying trust, as well as its contribution to trust management
techniques. The article examines the usage of credit and reputation systems in trust
quantification, which are essential parts of the process. Credit mechanisms assess an entity's
trustworthiness using behavioural data and interactions with other entities. They represent the
owner's judgement of an object on a subject following certain encounters. The reputation
system takes into account an object's level of trust in a topic over time using different credit
values. It is calculated by combining credit values from various interactions and assigning
suitable weights. The paper presents a thorough method to trust quantification that takes into
account both qualitative and quantitative characteristics, as described by fuzzy logic and credit
and reputation assessments. This multifaceted review approach improves the robustness and
accuracy of trust assessments.
Wang et al [22] use probabilistic linguistic term sets (PLTS) to improve trust scaling by offering
a more precise and adaptable approach to convey trust judgements. PLTS enables decision
makers to represent evaluation information using numerous language phrases and probabilities,
reflecting ambiguity and reluctance in trust judgements. This method contrasts with hesitant
fuzzy linguistic term sets (HFLTS), which may result in mistakes in expressing expert opinions.
PLTS also distinguishes between various recommenders' viewpoints more explicitly, preventing
poor solutions. The model's fuzzy algorithm tackles ambiguity and vagueness in decision-
making processes, allowing decision-makers to express their thoughts in linguistic words that
signify degrees of confidence or trustworthiness. Fuzzy logic helps to quantify and evaluate
subjective information, resulting in more accurate trust assessments. The model also uses the
Multi-Objective Optimisation by Ratio Analysis (MULTIMOORA) approach for decision
making, addresses context-dependent trust modelling, tackles ambiguity and uncertainty, and
creates a structural trust evaluation by breaking down trust into various building pieces. This
comprehensive method to trust modelling tackles the complexities and problems of trust
evaluation in numerous application contexts. In addition to the fuzzy logic technique, this study
applies the Multi-Objective Optimisation by Ratio Analysis (MULTIMOORA) approach to
assess trust levels. To rank the options, this robust decision-making approach uses three
subordinate orders. The combination of the MULTIMOORA technique with the fuzzy logic
algorithm creates a complete and systematic approach to trust evaluation. The fuzzy logic
algorithm deals with ambiguity and vagueness, whereas the MULTIMOORA technique
combines numerous factors to get a final rating based on the trustworthiness of the alternatives.
This study attempts to construct a comprehensive trust evaluation model that analyses many
trust-related criteria, resulting in more accurate and context-aware evaluations in multi-agent
systems and networked settings.
2.2.2 Decentralization approach

Blockchain technology, distinguished by its distributed ledger architecture, in which

information is maintained among several nodes, each with an identical copy of the ledger,
provides a secure, traceable, decentralised, and immutable data storage solution. Using these
characteristics, blockchain technology has the ability to improve trust in network contexts by
assuring the validity of trust-related data. For example, in the proposed B-RAN architecture,
which employs blockchain, trust connections in wireless networks are built via an identity-
based consensus method. Smart contracts enable quick operations on the blockchain, while a
hash puzzle-solving requirement for device access helps to reduce resource misuse, latency
concerns, and unauthorised network access. This hash access strategy promotes confidence
between clients and network resources by requiring compliance with preset criteria. Similarly,
to address dynamic spectrum access for IoT systems, a trust evaluation mechanism proposed in
other sources uses blockchain technology to ensure privacy, information transparency,
decentralised spectrum access, automatic spectrum management, and flexibility via
parameterised smart contracts. Trust-related information recorded in blockchain grows
depending on the consistency of cooperative measurements in IoT networks, increasing
trustworthiness.
Blockchain technology has been proved to improve trust in 5G and 6G networks by reducing
vulnerabilities, increasing privacy, and enabling distributed trust. Several research have
provided useful insights into determining the level of trust in 5G and 6G networks utilising
blockchain technology. Rahman et al. underlined blockchain's potential for limiting risks and
vulnerabilities in 5G networks while also improving privacy, trustworthiness, and reliability.
Similarly, MSI Khan et al [23] they emphasised that blockchains in 5G networks enable
distributed trust models that improve security and prevent breaches. Cheng et al [24]
established the SIX-Trust framework for 6G networks, which combines sustainable trust,
infrastructure trust, and xenogenesis trust levels to provide network security and
trustworthiness. Al-Ansi et al [25] examined the use of blockchain technology in service
migration to 6G networks, emphasising its importance as a secure and decentralised platform
for managing migration procedures. Gao et al. emphasised the importance of blockchain in
satisfying the communication and security needs of 5G networks, including dependability, low
latency, and secure transmission. The inclusion of blockchain technology into 6G networks has
the potential to strengthen trust relationships by ensuring the legitimacy and dependability of
trust-related data. Blockchain's intrinsic traceability, immutability, and transparency show
promise for increasing trustworthiness and overcoming data-sharing issues in 6G networks
[26]. However, computational overheads, energy-intensive operations, scalability limitations,
and potential security vulnerabilities, such as quantum computing threats, may impede the
widespread adoption and long-term viability of blockchain-based trust assessment in 6G
networks. Additionally, regulatory and interoperability problems may need to be addressed to
ensure smooth integration.

2.2.3 Dynamic Trust Assessment

Some approaches, work very well at a network controller level by applying machine learning
algorithms [27] for detection of anomalies and dynamic trust assessment of devices on the
network based on their activities over time. In this study, exploration is focused on a novel
dynamic trust assessment model which combines the efforts of weighted sums specifically to be
deployed on edge devices to ensure that they too are just as secure as they are as fast as the
network allows them to be.
The framework is made up of several core components, each of which is essential for
monitoring, analysing, and managing IoT devices:

Device Representation: Each IoT device is represented as an object with an identification, a

context (such as location), a trust score, and a history of previous behaviour. This model enables
the system to monitor and evaluate each device independently.
Behavioural Data Collection: The system continually gathers data on how each device acts,
with an emphasis on usage patterns. For example, a device that suddenly begins consuming an
abnormally large quantity of bandwidth may be displaying abnormal behaviour.
Contextual Data Integration: The system also collects contextual information about the
environment in which the device operates. This information allows for a more accurate
interpretation of the device's behaviour. For example, excessive consumption may be
appropriate in an office context but suspect in a public location.

2.2.4 Anomaly detection

The system uses statistical approaches, such as z-score computation, to compare a device's
present behaviour to its past data. A considerable divergence from the norm may signal an
abnormality and need a re-evaluation of the device's trust score.
The trust score is calculated constantly based on identified abnormalities and contextual
variables. A lower trust level implies that a device is less dependable and may be hacked,
whereas a higher score shows that the device is functioning properly.
Access Control: Using the trust score, the system decides the appropriate degree of access for
each device. Devices with low trust ratings may have their access restricted to avoid security
breaches.
False Positive/Negative Management: The system also keeps track of false positives (typical
behaviour mistakenly marked as aberrant) and false negatives (real anomalies that go
unnoticed). This feedback helps to improve the system's accuracy over time.
Visualisation and Reporting: To make the system's conclusions more clear and intelligible, it
incorporates tools for visualising trust scores, access levels, and the frequency of false positives
and negatives. These visualisations allow administrators to easily assess the entire security
posture of an IoT network.

2.2.5 Practical Implementation

The actual application of this conceptual framework is writing a set of functions and classes
that replicate the behaviour of IoT devices, monitor their actions, and dynamically update their
trust scores. The system makes use of a variety of Python tools, including matplotlib for
visualisation and numpy for statistical analysis. For example, a device's behaviour might be
replicated to generate typical or abnormal usage patterns. These patterns are then analysed to
provide an anomaly score, which is fed into the trust score. Based on this trust score, the system
determines whether to provide the device full access, limited access, or complete access
restriction. The system may be evaluated in virtual scenarios where many devices are tracked
over time and their trust scores updated based on their behaviour and context. The simulation
results may be visualised to provide an understanding of the anomaly detection system's
efficacy.

2.2.6 Evaluation
Of all the methods implored, Dynamic Trust Assessment demands the least compute resources.
By combining elements from Decentralisation as well, a hybrid system can be set up which
picks the pros from each of the highlighted security approaches such as leaving dedicated
devices to do compute intensive processing tasks. These devices could be integrated with
network controllers such that machine learning algorithms could aid the dynamic trust
assessment model implemented.

2.3 Conclusion
In this study, we have thoroughly examined the evolution of network security across different
generations of mobile networks, from 1G to the forthcoming 6G systems. The progression from
basic encryption methods to advanced security measures illustrates the growing complexity and
sophistication required to safeguard network infrastructures.

As we transition into the 6G era, the challenges associated with securing vast amounts of data
and advanced technologies become increasingly apparent. Traditional security models and
encryption methods face limitations, especially given the potential impact of quantum
computing and the diverse range of devices and applications in 6G networks.

To address these emerging challenges, our research has highlighted the importance of
integrating innovative security frameworks. Among these, Dynamic Trust Assessment (DTA)
stands out as a pivotal approach. By employing Dynamic Trust Assessment, we aim to enhance
security in 6G networks through a more adaptive and context-aware approach. DTA leverages
real-time data and advanced algorithms to continuously evaluate and adjust trust levels,
providing a more responsive and resilient security posture.

In the subsequent phases of this research, we will focus on the practical implementation of DTA
within 6G networks. This will involve developing and deploying DTA models that can
dynamically assess and respond to varying security threats, leveraging insights gained from our
studies and experiments. The goal is to create a robust security framework that not only
addresses current vulnerabilities but also adapts to future challenges, ensuring a secure and
reliable 6G network infrastructure.

[1] T. S. Rappaport et al “Millimeter Wave Wireless Communications”

[2] https://www.cengn.ca/information-centre/innovation/timeline-from-1g-to-5g-a-brief-history-
on-cell-phones/
[3]: https://steemit.com/mobilenetworks/@irelandscape/introduction-to-mobile-networks-
security-in-2g-gsm-networks
[4]: https://www.tech.gov.sg/media/technews/all-you-ever-wanted-to-know-about-the-sim-card-
history/#:~:text=Evolution%20of%20SIM%20card%20–%20smaller%20yet
%20mightier&text=It%20was%20developed%20in%201991,Telecommunications
%20Standards%20Institute%20(ETSI).
[5]: Jasim, Khalid & Alshaikhli, Imad & Al Shaikhli, Hasan. (2019). Comparative Study of
Some Symmetric Ciphers in Mobile Systems.
[6]: https://www.fortinet.com/resources/cyberglossary/dpi-deep-packet-inspection#:~:text=DPI
%20examines%20a%20larger%20range,for%20executing%20network%20packet%20filtering.
[7]: "Verizon 2023 Data Breach Investigations Report." Verizon Enterprise,
2023. https://www.verizon.com/business/resources/reports/dbir/2023/master-guide/
[8]: https://www.samsung.com/global/business/networks/insights/blog/1126-securing-5g-what-
are-the-six-5g-network-security-checkpoints/
[9]: https://www.analog.com/en/signals/articles/developing-one-of-the-worlds-first-5g-
networks.html
[10]: https://www.spiceworks.com/tech/networking/articles/what-is-6g/
[11]: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Daily-Network-traffic-volume-from-three-IoT-
devices_fig1_331039641
[12]: Das M, Nag A, Hassan MM, et al. Synergy of 6G technology and IoT networks for
transformative applications. Int J Commun Syst. 2024; 37(14):e5869. doi:10.1002/dac.5869
[13] https://testbed.ieee.org/internet-of-things-iot-integration-identifying-blockages-and-
optimizing-resource-allocation-in-5g-6g-networks/
[14]: https://www.techtarget.com/searchdatacenter/feature/Explore-the-impact-of-quantum-
computing-on-cryptography
[15] A Kesarwani et al “Development of trust based access control models using fuzzy logic in
cloud computing,” (https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?
title=Development+of+trust+based+access+control+models+using+fuzzy+logic+in+cloud+co
mputing&author=Kesarwani,+A.&author=Khilar,+P.M.&publication_year=2022&journal=J.
+King+Saud+Univ.-Comput.+Inf.+Sci.&volume=34&pages=1958–1967&doi=10.1016/
j.jksuci.2019.11.001) .
[16] Rahman et al “A fuzzy-based trust evaluation framework,”
(https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Find+my+trustworthy+fogs:+A+fuzzy-
based+trust+evaluation+framework&author=Rahman,+F.H.&author=Au,+T.-
W.&author=Newaz,+S.S.&author=Suhaili,+W.S.&author=Lee,
+G.M.&publication_year=2020&journal=Futur.+Gener.+Comput.
+Syst.&volume=109&pages=562–572&doi=10.1016/j.future.2018.05.061)
[17] Soleymani et al “Fuzzy Rule-Based Trust Management Model for the Security of Cloud
Computing,” (https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Fuzzy+rule-
based+trust+management+model+for+the+security+of+cloud+computing&author=Soleymani,
+M.&author=Abapour,+N.&author=Taghizadeh,+E.&author=Siadat,+S.&author=Karkehabadi,
+R.&publication_year=2021&journal=Math.+Probl.
+Eng.&volume=2021&pages=6629449&doi=10.1155/2021/6629449)
[18] Bernabe et al “TACIoT: multidimensional trust aware access control system for the
Internet of Things,”(https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=TACIoT:
+Multidimensional+trust-
aware+access+control+system+for+the+Internet+of+Things&author=Bernabe,
+J.B.&author=Ramos,+J.L.H.&author=Gomez,
+A.F.S.&publication_year=2016&journal=Soft+Comput.&volume=20&pages=1763–
1779&doi=10.1007/s00500-015-1705-6) .
[19] Hashemi et al “Fuzzy dynamic trust based routing for IoT,”
(https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Fuzzy,
+dynamic+and+trust+based+routing+protocol+for+IoT&author=Hashemi,
+S.Y.&author=Aliee,+F.S.&publication_year=2020&journal=J.+Netw.+Syst.
+Manag.&volume=28&pages=1248–1278&doi=10.1007/s10922-020-09535-y)
[20] Yu et al “CET-AoTM: Cloud edge terminal collaborative trust evaluation scheme for AIoT
networks,” (https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=CET-AoTM:+Cloud-Edge-
Terminal+Collaborative+Trust+Evaluation+Scheme+for+AIoT+Networks&author=Yu,
+C.&author=Xia,+G.&author=Song,+L.&author=Peng,+W.&author=Chen,+J.&author=Zhang,
+D.&author=Li,+H.&publication_year=2023&pages=143–158)
[21] Ma et al “Application of fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method in trust quantification,”
(https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?
title=Application+of+fuzzy+comprehensive+evaluation+method+in+trust+quantification&auth
or=Ma,+S.&author=He,+J.&author=Shuai,+X.&publication_year=2011&journal=Int.+J.
+Comput.+Intell.+Syst.&volume=4&pages=768–776) .\
[22] Wang et al “Trust modelling based on probabilistic linguistic term sets and the
MULTIMOORA method,” (https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?
title=Trust+modeling+based+on+probabilistic+linguistic+term+sets+and+the+MULTIMOORA
+method&author=Wang,+Y.&author=Tian,+L.&authorauthor=Wu,
+Z.&publication_year=2021&journal=Expert+Syst.
+Appl.&volume=165&pages=113817&doi=10.1016/j.eswa.2020.113817)
[23] MSI Khan et al “BlockSD-5GNet: Enhancing security of the5G network through the block
chain SDN with ML based bandwidth prediction,” (https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?
title=BlockSD-5GNet:+Enhancing+security+of+5G+network+through+block chain-
SDN+with+ML-based+bandwidth+prediction&author=Rahman,+A.&author=Khan,
+M.S.I.&author=Montieri,+A.&author=Islam,+M.J.&author=Karim,+M.R.&author=Hasan,
+M.&author=Kundu,+D.&author=Nasir,+M.K.&author=Pescapè,
+A.&publication_year=2024&journal=Trans.+Emerg.+Telecommun.
+Technol.&volume=35&pages=e4965&doi=10.1002/ett.4965)
[24] Cheng et al “Six trust for 6G: Towards a secure and trustworthy future network,”
(https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=SIX-Trust+for+6G:
+Towards+a+Secure+and+Trustworthy+Future+Network&author=Wang,+Y.&author=Kang,
+X.&author=Li,+T.&author=Wang,+H.&author=Chu,+C.-K.&author=Lei,+Z.&author=Cheng,
+C.&publication_year=2023&journal=IEEE+Access&volume=11&pages=107657–
107668&doi=10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3321114)
[25] Al-Ansi et al “Block chain technology integration in service migration to 6g
communication networks: A comprehensive review,”
(https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Block
chain+technology+integration+in+service+migration+to+6gcommunication+networks:
+A+comprehensive+review&author=Al-Ansi,+A.&author=Al-Ansi,+A.M.&author=Muthanna,
+A.&author=Koucheryavy,+A.&publication_year=2024&journal=Indones.+J.+Electr.+Eng.
+Comput.+Sci&volume=34&pages=1654–1664)
[26] Gao et al “Revealing development trends in block chain-based 5G network technologies
through patent analysis,” (https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?
title=Revealing+development+trends+in+block chain-
based+5g+network+technologies+through+patent+analysis&author=Gao,+F.&author=Chen,
+D.L.&author=Weng,+M.H.&author=Yang,
+R.Y.&publication_year=2021&journal=Sustainability&volume=13&pages=2548&doi=10.339
0/su13052548)
[27] “Sixth Generation (6G) Wireless networks: Vision, Research Activities, Challenges and
Potential Solutions,” (https://www.mdpi.com/699472)
[14]: https://nilesecure.com/ai-networking/anomaly-detection-ai#:~:text=Anomaly
%20detection%20in%20AI%20is,a%20rare%20event%20of%20interest.