IoT Playing Remarkable roll in today’s world, Nowadays, most smart devices have many sensors such as temperature sensor, humidity sensor, heartbeat sensor etc., these smart devices to detect information about their surroundings through sensors, and act accordingly. Internet connection of such devices are called the Internet of Things. As IoT is implemented successfully in different fields around the world, number of IoT networks newly created increase. It opens up new research area. IoT involves integration of multiple technologies. Integration of these multiple technologies increase the IoT system complexity. For authentication purpose Central server structure was used. Integrating multiple technologies with not reliable interconnection network may leads to sharing false data with wrong authentication. Central server is used for Data processing, it will require increase in processing infrastructure requirement for large scale IoT. Centralized architecture also affected by the problem Single point of failure. In smart city application privacy of the participant and security of the user data are more important. So, in order to solve these issues, we need a solution which is decentralized, verifiable, and privacy preserving technology. Here the roll of blockchain will come. Blockchain technology use distributed node to node communication technique. Blockchain helps to exchange information between untrusted parties without the need of thrusted third party. So, by communicating the IoT data through Blockchain solves such problems. But heterogeneity of the IoT network and resource constrained environment of it make difficulty to integrating Blockchain with IoT. So, we need to develop a blockchain model which will work effectively in resource constrained environment. This paper proposed a Dew computing based IoT Blockchain integration method which use election-based consensus algorithm for improving performance in resource constrained IoT network.

1.
A.A.
Sadawi
,
S.
Mohamed
,
Hassan
, and
M.
Ndiaye
,
IEEE Access
9
,
2021
2021
.
2.
Z.
Li
,
M.
Alazab
,
S.
Garg
, and
M. S.
Hossain
,
IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology
70
(
2021
).
3.
P. P.
Ray
,
IEEE Access
723
737
(
2017
).
4.
K.
Xiao
,
Z.
Gao
,
W.
Shi
,
X.
Qiu
,
Y.
Yang
, and
L.
Rui
,
Future Generation Computer Systems, Science Direct
2020
2020
.
5.
B.
Bera
,
D.
Chattaraj
, and
A. K.
Das
,
Computer Communications
2020
2020
.
6.
M.
Rafailescu
,
International Journal of Computer Science & Information Technology
9
(
2017
).
7.
A.
Reyna
,
C.
Martín
,
J.
Chen
,
E.
Soler
,
M.
Diaz
,
Future Generation Computer Systems
, Vol
88
, pp
173
190
,
2018
.
8.
J.
Zanella
,
N.
Bui
,
A.
Castellani
,
L.
Vangelista
, and
M.
Zorzivol
,
IEEE Internet Things
1
,
22
32
(
2014
).
9.
J.
Gubbi
,
R.
Buyya
,
S.
Marusic
, and
M.
Palaniswami
,
Future Gener, Comput. Syst
29
,
1645
1660
(
2013
).
10.
N.
Kshetri
,
IEEE IT Professional.
, vol.
19
, no.
4
, pp.
68
72
,
2017
.
11.
M.
Amadeo
,
C.
Campolo
,
J.
Quevedo
,
D.
Corujo
,
A.
Molinaro
,
A.
Iera
,
R. L.
Aguiar
, and
A. V.
Vasilakos
,
IEEE Netw
30
,
92
100
(
2016
).
12.
M. A.
Khan
and
K.
Salah
,
Future Gener. Comput. Syst
82
,
395
411
(
2018
).
13.
M.
Crosby
,
P.
Pattanayak
,
S.
Verma
, and
V.
Kalyanaraman
,
Appl. Innov
2
,
71
71
(
2016
).
14.
M.
Ammar
,
G.
Russello
,
B.
Crispo
, and
J, Inf. Secur. Appl
38
,
8
27
(
2018
).
15.
D.
Puthal
,
S.
Nepal
,
R.
Ranjan
, and
J.
Chen
,
IEEE Cloud Comput
3
,
64
71
(
2016
).
16.
M.
Banerjee
,
J.
Lee
, and
K. K. R.
Choo
,
Digit. Commun. Netw
4
,
149
160
(
2018
).
This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this content.