https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1057%2Fjors.1968.58.pdf

Decision and Control

A Connected World

The transformation of time series into complex networks through visibility graphs is an innovative way to study time-based events. In this work, we use visibility graphs to transform IOTA and IoTeX price volatility time series into complex networks. Our aim is twofold: first, to better understand the markets of the two most capitalised Internet of Things (IoT) platforms at the time of writing. IOTA runs on a public directed acyclic graph (DAG) and IoTeX on a blockchain. Second, to suggest how 5G can improve information security in these two key IoT platforms. The analysis of the networks created by the natural and horizontal visibility graphs shows, first, that both IOTA and IoTeX are still at their infancy in their development, with IoTex seemingly developing faster. Second, both IoT tokens form communities in a hierarchical structure, and third, 5G can accelerate their development. We use intentional risk management as a lever to understand the impact of 5G on IOTA and IoTeX. Our results lead us to provide a set of design recommendations that contribute to improving information security in future 5G-based IoT implementations.

Visibility Graph Analysis of IOTA and IoTeX Price Series: An Intentional Risk-Based Strategy to Use 5G for IoT

In this paper, we use the methods of networks science to analyse the transaction networks of tokens running on the Ethereum blockchain. We start with a deep dive on four of them: Ampleforth (AMP), Basic Attention Token (BAT), Dai (DAI) and Uniswap (UNI). We study two types of blockchain addresses, smart contracts (SC), which run code, and externally owned accounts (EOA), run by human users, or off-chain code, with the corresponding private keys. We use preferential attachment and network dismantling strategies to evaluate their importance for the network structure. Subsequently, we expand our view to all ERC-20 tokens issued on the Ethereum network. We first study multilayered networks composed of Ether (ETH) and individual tokens using a dismantling approach to assess how the deconstruction starting from one network affects the other. Finally, we analyse the Ether network and Ethereum-based token networks to find similarities between sets of high-degree nodes. For this purpose, we use both the traditional Jaccard Index and a new metric that we introduce, the Ordered Jaccard Index (OJI), which considers the order of the elements in the two sets that are compared. Our findings suggest that smart contracts and exchange-related addresses play a structural role in transaction networks both in DeFi and Ethereum. The presence in the network of nodes associated to addresses of smart contracts and exchanges is positively correlated with the success of the token network measured in terms of network size and market capitalisation. These nodes play a fundamental role in the centralisation of the supposedly decentralised finance (DeFi) ecosystem: without them, their networks would quickly collapse.

/pdf/the-structural-role-of-smart-contracts-and-exchanges-in-the-2hxftm0w.pdf

The Structural Role of Smart Contracts and Exchanges in the Centralisation of Ethereum-Based Cryptoassets

In this article, we model the two most market-capitalised public, open and permissionless blockchain implementations, Bitcoin (BTC) and Ethereum (ETH), as a System of Systems (SoS) of public blockchains. We study the concepts of blockchain, BTC, ETH, complex networks, SoS Engineering and intentional risk. We analyse BTC and ETH from an open SoS perspective through the main properties that seminal System of Systems Engineering (SoSE) references propose. This article demonstrates that these public blockchain implementations create networks that grow in complexity and connect with each other. We propose a methodology based on a complexity management lever such as SoSE to better understand public blockchains such as BTC and ETH and manage their evolution. Our ultimate objective is to improve the resilience of public blockchains against intentional risk: a key requirement for their mass adoption. We conclude with specific measures, based on this novel systems engineering approach, to effectively improve the resilience against intentional risk of the open SoS of public blockchains, composed of a non-inflationary money system, “sound money”, such as BTC, and of a world financial computer system, “a financial conduit”, such as ETH. The goal of this paper is to formulate a SoS that transfers digital value and aspires to position itself as a distributed alternative to the fiat currency-based financial system.

https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9292/11/2/241/pdf?version=1642065450

Modeling Bitcoin plus Ethereum as an Open System of Systems of Public Blockchains to Improve Their Resilience against Intentional Risk

Some Internet of Things (IoT) platforms use blockchain to transport data. The value proposition of IoT is the connection to the Internet of a myriad of devices that provide and exchange data to improve people’s lives and add value to industries. The blockchain technology transfers data and value in an immutable and decentralised fashion. Security, composed of both non-intentional and intentional risk management, is a fundamental design requirement for both IoT and blockchain. We study how blockchain answers some of the IoT security requirements with a focus on intentional risk. The review of a sample of security incidents impacting public blockchains confirm that identity and access management (IAM) is a key security requirement to build resilience against intentional risk. This fact is also applicable to IoT solutions built on a blockchain. We compare the two IoT platforms based on public permissionless distributed ledgers with the highest market capitalisation: IOTA, run on an alternative to a blockchain, which is a directed acyclic graph (DAG); and IoTeX, its contender, built on a blockchain. Our objective is to discover how we can create IAM resilience against intentional risk in these IoT platforms. For that, we turn to complex network theory: a tool to describe and compare systems with many participants. We conclude that IoTeX and possibly IOTA transaction networks are scale-free. As both platforms are vulnerable to attacks, they require resilience against intentional risk. In the case of IoTeX, DIoTA provides a resilient IAM solution. Furthermore, we suggest that resilience against intentional risk requires an IAM concept that transcends a single blockchain. Only with the interplay of edge and global ledgers can we obtain data integrity in a multi-vendor and multi-purpose IoT network.

Alberto Partida

Papers

Identity and Access Management Resilience against Intentional Risk for Blockchain-Based IOT Platforms

Visibility Graph Analysis of IOTA and IoTeX Price Series: An Intentional Risk-Based Strategy to Use 5G for IoT