ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Analysis of LoRaWAN 1.0 and 1.1 Protocols Security Mechanisms.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
LoRaWAN is a low power wide area network (LPWAN) technology protocol introduced by the LoRa Alliance in 2015. It was designed for its namesake features: long range, low power, low data rate, and wide area networks. Over the years, several proposals on protocol specifications have addressed various challenges in LoRaWAN, focusing on its architecture and security issues. All of these specifications must coexist, giving rise to the compatibility issues impacting the sustainability of this technology. This paper studies the compatibility issues in LoRaWAN protocols. First, we detail the different protocol specifications already disclosed by the LoRa Alliance in two major versions, v1.0 and v1.1. This is done through presenting two scenarios where we discuss the communication and security mechanisms. In the first scenario, we describe how an end node (ED) and network server (NS) implementing LoRaWAN v1.0 generate session security keys and exchange messages for v1.0. In the second scenario, we describe how an ED v1.1 and an NS v1.1 communicate after generating security session keys. Next, we highlight the compatibility issues between the components implementing the two different LoRaWAN Specifications (mainly v1.0 and v1.1). Next, we present two new scenarios (scenarios 3 and 4) interchanging the ED and NS versions. In scenario three, we detail how an ED implementing LoRaWAN v1.1 communicates with an NS v1.0. Conversely, in scenario four, we explain how an ED v1.0 and an NS v1.1 communicate. In all these four scenarios, we highlight the concerns with security mechanism: show security session keys are generated and how integrity and confidentiality are guaranteed in LoRaWAN. At the end, we present a comparative table of these four compatibility scenarios.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.