What Is an Open IoT Platform? Insights from a Systematic Mapping Study

Abstract

Today, the Internet of Things (IoT) is mainly associated with vertically integrated systems that often are closed and fragmented in their applicability. To build a better IoT ecosystem, the open IoT platform has become a popular term in the recent years. However, this term is usually used in an intuitive way without clarifying the openness aspects of the platforms. The goal of this paper is to characterize the openness types of IoT platforms and investigate what makes them open. We conducted a systematic mapping study by retrieving data from 718 papers. As a result of applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 221 papers were selected for review. We discovered 46 IoT platforms that have been characterized as open, whereas 25 platforms are referred as open by some studies rather than the platforms themselves. We found that the most widely accepted and used open IoT platforms are NodeMCU and ThingSpeak that together hold a share of more than 70% of the declared open IoT platforms in the selected papers. The openness of an IoT platform is interpreted into different openness types. Our study results show that the most common openness type encountered in open IoT platforms is open-source, but also open standards, open APIs, open data and open layers are used in the literature. Finally, we propose a new perspective on how to define openness in the context of IoT platforms by providing several insights from the different stakeholder viewpoints.

Openness and Security Thinking Characteristics for IoT Ecosystems

“…The results emphasize the openness aspects as an emerging trend [6,10,31,32]. However, we also need to point out that openness trends are adapted towards some of the openness aspects and IoT applications, for e.g., when it comes to the smart home, there are still a number of devices, such as: gateway/hub that feature a closed ecosystem or with some proprietary standards and APIs [33], whereas most of them are closed when considered from an industrial-based IoT systems [34].…”

“…Openness is usually characterized by transparent access to information, other resources, collaborative participation, and after all is about opening up [9]. Openness is a de-facto trend in the IoT domain, whereas its interpretation relies on different stakeholders view and their domains [10]. Moreover, values of openness via Blockchain smart contracts are particularly encouraged as it can help reducing the surveillance threats while improving the trust to IoT ecosystems [11].…”

“…Openness in IoT systems offer multitude of benefits [10], but security is never assured [12,13]. Security and privacy goals are at the top of the agenda for the industry, yet a growing number of smaller IoT vendors, typically startups, whose core competence does not focus on security, brings a bigger challenge to set-up a secure IoT infrastructure [14][15][16].…”

Accessing and Integrating Distant Capabilities in Smart Industry Projects

“…• Edge computing (processing closer to the original data). This heterogeneity of technology and the inherent integration difficulties challenge developers and researchers (Vogel, Dong, Emruli, Davidsson, & Spalazzese, 2020). And within organizations, leaders who need to select solutions or commercialize their technologies face many technological approaches and decisions (Firouzi, Farahani, Weinberger, DePace, & Aliee, 2020).…”

Hypnos: A Hardware and Software Toolkit for Energy-Aware Sensing in Low-Cost IoT Nodes

“…Across these layers, the IoT space is highly heterogeneous, with a variety of standards, hardware and (software) platforms available, and major commercial players each implementing and pushing their respective solutions [11]. Never [12]. This article focuses on the latter market segment, where IoT nodes consist of small, lightweight, self-sustaining and often low-cost devices, with limited memory, computational capabilities and battery power.…”