Internet of Things: Exploring Applications, Security, and Bandwidth

This assignment delves into various aspects of the Internet of Things (IoT). It begins by exploring the concept of no user interface, providing examples like automatic payment and car unlocking systems. The assignment then compares different cable types, including twisted pair, coaxial, and optical fiber cables, outlining their bandwidth, cost, security, and noise interference characteristics. Furthermore, it contrasts RFID, sensors, and video tracking technologies, highlighting their advantages, disadvantages, and key applications. The assignment also addresses security and privacy issues in IoT, such as hacking and data breaches, and proposes solutions to mitigate these vulnerabilities. A calculation demonstrates the time savings achieved by a system blocking application requests. Finally, the assignment discusses Nielsen's Law of Internet Bandwidth, comparing it to Moore's Law and emphasizing the importance of bandwidth optimization for web designers. The document references various sources to support the analysis.

Running head: INTERNET OF THINGS
Internet of Things
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author’s notes

1
INTERNET OF THINGS
Table of Contents
Answer 1..............................................................................................................................2
Answer 2..............................................................................................................................2
Answer 3..............................................................................................................................4
Answer 4..............................................................................................................................5
Answer 5..............................................................................................................................6
Answer 6..............................................................................................................................6
References............................................................................................................................9

2
INTERNET OF THINGS
Answer 1
In this era of technology, people have become used to mobile phones and applications.
There is a recent observation that says that people have more preference towards natural mode of
communication rather than through any graphical user interface (GUI). The initial step towards
this is the voice user interface (VUI). It is a more convenient method of communicating (Singh,
Tripathi & Jara, 2014). People have a preference towards using their sensors while interacting
rather than GUI. It is extremely convenient if they do not use any type of interface. Following
are the two examples where it can be applied:
Automatic payment method: The no user interface concept can simplify the method of
payments that can be done in any store. This will ease the customers in many ways. They can
simply buy their products and leave the store without any queue at the exit. There is an app
called Pay with Square that enables the customers to carry out their actions without any user
interference and in a natural way.
Automatic car unlock system: People have to take many steps before entering their cars.
They have to walk to car, take out the keys and unlock the car. This system can be simplified by
the concept of no user interface. Mercedes-Benz has gone keyless in 1991. This helps to save
energy and time. It is an user friendly concept.
Answer 2
The table given below shows the comparison between coaxial, twisted pair and optical
fiber cable.
Twisted Pair Cable Coaxial Cable Optical Fiber

3
INTERNET OF THINGS
It has the least bandwidth. It has medium level of
bandwidth.
It has the highest bandwidth
among these three.
It is the cheapest among these
three.
Its cost is at a medium level. It is highly expensive.
The level of security here is very
low.
It security level is moderate. It has high level of security.
Their noise interference is very
high.
Noise interference is very low. It has got high immunity for
interference. Light wave remains
unaffected towards noise
interference.
The frequency range or distance
is 0 to 3.5 kHz.
The range of frequency or
distance is 0 to 500 MHz.
The frequency range or distance
is 180 to 370 THz.
Table 1: Comparison between Twisted Pair, Coaxial and Optical Fiber Cable
(Source: Boyer & Heffron, 2015)
Three types of Twisted Pair Cables are:
FTP: This is known as foil shield twisted pair cable. This has almost similar
characteristics like the unshielded cable that are twisted pair. The applications are similar to that
of 10GBaseT.
SF/UTP: This is known as unscreened twisted pair. It has a foil shield as well as braid
screen. It is useful for EMI protection.
S/UTP: This is known as twisted pair cable that is unscreened. It is also referred to as
STP in special cases.

4
INTERNET OF THINGS
Three types of Coaxial Cables are:
RG-6/UQ: It has 75 ohms impedance. It consists of four different levels for the purpose
of shielding.
RG-8/U: It has 50 ohms impedance. It has characteristics that are of same nature as
10BASE5 which is a thicknet.
RG-7: It has 75 ohms impedance. Its frequency level is very high. And it has very less
loss.
Three types of Optical Fibers are:
Single Mode Cable: It is called single mode cable because the transmission mode is
single (Winzer, 2014). The diameter of the stand is around 10 microns. It has only one stand
Plastic Optic Fiber: This is a type of fiber that is made of polymer. Its refractive index is
approximately 1.46.
Multi Mode Cable: This is a type of cable that high bandwidth, speed and huge diameter
that is greater than 50 but less than 100 microns. It has more than one mode of transmission.
Answer 3
The table given is the comparison table showing the difference between RFID, Sensors
and Video Tracking.
RFID Sensors Video Tracking

5
INTERNET OF THINGS
Advantages: Its method of
identification is unique and is
very easy.
The long life of photoelectric
sensors along with a quick
response time is its advantage.
It can give exact data in an
intensive manner that has been
recorded.
Disadvantages: Damaged tags
can cause failure to the system.
Physical contact is necessary in
this method (Tozlu et al., 2012).
Huge storage space is needed
along with costly gadgets.
Key Requirement: Unique and
automatic identification
Safety requirements Customizable flow of work is
needed.
Application: Retail stores and
supply chain logistics.
Detecting parts and travel
sensing.
Surveillance and event tracking.
Table 2: Comparison between RFID, Sensors and Video Tracking
(Source: Takai et al., 2013)
Answer 4
This era of technology and internet has made people dependent on the Internet of Things.
There are major privacy and security issues that are related to IoT. There is a chance of losing
personal sensitive data through the process of hacking. Deliberate loss can be done by any
unauthorized user who hacks in the system. Internet can get attacked for several reasons
(Borgohain, Kumar & Sanyal, 2015). There are possibilities of spyware and malware attacks.
Information can be deleted or manipulated by the attacker for harming the user. It can also lead
to financial loss and loss of property (Suo et al., 2012). These vulnerabilities can be resolved by
deploying strong security policies.

6
INTERNET OF THINGS
Answer 5
The question provides us with the following information:
Time taken for application trigger= 1s.
Time delay in case of propagating in round trip way between the application and sensor=
12 ms.
Time consumed on an average basis for the purpose of processing every request=3 ms.
Time taken to send and receive message= 2 ms.
Therefore, total time consumed by the application is 1+12+3+2 ms= 18 ms
This calculation shows that the system would save 18 ms when all the requests are
blocked by the application. This application design would be much better than the previous
existing system.
Answer 6
According to the Nielsen’s law, the speed of connection of the high end user goes on
increasing at the rate of 50% each year (Nielsen, 2014). The graph presented below proves the
law by showing that the speed increased around 50 % from the year 1984 to the year 2014. The
exponential growth of the speed is represented by the straight line.

7
INTERNET OF THINGS
Figure 1: Nielsen’s Law
(Source: Nielsen, 2014)
The Nielsen’s law is similar to the Moore’s law. On comparing both the laws, it reveals
that bandwidth growth is much slower than computer power. Moore’s law state that the
computer capabilities become two times in every 18 months. The table below gives a briefing of
both the laws:
Law Annualized Growth Rate
Nielsen’s law Internet bandwidth: 50 %
Moore’s law Computer power: 60%
Table 3: Nielsen and Moore’s Law
(Source: Nielsen, 2014)

8
INTERNET OF THINGS
Most of the general users have a greater preference for moderate bandwidth rather than
high speed bandwidth. People have the tendency of saving bandwidth. It is possible only for high
end users to access the internet at an extremely high speed. The web designers must concentrate
on an optimal usage of bandwidth rather than high available speeds.

9
INTERNET OF THINGS
References
Borgohain, T., Kumar, U., & Sanyal, S. (2015). Survey of security and privacy issues of Internet
of Things. arXiv preprint arXiv:1501.02211.
Boyer, R. J., & Heffron, J. F. (2015). U.S. Patent Application No. 14/775,870.
Nielsen, J. (2014). Nielsen’s Law of Internet Bandwidth, 1998.
Singh, D., Tripathi, G., & Jara, A. J. (2014, March). A survey of Internet-of-Things: Future
vision, architecture, challenges and services. In Internet of things (WF-IoT), 2014 IEEE
world forum on (pp. 287-292). IEEE.
Suo, H., Wan, J., Zou, C., & Liu, J. (2012, March). Security in the internet of things: a review.
In Computer Science and Electronics Engineering (ICCSEE), 2012 international
conference on (Vol. 3, pp. 648-651). IEEE.
Takai, I., Ito, S., Yasutomi, K., Kagawa, K., Andoh, M., & Kawahito, S. (2013). LED and
CMOS image sensor based optical wireless communication system for automotive
applications. IEEE Photonics Journal, 5(5), 6801418-6801418.
Tozlu, S., Senel, M., Mao, W., & Keshavarzian, A. (2012). Wi-Fi enabled sensors for internet of
things: A practical approach. IEEE Communications Magazine, 50(6).
Winzer, P. J. (2014). Spatial multiplexing in fiber optics: The 10x scaling of metro/core
capacities. Bell Labs Technical Journal, 19, 22-30.