Devices now more than ever are specifically designed to freely communicate with one another, creating a web of interconnected sensors, machines, cameras and vehicles. This, however, creates challenges. Interoperability issues continue to appear as the IoT ecosystem continues to grow. Overcoming these challenges is critical to ensuring success.
Fragmented ecosystems
The fracturing of IoT is not just a single issue, but a multi-faceted one, with causes rooted in the proliferation of proprietary technologies, a diversity of standards and competing interests among industry players. Companies designing and manufacturing devices in the IoT ecosystem emerge with a natural incentive to differentiate themselves and their propositions to the market through closed ecosystems surrounding their technologies. Starting with an existing proprietary platform and protocol, they quickly move on to differentiate their product with proprietary hardware or software.
Furthermore, the absence of interoperability standards exacerbates the issue. Unlike the Internet or other networks, there are no adopted protocols for how IoT devices should communicate with each other or share data within the larger IoT ecosystem. Efforts to develop interoperability specifications that currently exist are quite fragmented. Various industry consortia and standards development organisations have promoted their own specifications and standardisation protocols, including one M2M and the IPSO Alliance. These organisations offer recommendations and information-sharing on interoperability but need necessary standards that can support a deeper network of devices. Without adopting interoperability standards, we remain further apart than we should be.
On top of that, the disunity at the software and services level is a feature rather than a bug: almost every manufacturer develops its own app ecosystem, cloud services and third-party integrations, so when you bring together different IoT products, the customer experience remains fragmented.
Creating a unified strategy for addressing the tangle of IoT ecosystems demands industry actors cooperating to embrace open standards, interoperability standards and consistent development approaches. Unifying the IoT ecosystem is critical to achieving the most valuable outcomes from connected technologies.
Protocol proliferation
The massive increase in communication protocols for the IoT converges as a challenge for interoperability. The sheer number of different protocols makes it difficult, especially if they have been made by different companies. For example, standardised communications protocols, such as Wi-Fi and Bluetooth, co-exist with application-specific protocols, such as Zigbee, Z-Wave, UPnP and others.
That diversity results in the overall proliferation of IoT protocols, which is necessary for different use cases and constraints, such as low-power sensor networks versus high-bandwidth multimedia streaming. Manufacturers might choose a lower data-rate, lower-power option when burdens such as limited battery life take priority. As such, one might find that, within an IoT deployment, a combination of multiple protocols is used.
The following is a non-exhaustive list of commonly used IoT communication protocols:
- Wi-Fi (802.11): An omnipresent wireless networking technology, it offers high data rates and ubiquitous compatibility with consumer devices.
- Bluetooth: A short-range wireless technology that is a key aspect of connecting devices nearby, such as wearables or smart home technology.
- Zigbee: developed for home automation and industrial applications, this low-power, low-data-rate wireless protocol is intended for very low-cost, battery-powered networking devices.
- Z-Wave: Another wireless mesh protocol like Zigbee, optimised for home automation but more consistently consistent over greater distances. It supports interoperability across devices from several manufacturers.
- LoRaWAN: A wide-area, low-power wireless protocol for connecting IoT devices, such as objects in smart cities and agriculture.
While these protocols have advantages, they also create a cacophony that could hinder attempts at interoperability if all the different devices are not able to communicate with each other. Standardisation bodies are an important counterweight to protocol proliferation by establishing interoperability standards and fostering convergence towards common protocols. For example, the Open Connectivity Foundation (OCF) and the Thread Group are developing open standards for IoT interoperability, enabling mature IoT device families to communicate with each other.
If manufacturers, developers and integrators address the challenges of protocol proliferation by carefully analysing demands in their respective IoT deployments, choosing protocols that will best deliver performance, compatibility and scale, and embracing the emerging interoperability standards and best practises that enable protocol selection and integration, then we can finally conquer protocol proliferation, enabling the full evolution and potential of our interconnected IoT ecosystems.
Security concerns
Security is another big issue when discussing IoT technology because the interconnected nature of so many devices creates an unseen attack surface that malicious actors may be able to exploit through a well-designed attack. One of the main promises of interoperability is that any device or system can be integrated with any other, allowing us to bring previously separate devices together to create new systems. However, they potentially provide a much larger attack surface and may need increased and improved security to keep these devices free from hackers and other malicious actors.
The problem is that in most IoT deployments, there are just too many moving parts, as said earlier: different types of hardware, different software systems and different protocols are used for communication between devices. Manufacturers generally want to prioritise ease of development and time to market, rather than security, meaning that security bugs are baked into many IoT devices out of the box. But there is also an alarming lack of standards and certification processes for these security systems, meaning the industry generally guards IoT ecosystems with a false sense of security, leaving the engines of our modern civilisation exposed to the clever attacks of cybercriminals.
Common security threats in IoT deployments include:
- Unauthorised access: IoT device default or weak authentication cannot stop attackers from taking over IoT devices using unauthorised methods such as brute force and gain control over critical systems.
- Security vulnerabilities: Sensitive data stored on or transmitted through IoT devices can be intercepted or blackmailed due to insufficient encryption and privacy, and security standards. This poses a threat to user privacy and confidentiality.
- Botnets and DDoS attacks: A botnet hijacks IoT devices to launch a large-scale distributed denial of service (DDoS) attack against a network or service.
- Malware and ransomware: Inadequate security controls render IoT devices vulnerable to malware infection and ransomware attacks, with a consequent risk of business disruption and the extortion of ransom.
- Risks for supply chain: The supply chain for the IoT’s constituent parts is lengthy with suppliers in multiple countries, thereby increasing the risk of fake hardware, tainted firmware and supply chain attacks, ensuring that IoT’s constituent parts cannot be trusted to work as designed and make or break our safety, privacy and prosperity – as well as that of our trusted AIs.
Providing security for IoT deployments requires a multipronged approach, including hardware security, software security, network security and operational security measures. Firstly, manufacturers must build in security from the ground up by embedding features such as secure boot – an initialising routine that ensures only trusted and properly authenticated software loads – hardware-based encryption and tamper-resistant components. Secondly, if developed devices have memory upgrades and evolving requirements, manufacturers must provide regular security updates and patches to squash bugs, address vulnerabilities and stay ahead of evolving threats.
Data compatibility
Data is critical, as it’s the fuel that drives the creation of insight, automation and decisions. The readiness of IoT devices to interact and interoperate depends as much on the exchange and interpretation of the data they create as it does on their communications capabilities. Data interoperability thus becomes an important component of the interoperability challenge.
Incompatibility among data formats, structures and semantics is arguably the most fundamental IoT data issue. Different IoT devices and systems could produce, transmit and publish data in different formats, as each data source might adopt its own data model based on application scenarios. It remains a tough nut to crack when different entities are trying to make sense of unique datasets from various sources. The incompatibility of data modelling can substantially impact the interoperability of IoT, the scalability of the system, or its extensibility.
Key aspects of data compatibility challenges include:
- Data formats: IoT devices may follow different data formats, such as JSON, XML, CSV, etc., or proprietary data formats in which data is stored. Due to the use of multiple data formats, there can be a lot of inconsistency in the representation and transmission of data among the devices. It is very important to make sure that data formats are in sync across devices so that different devices can communicate properly.
- Data models: IoT platforms and ecosystems often use different data models and schemas to represent their data. Standardising data models and providing support for interoperable data schemas through common representations of data is a necessary step to ensure consistency and compatibility across different IoT systems.
- Data protocols: Differences in data protocols and communication mechanisms can also pose challenges to data compatibility. Common communication data protocols and data exchange and communication standards are highly recommended in order to lower the manpower required for these projects.
As new technologies, such as edge computing, semantic interoperability and data virtualisation, evolve and mature, they provide pathways to address data interoperability issues. Edge computing moves data processing and transformation closer to the source, thus minimising latency and enabling real-time interoperability. Application of semantic interoperability frameworks using ontologies and semantic annotation to data facilitates machine-understandable data exchange through the brokering of data semantics. Data virtualisation can exploit abstraction layers and data integration facilities to ‘virtually’ unify disparate data sources, thus enabling interoperability.
Navigating through IoT compatibility land requires support from data governance, data quality management and data lifecycle management practises to assure consistency, integrity and usability of IoT data. Using standards-based approaches, enabling technologies and fostering stakeholder engagement will enable organisations to make the most of data-driven value and innovation across the IoT and gathering networks.
User experience
As the number of devices and the complexity of their interactions increase, user experience (UX) will be the main factor determining the success of IoT devices, as they are designed to optimise and enhance daily life and work. The particular challenges of achieving seamless and intuitive UX for interconnected IoT environments come from the inherent complexity of the IoT, its diversity and the fragmentation resulting from the plug-and-play model.
Disjointed ecosystems and interfaces are one of the biggest problems in IoT user experience. There is an overwhelming number of devices, platforms and applications competing for user attention. Consumers are often greeted by a chaotic offering of disjointed experiences, resulting in interfaces, interactions and workflows that lack a cohesive vision. This produces interfaces that are unclear and frustrating and, therefore, users can feel disoriented, discouraged and disconnected.
Besides, interoperability issues can make the challenge of providing a seamless user experience in IoT deployments worse. This can occur when devices or systems are incompatible or behave unpredictably because they were not built to ‘talk’ to each other – leading to incompatibilities and unforeseen interoperability failures that can compromise user confidence and trust in IoT solutions. This means that users may continue to experience the gaps and frictions associated with technical complexities and interoperability challenges, despite being promised seamless integration and automation.
Key aspects of user experience challenges in IoT include:
- Interface complexity: IoT ecosystems typically entail a multitude of devices with heterogeneous interfaces and interaction models. Often, the challenge is to balance simplicity, consistency and functionality with these complex and multifaceted interfaces.
- Interaction design: Designing intuitive interactions that respond sensitively to individual differences in user needs, preferences and contexts is important for improving the user experience in IoT environments. This involves designing context-aware interactions, pre-emptive alerts and adaptive interfaces for improved usability and as a means to facilitate user interactions with smart objects with greater flexibility in diverse IoT ecosystems.
- Feedback and control: IoT needs to give users valuable feedback and meaningful control over their devices and systems. Users need feedback for awareness and control for empowerment. For this, IoT needs clear, contextual feedback notifications for monitoring, information delivery and alerts, as well as granular control options for customisation, change and adaptation to the user’s specific needs and preferences.
User experience difficulties associated with IoT can be avoided by taking a design-led approach that is user-centric, involves usability testing and iterative refinement. Design thinking methods, user research techniques and usability testing heuristics can be used to identify user needs, pain points and preferences, which can inform IoT design and implementation.
The IoT interoperability journey is marked by challenges including ecosystem fragmentation, protocol proliferation, security loopholes and insufficient UX. But despite the obstacles, the opportunities for innovation, efficiency and transformation are immense. Achievinging the efficiencies IoT promises requires grappling with the enormity and complexity of the technological landscape ahead. In crafting a vision of the future in which IoT enhances our lives and boosts productivity, the first step is for us to acknowledge these problems and take on the challenge of managing, orchestrating and using inter-related and distributed technologies.
Article by Magda Dąbrowska, editor at WeKnow Media
Comment on this article via X: @IoTNow_ and visit our homepage IoT Now
