Due to the widespread proliferation of today's Internet of Things (IoT), a system designer needs the IoT system and software design patterns to assist in designing scalable and replicable solutions. Patterns are encapsulations of reusable common problems and solutions under specific contexts. Many IoT patterns have been published, such as IoT design patterns and IoT architecture patterns to document the successes (and failures) in IoT systems and software development. However, because these patterns are not well classified, their adoption does not live up to their potential. To understand the reasons, we conducted a systematic literature review. From the 32 identified papers, 143 IoT architecture and design patterns were extracted. We analyzed these patterns according to several characteristics and outlined directions for improvements when publishing and adopting IoT patterns. Of the extracted patterns, 57% are non-IoT patterns, suggesting that IoT systems and software are often designed via conventional architecture and design patterns that are not specific to IoT design. Although most IoT design patterns are applicable to any domain, IoT architecture patterns tend to be domain specific, implying that the unique nature of IoT adoption in specific domains appears at the architecture level. As more domains adopt IoT, the number of domain-specific IoT design patterns should increase. In terms of quality attributes, many IoT patterns address compatibility, security, and maintainability.

For effective vulnerability management, vulnerability and attack information must be collected quickly and efficiently. A security knowledge repository can collect such information. The Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE) provides known vulnerabilities of products, while the Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification (CAPEC) stores attack patterns, which are descriptions of common attributes and approaches employed by adversaries to exploit known weaknesses. Due to the fact that the information in these two repositories are not linked, identifying related CAPEC attack information from CVE vulnerability information is challenging. Currently, the related CAPEC-ID can be traced from the CVE-ID using Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE) in some but not all cases. Here, we propose a method to automatically trace the related CAPEC-IDs from CVE-ID using three similarity measures: TF–IDF, Universal Sentence Encoder (USE), and Sentence-BERT (SBERT). We prepared and used 58 CVE-IDs as test input data. Then, we tested whether we could trace CAPEC-IDs related to each of the 58 CVE-IDs. Additionally, we experimentally confirm that TF–IDF is the best similarity measure, as it traced 48 of the 58 CVE-IDs to the related CAPEC-ID.

Vulnerability and attack information must be collected to assess the severity of vulnerabilities and prioritize countermeasures against cyberattacks quickly and accurately. Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures is a dictionary that lists vulnerabilities and incidents, while Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification is a dictionary of attack patterns. Direct identification of common attack pattern enumeration and classification from common vulnerabilities and exposures is difficult, as they are not always directly linked. Here, an approach to directly find common links between these dictionaries is proposed. Then, several patterns, which are combinations of similarity measures and popular algorithms such as term frequency–inverse document frequency, universal sentence encoder, and sentence BERT, are evaluated experimentally using the proposed approach. Specifically, two metrics, recall and mean reciprocal rank, are used to assess the traceability of the common attack pattern enumeration and classification identifiers associated with 61 identifiers for common vulnerabilities and exposures. The experiment confirms that the term frequency–inverse document frequency algorithm provides the best overall performance.

Security patterns encompass security-related issues in secure software system development and operations that often appear in certain contexts. Since the late 1990s, about 500 security patterns have been proposed. Although the technical components are well investigated, the direction, overall picture, and barriers to implementation are not. Here, a systematic literature review of 240 papers is used to devise a taxonomy for security pattern research. Our taxonomy and the survey results should improve communications among practitioners and researchers, standardize the terminology, and increase the effectiveness of security patterns.

Patterns are encapsulations of problems and solutions under specific contexts. As the industry is realizing many successes (and failures) in IoT systems development and operations, many IoT patterns have been published such as IoT design patterns and IoT architecture patterns. Because these patterns are not well classified, their adoption does not live up to their potential. To understand the reasons, this paper analyzes an extensive set of published IoT architecture and design patterns according to several dimensions and outlines directions for improvements in publishing and adopting IoT patterns.