Blockchain Security and Privacy: Threats,Solutions,and Future Directions

Abstract

Blockchain is a decentralized, public, and distributed ledger designed to securely record and track transactions. It possesses the potential to transform various industries, including healthcare, supply chain management, and financial services, by enhancing transparency, efficiency, and trust. Despite its promise, blockchain development continues to face several challenges, particularly concerning security, scalability, and standardization. This paper provides a comprehensive analysis of blockchain technology, focusing on its quality of service (QoS), security mechanisms, and the latest frameworks and models shaping its evolution. Furthermore, it examines existing limitations and identifies key open research challenges that must be addressed for broader adoption. The findings suggest that blockchain can substantially improve operational efficiency and data integrity across multiple domains; however, realizing its full potential requires continued research and technological advancement to overcome current barriers.

Keywords

blockchain quality of service security distributed ledger scalability

1. Introduction

Blockchain is an open and decentralized record of information assembled through an interconnected framework that can be accessed over the Internet (Huynh-The et al., 2023; Laghari et al., 2023a). In this context, a framework represents the underlying distributed system that supports blockchain operations. The method by which information is chronologically recorded and verified provides blockchain with its profound potential as a trustworthy and transparent digital infrastructure (Kim & Won, 2019; Kumar et al., 2023). Unlike conventional centralized systems or standalone applications, blockchain represents an innovative methodology for recording and maintaining data securely across distributed environments (Feeney, 2016a, 2016b). This advancement enables the development of a wide variety of blockchain-based applications such as social networks, intermediary platforms, gaming systems, trading exchanges, storage services, voting systems, prediction markets, and online commerce platforms (Al-Nbhany et al., 2024; Chen et al., 2018; Sankar et al., 2017; Shaikh et al., 2022; Tasatanattakool & Techapanupreeda, 2018). Because of its networked, decentralized nature, blockchain has often been referred to as a foundational component of “Web 3.0” (Nehith, 2019).

Data recorded within a blockchain can represent diverse types of information, including monetary transactions, proof of ownership, identity verification, smart contracts between parties, or even metrics such as device energy usage (Mougayar, 2016). Each operation in the blockchain is verified through a consensus process involving numerous networked devices. Once consensus is achieved, a collective agreement among the participating nodes permanently stores the verified information on the blockchain. This recorded data becomes immutable—it cannot be altered, removed, or tampered with without the consent of the validating entities. Introduced in 2009 as the underlying technology for Bitcoin, blockchain facilitates decentralized transactions where no single third-party organization has control over the data (De Filippi & Hassan, 2018; Koutra & Tenentes, 2024; Monem et al., 2024; Nowiński & Kozma, 2017). In this decentralized environment, the ledger of transactions is publicly visible, timestamped, and verifiable by any participant, ensuring transparency, reliability, and permanence (Lemieux, 2016).

At its most fundamental level, blockchain is a chain of cryptographically secured digital information blocks stored in a shared public database (Liu, 2019; Nofer et al., 2017). Each block contains specific data elements that are verified by the network before being added to the chain (Costea, 2019; Mandolla et al., 2019). Conceptually, blockchain can be described as a database shared across interconnected computer networks (Bozic et al., 2016). Once information is entered into this distributed ledger, it becomes exceedingly difficult to modify (Lewis et al., 2017). Each block aggregates a set of verified records or transactions, and these blocks are linked sequentially through cryptographic hashes (Laghari et al., 2023b). A cryptographic hash—serving as a unique identifier for each block—is generated to ensure integrity and to maintain the chronological order of data (Kakavand et al., 2017; King et al., 2024). The linkage of hashes among blocks creates a tamper-resistant chain where any alteration would disrupt the entire structure (Nakasumi, 2017).

Blockchain networks operate primarily through two organizational paradigms: centralized and decentralized. In centralized systems, all branches and sub-networks connect to a single authority or database, whereas in decentralized systems, each node is able to maintain its own database and to reach agreement through peer interactions (Efanov & Roschin, 2018; Yang et al., 2018). In the absence of central authority, establishing trust among participants becomes a fundamental challenge. Blockchain resolves this issue by employing a distributed consensus model—a mechanism through which multiple nodes agree on the validity of transactions and collectively update the ledger. The Bitcoin network, one of the earliest implementations, exemplifies this approach: it allows anyone to join and participate anonymously, relying on consensus rather than identity verification (Poon & Dryja, 2016).

The conceptual foundation of blockchain dates back to 1991, when Stuart Haber and W. Scott Stornetta (https://www.techbullion.com/invented-Blockchain-technology/) first described the concept of a “chain of blocks” secured through cryptographic timestamps. They proposed a system that enhanced the efficiency of Merkle trees, where each leaf node is labeled with a hash of a data block, providing an auditable and tamper-evident structure. Merkle trees remain integral to modern blockchain systems, ensuring that any modification to stored data can be immediately detected (Mougayar, 2016). Beyond financial applications, blockchain has proven valuable for ensuring authenticity and traceability in supply chains, allowing organizations to verify the origin of materials and prevent counterfeiting (Francisco & Swanson, 2018). In terms of privacy, most blockchain networks function as public ledgers, meaning that all transaction histories are viewable by anyone with internet access. However, while transaction details are transparent, the identities of users remain protected by pseudonymous digital signatures, maintaining confidentiality (Muzammal et al., 2019; She et al., 2019). Every new transaction must be verified through network consensus before being added to the ledger (Min, 2019), guaranteeing integrity and consistency.

Each transaction in the blockchain undergoes rigorous verification by network participants to ensure authenticity and correctness (Zhang et al., 2019a). During the validation process, two main types of information are recorded: transaction details such as date, time, and value and cryptographically generated digital signatures representing the identities of transacting parties. Instead of revealing personal identifiers, blockchain uses these digital signatures to preserve privacy while ensuring accountability. Figure 1 illustrates the general working procedure of blockchain technology (https://www.cnet.com/news/Blockchain-explained-builds-trust-when-you-need-it-most/). Once verified, each transaction is securely encapsulated within a block, which is appended to the chain in an irreversible manner. Every participating node retains a synchronized copy of the ledger, ensuring redundancy and transparency. This distributed verification mechanism relies on peer-to-peer (P2P) consensus rather than centralized authority. Traditional financial systems, for example, depend on intermediaries such as banks or notaries to verify and record transactions, whereas blockchain replaces these institutions with distributed computational trust. Miners or validator nodes compete or cooperate to confirm transactions, and once a consensus is reached, the data is permanently recorded in the ledger. This decentralized validation not only ensures trustworthiness but also eliminates single points of failure and enhances overall system resilience.

Figure 1.

Working procedure of blockchain technology.

Blockchain represents a paradigm shift in how data and transactions are verified, stored, and shared in digital environments. Its decentralized architecture ensures immutability and transparency, while cryptographic mechanisms provide integrity and security. These features make blockchain a promising foundation for secure digital ecosystems. In this paper, we focus on blockchain technology and its state-of-the-art applications, emphasizing its role in securely transferring data, assets, and information across domains such as finance, healthcare, and communication networks. The paper provides a systematic review of blockchain frameworks, business models, quality-of-service (QoS) aspects, and security mechanisms. Furthermore, it discusses the major limitations and open research challenges that must be addressed to enable secure, scalable, and efficient blockchain implementations for future stakeholders.

The paper is organized into seven sections. Section 2 reviews blockchain frameworks and their classifications, including Ethereum, Hyperledger, Exonum, Bitcoin, and Corda. Section 3 discusses blockchain business models and their roles in service delivery. Section 4 explores blockchain's QoS parameters and operational performance. Section 5 focuses on distributed ledger technology, security mechanisms, and their implications. Section 6 highlights open research issues and challenges in blockchain adoption. Finally, Section 7 concludes the paper with key findings and future directions.

1.1 Methodology

This study relies on systematic reviews of blockchain technology and security issues. This research has examined recent trends and technical issues that have arisen since the adoption of blockchain technology. Furthermore, systematic literature reviews (SLRs) and system mapping studies (SMSs) are used in conjunction with blockchain secure technology.

1.2. Research Questions

RQ1: Which is the best-proposed framework for the blockchain?

The well-known and best framework of the blockchain is discussed in Section 2 (Bhowmik & Feng, 2017). Ethereum is a well-known and open-source framework for blockchain.

RQ2: Which is the best business model based on blockchain?

The best business model based on blockchain is discussed in Section 3 (Hwang et al., 2017): blockchain as a service.

RQ3: What are the critical parameters for blockchain QoS delivery?

In this question, the QoS delivery can be measured with several techniques. Still, the most important and well-known parameters are packet loss, jitter, latency, bandwidth, and mean opinion score (MOS). These parameters are used to measure the QoS delivery.

RQ4: Is blockchain secure compared to previous security methods and techniques?

Section 5 provides the answer to this question. It shows that blockchain is more secure than previous techniques because it is nearly impossible to hack.

RQ5: What are the open issues in blockchain?

The answer to this question is available in Section 7, which shows the many hot blockchain-related issues.

1.3. Selection Criteria and Non-Selection Criteria

Our investigation is based on good scientific papers published in well-known journals and agencies. The published papers are in English and have been extracted from recognized databases for journals such as IEEE, Elsevier, SpringerLink, Emerald, Wiley Online Library, and Google Scholar. These are related to the years 2016–2025, based on this SLR. Table 1 shows the selection and non-selection criteria for the published papers.

Table 1
Selection Criteria for Published Papers.

Selection Criteria Non-Selection Criteria

Those published papers are mostly focused on “Security” and “Blockchain Business Models.” The data have been extracted from recent papers published between 2016 and 2025. Selection criteria are based on authenticated data. Due to verified and proper data, we have excluded blogs, websites, Wikipedia, and technical reports because they are not related to our research questions and our SLR. Moreover, we have excluded many research papers that lack authentication and are not listed in well-known databases.

Selection Criteria	Non-Selection Criteria
Those published papers are mostly focused on “Security” and “Blockchain Business Models.” The data have been extracted from recent papers published between 2016 and 2025.	Selection criteria are based on authenticated data. Due to verified and proper data, we have excluded blogs, websites, Wikipedia, and technical reports because they are not related to our research questions and our SLR. Moreover, we have excluded many research papers that lack authentication and are not listed in well-known databases.

1.4. Searching Terms Techniques

The most important keywords were used during the search (“Blockchain,” “Blockchain Models,” “Blockchain Frameworks,” “Blockchain Security,” “Blockchain Ledgers,” and “Multimedia in Blockchain”) in IEEE, Elsevier, SpringerLink, Emerald, Wiley Online Library, and Google Scholar.

1.5. SLR Steps

This SLR and SMS completely focused on well-known and recently published papers:

The used papers inside this SLR were extracted from IEEE, Elsevier, SpringerLink, Emerald, Wiley Online Library, and Google Scholar.

The most important research questions have been answered.

Unrecognized work has been excluded from this SLR.

Most collected data relate to published work from their titles, abstracts, and well-known journal databases.

Finally, the most relevant data and published papers are cited in this paper to increase the effectiveness of our SLR.

Figure 2 presents a PRISMA flow diagram illustrating the systematic review process. Initially, 475 records were identified from databases, of which 175 duplicate records were removed. The remaining 300 records were screened, leading to the exclusion of 120 irrelevant studies. Out of the 180 reports sought for retrieval, 15 could not be retrieved, leaving 165 reports for eligibility assessment. After a detailed review, 27 reports were excluded, including 19 not related to blockchain security or business models and eight from non-authenticated sources. Finally, 138 studies were included in the systematic review, forming the final dataset for analysis.

Figure 2.

Prisma flow diagram of the SLR.

2. Blockchain Frameworks and New Classifications

Blockchain technology has evolved through several specialized frameworks designed to address different operational and organizational requirements. These frameworks provide the structural foundation for developing decentralized applications (DApps), managing data securely, and enabling interoperability across industries. This section reviews key blockchain frameworks, emphasizing their architecture, characteristics, and intended applications.

2.1 Ethereum and Hyperactive Ledger Framework

Ethereum and Hyperledger Fabric are among the most prominent blockchain frameworks adopted in both public and enterprise domains (Risius & Spohrer, 2017; Valenta & Sandner, 2017). Ethereum represents a public and open-source blockchain that enables the development of DApps through smart contracts (Saab & El Samad, 2024). Its flexibility and programmability make it suitable for a wide range of use cases, from financial systems to supply-chain management. The Ethereum network relies on consensus mechanisms such as proof of work (PoW) and, more recently, proof of stake (PoS) to validate transactions securely. Figure 3 illustrates the general structure of the Ethereum framework, showing how transaction identifiers and addresses are cryptographically linked for both sending and receiving parties.

Figure 3.

Ethereum blockchain framework.

In contrast, Hyperledger Fabric is a permissioned blockchain framework primarily designed for enterprise applications (Dinh et al., 2018). Developed under the Linux Foundation, it supports consortium-based deployments where multiple organizations collaborate within a shared, private ledger. Hyperledger Fabric enables modular architecture, fine-grained access control, and high throughput, making it suitable for business processes that require regulatory compliance, identity management, and controlled data sharing.

2.2 Multimedia Blockchain Framework

The multimedia blockchain framework focuses on protecting digital media integrity through blockchain-based verification. The proposed distributed and tamper-proof architecture comprises three essential components: (a) a compressed sensing (CS)-based self-embedding watermarking scheme, (b) a blockchain distributed ledger, and (c) an authentication module (Bhowmik & Feng, 2017). The framework ensures secure media ownership validation and prevents unauthorized manipulation of multimedia data. Its structure integrates blockchain's immutable ledger with watermarking techniques to enable traceability and authenticity in digital content distribution.

2.3 Exonum Blockchain Framework

Exonum (Hjálmarsson et al., 2018) is a permissioned blockchain framework emphasizing audibility, transparency, and performance efficiency. It combines cryptographic verification mechanisms with high processing speed and governance control. The framework is tailored for enterprise and governmental applications that require both privacy and verifiable data integrity. Exonum's design allows it to achieve consensus efficiently while maintaining control over network participants, thus ensuring operational transparency without sacrificing confidentiality.

2.4 Bitcoin Blockchain Framework

Bitcoin represents the earliest and most recognized implementation of the blockchain concept. It serves as the foundation for numerous cryptocurrencies and decentralized systems (Antonopoulos, 2017). The Bitcoin protocol operates as an open, permissionless network where anyone can participate in transaction validation. Its core components include cryptographic hash functions, digital signatures, public–private key encryption, P2P networking, and the PoW consensus algorithm (Lim et al., 2018; Ruffing et al., 2017).

This framework allows users to execute irreversible transactions without the need for intermediaries, thereby achieving full decentralization. Each node within the Bitcoin network maintains a complete copy of the blockchain ledger, which enhances resilience and transparency. Figure 4 presents the Bitcoin blockchain framework, which uses a hierarchical tree structure to generate unique transaction identifiers for senders and receivers. Each block is connected to its predecessor through a reference hash (Prev_Hash), forming an unbroken chain that can be traced back to the Genesis block—the first in the sequence.

Figure 4.

Bitcoin blockchain framework.

2.5 Corda Blockchain Framework

Corda, developed by the R3 consortium, is a permissioned blockchain platform specifically engineered for the financial services sector (Munoz et al., 2019). Unlike public blockchains, Corda operates under strict regulatory and privacy requirements, enabling secure and auditable transactions among authorized participants. It employs smart contracts that contain both executable code and embedded legal statements, providing legal validity and compliance assurance.

Corda's consensus mechanism differs from traditional mining-based systems—it achieves consensus at the transaction level without relying on PoW. Nodes in the Corda network are assigned specific roles, ensuring efficient transaction validation and confidentiality between counterparties. Figure 5 illustrates the operational model of Corda, depicting its enterprise-oriented structure designed for privacy-preserving and regulated environments.

Figure 5.

Corda blockchain framework from R3.

3. Blockchain Models

Blockchain models define the conceptual frameworks that describe how blockchain technology integrates with business logic, governance mechanisms, and value creation strategies. These models emphasize decentralization, transparency, automation, and efficiency while reshaping the operational structure of organizations. By eliminating intermediaries and enabling P2P trust, blockchain models promote new ways of organizing transactions, sharing data, and generating economic value.

3.1 Blockchain Business Model

The blockchain business model focuses on transforming conventional centralized organizations into decentralized ecosystems that foster transparency, traceability, and trustless collaboration (Zhang & Wen, 2017). These models enable organizations to streamline operations, reduce transaction costs, and establish new revenue mechanisms through tokenization and smart contracts. Unlike traditional business models that rely on centralized authority or intermediaries, blockchain-based models allow direct P2P interactions governed by cryptographic verification and consensus.

Through the integration of distributed ledgers, smart contracts, and DApps, organizations can automate complex workflows while maintaining security and accountability. Blockchain-based business models therefore redefine ownership, governance, and value exchange across sectors such as finance, supply chain, and digital content distribution.

3.2 Types of Blockchain Business Model

Various blockchain business models have emerged based on service delivery, operational focus, and stakeholder involvement. The most widely recognized types include blockchain-as-a-service (BaaS), development platforms, blockchain-based software products, professional services, and network fee–based models. Each type serves distinct organizational objectives while leveraging blockchain's core features for scalability, reliability, and innovation.

3.2.1 BaaS Business Model

The BaaS model has become one of the most popular business strategies for adopting blockchain technology. It allows enterprises to access blockchain infrastructure, development tools, and maintenance services without managing the systems themselves (Hwang et al., 2017). Major technology corporations have already implemented BaaS offerings to help businesses integrate blockchain more efficiently (Ramadhan & Fitria, 2024; Saberi et al., 2019; Tumasjan, 2024).

In this model, service providers are responsible for deploying, hosting, and maintaining blockchain networks, enabling client organizations to focus on application-level innovation. The BaaS ecosystem also encourages experimentation, allowing startups and researchers to design, test, and validate blockchain applications within controlled environments. This outsourcing approach significantly reduces operational costs and technical complexity for organizations adopting blockchain solutions.

3.2.2 Development Platform

Blockchain remains in an evolving stage, and the development platform model addresses ongoing research and innovation requirements. In this approach, blockchain serves as a foundational platform for creating DApps, consensus algorithms, and smart-contract mechanisms (Khan et al., 2021; Pereira et al., 2019). Development platforms such as Ethereum, Hyperledger, and Corda provide programmable environments that support the design, testing, and scaling of blockchain-based services. These platforms encourage open innovation by offering frameworks and software development kits (SDKs) for researchers and developers to extend blockchain functionalities.

3.2.3 Blockchain-Based Software Products

The software product model focuses on commercializing blockchain technology through ready-made or customized software solutions (Tariq & Colomo-Palacios, 2019). Companies following this approach develop blockchain-based products that can be directly integrated into existing enterprise systems (Ozyilmaz & Yurdakul, 2019). These products typically solve specific problems—such as supply-chain tracking, identity management, or digital-asset verification—or enhance workflow efficiency (Hazari & Mahmoud, 2019).

In addition to product delivery, these companies offer post-deployment support and maintenance, enabling client organizations to utilize blockchain without building in-house expertise. This model aligns with software-as-a-service (SaaS) principles, emphasizing continuous updates and scalability while minimizing development overhead for end users.

3.2.4 Blockchain Professional Service

The professional service model involves specialized consultancy and implementation support provided by expert organizations (Tapscott & Tapscott, 2017). Large technology firms and niche startups deliver comprehensive blockchain services that include employee training, infrastructure deployment, and strategic integration into business processes (Bore et al., 2019).

This approach benefits companies that lack technical expertise or resources to develop blockchain solutions internally. Instead of investing heavily in hardware or software, organizations outsource blockchain implementation and management to professional service providers. This model not only accelerates adoption but also ensures best practices and compliance with emerging standards.

3.2.5 Network Fee Charge

The network fee–based model describes how blockchain systems generate operational revenue through transaction or network participation fees (Zhang et al., 2019b). End users or participating entities pay minimal charges to validate, record, or retrieve transactions within the blockchain network. This model underpins the economic sustainability of public blockchains, where miners or validators are incentivized for maintaining the ledger.

As shown in Figure 6, the blockchain model operates through three core service layers that interact within a decentralized network. The network layer comprises P2P communication protocols, propagation mechanisms, and consensus algorithms. The data layer maintains the structure of data blocks, timestamps, and cryptographic hashes that store transaction records immutably. These layers work in coordination to ensure security, transparency, and efficiency within the blockchain ecosystem. The overall hierarchical organization of blockchain layers is presented in Figure 7, illustrating the interconnections among data, network, and consensus operations.

Figure 6.

Blockchain model.

Figure 7.

Layers of blockchain models.

4. QoS

Blockchain supports decentralized energy markets, enabling local power producers to consume and trade energy efficiently (Strepparava et al., 2022). It offers reliable services through consensus mechanisms that ensure verified and trusted transactions. Although these processes may require additional time, they provide users with dependable and high-quality services (Bilal et al., 2022, October, Shabir et al., 2023). Blockchain also assigns each participant a code with a quality value, which adapts to market conditions and supports business operations through its ecosystem (Malik et al., 2023). This ecosystem enables users to manage blockchain activities, conduct experiments, and perform research within a secure and transparent framework.

Blockchain enhances transaction security by generating a private code for every transaction, making unauthorized access extremely difficult (Alkurdi et al., 2018). Users control these unique passwords, which further strengthen data protection (Laghari et al., 2024). Continuous updates in blockchain protocols help maintain a high standard of security and service quality (Boudguiga et al., 2017). The widespread adoption of blockchain by large organizations reflects its reliability and trustworthiness. Major enterprises conduct millions of transactions using blockchain systems, demonstrating confidence in their quality and minimizing doubts about associated risks (Yin et al., 2021). Their extensive use of blockchain validates its perceived security and efficiency, encouraging smaller users to adopt it confidently. Moreover, blockchain provides guidance for companies on technological adoption and creates employment opportunities for skilled professionals.

Blockchain also plays a role in educating technologists unfamiliar with its structure by offering training for secure and efficient transactions. The technology provides timely and reliable services, particularly in validation and data integrity. The quality of blockchain systems is reflected not only in their technical features but also in the consistent user experience and support they provide. Initially designed for financial transactions, blockchain has gained attention across nonfinancial domains due to its capability for secure and transparent information transfer (Taghiyeva-Zeynalova et al., 2019). Governments, banks, and private organizations are now exploring blockchain applications in areas such as property transfer, contract execution, authentication, and the management of networks, devices, and records.

A practical example is Navi, which utilizes blockchain to create a standardized digital addressing system. This system converts physical addresses into concise digital identifiers—for example, a beach hotel in California could be assigned the digital code 1, 7103055 (Smith et al., 2019). Developed by the Navi Address team, this system promotes transparency, efficiency, and quality in data management. Because blockchain stores data immutably, stakeholders can create and manage address entries, monitor updates, and verify all modifications in real time. Each transaction or record is represented by a unique cryptographic hash—essentially a fixed-length digital fingerprint (Di Vaio et al., 2023). This mechanism enhances trust and ensures data immutability, as no single compromised copy can alter the original records.

Blockchain platforms facilitate the creation of DApps under either authorized or unauthorized modes of operation. In an authorized mode, participants require permission to access the network, whereas the unauthorized mode allows open participation. Prominent blockchain frameworks include Bitcoin, Ethereum, Hyperledger, R3 Corda, BigchainDB, Chaincore, and OpenChain. Bitcoin and Ethereum operate primarily in open (unauthorized) environments, while Hyperledger and R3 Corda function in permissioned (authorized) settings. OpenChain uses a consent-based participation mechanism, BigchainDB supports both modes, and Chaincore employs federated consensus in an authorized manner. Table 2 presents an overview of these well-known blockchain platforms, including their consensus algorithms and operational modes.

Table 2
Some Well-Known Different Platforms of Blockchain.

Platform Consensus Algorithms Operation Mode Source

Bitcoin PoW General Viriyasitavat et al. (2021); Ferdous et al. (2021)

Ethereum PoW, PoS General and authorized Mercan et al. (2021); Badea and Mungiu-Pupӑzan (2021)

Hyperledger Practical Byzantine fault tolerance (PBFT) Authorized Lei et al. (2021); Abdelmged et al. (2016)

R3 Corda PoW, PoS Authorized AA et al. (2016)

OpenChain Partition Consent Khairy et al. (2021)

BigchainDB Byzantine fault tolerance (BFT) General and authorized El Koshiry et al. (2023); Eliwa et al. (2024)

Chaincore Federated consensus Authorized Lotfy et al. (2021)

Platform	Consensus Algorithms	Operation Mode	Source
Bitcoin	PoW	General	Viriyasitavat et al. (2021); Ferdous et al. (2021)
Ethereum	PoW, PoS	General and authorized	Mercan et al. (2021); Badea and Mungiu-Pupӑzan (2021)
Hyperledger	Practical Byzantine fault tolerance (PBFT)	Authorized	Lei et al. (2021); Abdelmged et al. (2016)
R3 Corda	PoW, PoS	Authorized	AA et al. (2016)
OpenChain	Partition	Consent	Khairy et al. (2021)
BigchainDB	Byzantine fault tolerance (BFT)	General and authorized	El Koshiry et al. (2023); Eliwa et al. (2024)
Chaincore	Federated consensus	Authorized	Lotfy et al. (2021)

4.1 Decentralized Authority

In the Navi addressing framework, users create and store their digital addresses on the blockchain, eliminating the need for a central authority to control or verify access (Glaser et al., 2019). This design increases user control by placing data management closer to the source. Without a hierarchical verification process, information can be authenticated and updated more rapidly (Heber & Groll, 2018). For instance, if a typographical or numerical error occurs in an address, users can promptly correct it by submitting the revised information directly to the blockchain ledger.

4.2 Effective Efficiency

Blockchain processes transactions continuously—24 h a day, seven days a week—without reliance on centralized intermediaries. The absence of central administrative units reduces transaction times and allows participants to operate independently (Thommandru & Chakka, 2023). By removing intermediaries and associated overhead costs, blockchain significantly increases transaction rates while minimizing expenses (Fosso Wamba et al., 2020; Jumani et al., 2021). Every transaction is recorded transparently and can be reviewed at any time, ensuring accountability and openness. Projects such as Navi Address exemplify blockchain's operational efficiency by offering a dependable and precise system for sharing physical location details. It benefits both users seeking reliable address representation and companies requiring accurate geographical identification. Blockchain technology thus provides a seamless, transparent, and user-friendly platform that enhances trust and operational tranquility.

5. Blockchain Distributed Ledger Technology and Security Prospects

Blockchain is widely regarded as a highly secure technology (Jumani et al., 2023; Nalavade et al., 2018), primarily due to its use of advanced cryptographic mechanisms. Each blockchain address consists of a unique combination of alphanumeric characters protected by cryptographic private keys (Li et al., 2025). These keys are long, complex, and computationally difficult to compromise, thereby providing a higher level of security than conventional password systems (Dasgupta et al., 2019). Because user identities are not directly linked to blockchain addresses, the technology effectively mitigates identity theft risks (Lesavre et al.).

Most data breaches occur when hackers exploit vulnerabilities in centralized databases rather than the blockchain itself (Carey & Jin, 2019). Many organizations collect user information to support business operations but often fail to implement adequate security controls, resulting in massive data leaks. Although private blockchains restrict participation, such restrictions do not inherently enhance security (Mohan, 2019; Sultan et al., 2019). In contrast, public blockchains—being open and continuously exposed to external attempts—tend to evolve greater resilience against attacks. The Bitcoin network, for instance, has withstood persistent cyber threats for over a decade without being compromised, illustrating that public blockchains can achieve high levels of security over time (Abdullah et al., 2017). Therefore, blockchain vulnerabilities should not be conflated with incidents involving cryptocurrency exchanges or wallet hacks, which generally stem from centralized intermediaries rather than the blockchain protocol itself (Chen et al., 2022; Craggs & Rashid, 2019; Manjunath et al., 2019).

To maintain digital security, users should adopt essential protection measures:

Encrypt online activity through a virtual private network (VPN) (Narwani et al., 2023).

Employ app-based two-factor authentication (2FA) rather than SMS-based codes.

Use distinct, strong passwords for each account (Kiktenko et al., 2018).

Create complex passwords containing numbers, symbols, and mixed letter cases Singh et al., 2019).

Utilize password managers to store credentials securely.

While blockchain's cryptographic encryption forms its security backbone, its decentralized architecture is what fundamentally ensures system integrity. The absence of centralized control eliminates single points of failure and enhances trust through distributed consensus.

Blockchain, as the name implies, is a chain of digital blocks that store transaction records. Each block is linked to all previous blocks, making unauthorized modification nearly impossible. To alter one record, a malicious actor would need to modify all preceding blocks simultaneously—a task requiring immense computational power (Pan & Koutsoukos, 2019). Each transaction is verified cryptographically using private keys that serve as digital signatures. Any modification to a record invalidates the associated signature, alerting the network to potential tampering. This self-verifying nature provides early warning against malicious activity and maintains systemic integrity.

Because blockchains are decentralized, data is shared across distributed systems that remain synchronized through consensus. The lack of a central control point prevents unilateral alterations, ensuring immutability and reliability (Ante, 2023). Theoretically, a successful attack would require control of over 51% of the total network power, which is highly impractical in large, well-established systems. Thus, blockchain remains one of the most secure data storage and transaction technologies available.

Each block in the chain contains distinct information, structured as follows:

Data: Depending on the blockchain, stored data may include information such as the previous and current owners of assets and transaction amounts (e.g., in Bitcoin) (Yin et al., 2019).

Hash: A unique digital fingerprint generated for each block. If any information within the block changes, the hash value also changes, signaling tampering (Hofman et al., 2018).

Previous hash: Each block references the hash of its predecessor, linking them sequentially to form an immutable chain (Singh & Singh, 2016). The first block, known as the genesis block, contains no previous hash and is denoted as “0000.”

Because all blocks are interconnected, altering any record would require recalculating all associated hashes, which is computationally infeasible. Consequently, blockchain ensures integrity, making large-scale hacking attempts nearly impossible (Swartz, 2017).

5.1 Advantages and Opportunities

Blockchain represents a transformative technology designed to securely record and verify digital transactions. Its primary strength lies in its tamper-resistant structure, where cryptographically linked blocks prevent unauthorized modification (Sheth & Dattani, 2019; Zheng et al., 2017). The use of private keys further safeguards users’ data (Alauthman et al., 2024), while continuous updates and consensus mechanisms enhance reliability. As a result, industries such as banking, insurance, healthcare, and gaming are increasingly adopting blockchain systems for their operational benefits (Arslanian & Fischer, 2019; Chowdhury et al., 2023; Felin & Lakhani, 2018).

The key advantages of blockchain can be summarized as follows:

Decentralization: Transactions occur directly among participants without reliance on third-party intermediaries.

Immutability: Once recorded, data cannot be modified or deleted, ensuring long-term integrity.

Cryptographic assurance: All data records are secured using encryption, and each transaction is validated through consensus among participants.

Transparency: Authorized entities can view all verified transactions, ensuring accountability.

Traceability: Every transaction can be tracked back to its origin, enabling complete auditability.

Reliability: Distributed ledgers ensure data redundancy and eliminate single points of failure.

Smart contract automation: Predetermined conditions trigger automated and trusted transactions.

Efficiency and cost reduction: Blockchain enables faster, low-cost transactions with no system downtime.

Blockchain provides a secure, transparent, and efficient infrastructure that empowers users to maintain both historical and current records within a single immutable system.

5.2 Critical Limitations

Despite its transformative potential, blockchain technology faces several critical challenges that limit its large-scale adoption. One of the foremost issues is resource intensity and complexity. The continuous growth of blockchain data requires significant computational power and energy, making the system expensive to maintain. Additionally, the technology's complexity, involving advanced cryptographic concepts and specialized terminology, often creates barriers for nontechnical users and organizations (Dobrovnik et al., 2018).

Another major limitation is private key dependency. Access to blockchain assets relies entirely on private keys; once lost, recovery is virtually impossible, as the system is designed to prevent unauthorized access (Xu, 2016). This absolute dependence, while enhancing security, also increases operational risk for users.

Market volatility further complicates blockchain adoption, particularly in cryptocurrency-based systems. The decentralized and speculative nature of such markets results in frequent price fluctuations—illustrated by Bitcoin's sharp price decline following China's 2017 initial coin offering (ICO) ban. These fluctuations discourage investment and reduce trust among traditional financial institutions.

The anonymity that ensures privacy on public blockchains can also facilitate illegal transactions. The “Silk Road” case, for example, revealed how decentralized currencies could be exploited for illicit trade. Such misuse stems from human behavior and regulatory gaps rather than flaws in the blockchain architecture.

Furthermore, network size and human error influence blockchain performance. Smaller networks with limited nodes are less resilient to attacks, while inaccurate data entry remains permanently recorded, reinforcing the adage “garbage in, garbage out” (Khan et al., 2024a; Rane et al., 2023; Reniers et al., 2019).

Finally, governance and interoperability represent emerging challenges. Disputes within blockchain communities over protocol updates, mining incentives, or governance policies can delay technological progress (Chen et al., 2024; Holler et al., 2019). Likewise, the lack of standardized frameworks for cross-chain communication hinders seamless interoperability between different blockchain platforms, limiting scalability and integration across sectors.

Overall, while blockchain provides unmatched security, transparency, and decentralization, its limitations—such as high resource demands, technical complexity, volatility, and governance constraints—must be addressed to ensure sustainable and widespread adoption.

6. Open Research Issues

Blockchain is widely recognized as an innovation with the potential to transform the financial sector and beyond (Huang et al., 2023). However, its development faces several obstacles, including slow transaction speeds, lack of standardization, and limited scalability, all of which restrict its broader adoption (Boskov, 2018).

According to Deloitte, five key barriers must be overcome for blockchain to achieve mainstream implementation. Although the technology has been hailed as revolutionary for its ability to record and verify transactions without a central authority, these challenges currently hinder its performance and practicality (McConaghy et al., 2016). In essence, blockchain functions as a decentralized ledger that records transactions across a distributed network, ensuring transparency and immutability. Yet, despite its promise, the system struggles with performance constraints.

A major issue identified by Deloitte concerns transaction throughput. Traditional payment systems can process thousands of transactions per second, whereas the Bitcoin blockchain manages only three to seven transactions per second, and Ethereum handles approximately 15 (Witzig & Salomon, 2019). This limited processing capability makes blockchain unsuitable for large-scale, high-frequency applications. The requirement for consensus among numerous participants ensures security but also increases settlement time, as miners must solve complex mathematical problems before transactions are confirmed.

Although researchers and organizations such as Stellar and Ripple are developing more efficient consensus mechanisms to improve scalability and reduce delays, blockchain's inherent design still poses performance limitations. The need for global consensus across all nodes means that transaction validation becomes slower as the network expands.

Beyond performance, technical and operational constraints further challenge blockchain deployment. Maintaining a blockchain network requires considerable computational power; transactions demand verification from multiple nodes, each performing extensive calculations (Khan et al., 2024a, 2024b, 2025a, 2025b; Laghari et al., 2025). To participate in mining or transaction validation, high-performance hardware is necessary—often including multiple high-end graphics processing units (GPUs)—which raises operational costs and energy consumption (Chen et al., 2024; Holler et al., 2019; Rane et al., 2023; Reniers et al., 2019).

Another significant limitation lies in the shortage of skilled developers. Blockchain remains a relatively new technology, and the pool of professionals proficient in distributed ledger systems, cryptographic protocols, and consensus mechanisms is limited (Badea & Mungiu-Pupӑzan, 2021; Ferdous et al., 2021; Mercan et al., 2021; Viriyasitavat et al., 2021). This scarcity hampers both innovation and widespread enterprise adoption.

Furthermore, industry analyses such as those by Forrester Research suggest that blockchain may not be suitable for all types of business transactions. Its decentralized architecture is advantageous for trustless environments but inefficient for systems where centralized control already ensures efficiency (Abdelmgeid et al., 2016; Abdelmged et al., 2016; Lei et al., 2021).

Finally, blockchain's processing delays stem from the need for every node in the network to verify each transaction. As network size increases, the time required for synchronization also grows, resulting in noticeable latency and scalability challenges (El Koshiry et al., 2023; Eliwa et al., 2024; Khairy et al., 2021; Lotfy et al., 2021).

While blockchain represents a groundbreaking technological advancement, it faces critical obstacles—such as slow transaction speeds, high computational requirements, skill shortages, and scalability limitations—that must be addressed through further research, innovation, and standardization to realize its full potential.

7. Conclusions

This study has presented a comprehensive overview of blockchain technology by elucidating its frameworks, operational concepts, and state-of-the-art developments. It has highlighted the importance of QoS and security features, alongside an assessment of blockchain's key advantages and limitations.

In less than a decade, blockchain has evolved into a transformative technology with significant applications across diverse domains, particularly in the realm of virtual currencies, which has attracted the attention of policymakers and regulators worldwide. Despite its proven potential to address critical challenges faced by modern industries and societies, there remains a noticeable gap in the strategic implementation of many blockchain use cases.

This paper also identified several unresolved issues and future research directions essential for improving blockchain's scalability, interoperability, and standardization. The insights presented herein aim to support policymakers, researchers, and educators in understanding the technological, security, and quality dimensions of blockchain systems, ultimately fostering informed decision-making and advancing the next phase of blockchain innovation.

Footnotes

ORCID iD

Asif Ali Laghari

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Declaration of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in the Writing Process

During the preparation of this work, the author(s) used ChatGPT-4o in order to improve language and readability. After using ChatGPT-4o, the author(s) reviewed and edited the content as needed and take(s) full responsibility for the content of the publication.

References

Abdelmged

Tarek

Seddik

A. H.

Shaimaa

(2016). Improving ZOH image steganography method by using braille method. International Journal of Computer Applications, 151(7), 31–35.

Abdelmgeid

A. A.

Tarek

A. A.

Seddik

A. H.

Shaimaa

M. H.

(2016). New image steganography method using zero order hold zooming. International Journal of Computer Applications, 133(9), 27–31.

Abdullah

Hakansson

Moradian

(2017). Blockchain based approach to enhance big data authentication in distributed environment. In 2017 Ninth International Conference on Ubiquitous and Future Networks (ICUFN) (pp. 887–892). IEEE.

Alauthman

Aljuaid

Sathyaprakash

Aldweesh

Rasheed

Jumani

A. K.

(2024). Unintended data behaviour analysis using cryptography stealth approach against security and communication network. Mobile Networks and Applications, 29(6), 1796–1810.

Alkurdi

Elgendi

Munasinghe

K. S.

Sharma

Jamalipour

(2018). Blockchain in IoT security: A survey. In 2018 28th International Telecommunication Networks and Applications Conference (ITNAC) (pp. 1–4). IEEE.

Al-Nbhany

W. A.

Zahary

A. T.

Al-Shargabi

A. A.

(2024). Blockchain-IoT healthcare applications and trends: A review. IEEE Access, 12, 4178–4212.

Ante

(2023). Non-fungible token (NFT) markets on the Ethereum blockchain: Temporal development, cointegration and interrelations. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 32(8), 1216–1234. https://doi.org/10.1080/10438599.2022.2119564

Antonopoulos

A. M.

(2017). Mastering Bitcoin: Programming the open blockchain. O'Reilly Media, Inc.

Arslanian

Fischer

(2019). Blockchain as an enabling technology. In The future of finance (pp. 113–121). Palgrave Macmillan.

10.

Badea

Mungiu-Pupӑzan

M. C.

(2021). The economic and environmental impact of Bitcoin.. IEEE Access, 9, 48091–48104.

11.

Bhowmik

Feng

(2017). The multimedia blockchain: A distributed and tamper-proof media transaction framework. In 2017 22nd International Conference on Digital Signal Processing (DSP) (pp. 1–5). IEEE.

12.

Bilal

Sajid

Singh

(2022, October). Blockchain technology: Opportunities & challenges. In 2022 international conference on data analytics for business and industry (ICDABI) (pp. 519–524). IEEE.

13.

Bore

Kinai

Mutahi

Kaguma

Otieno

Remy

S. L.

Weldemariam

(2019). On Using blockchain based workflows. In 2019 IEEE International Conference on Blockchain and Cryptocurrency (ICBC) (pp. 112–116). IEEE.

14.

Boskov

(2018). Blockchain and digital currency in the world of finance.

15.

Boudguiga

Bouzerna

Granboulan

Olivereau

Quesnel

Roger

Sirdey

(2017). Towards better availability and accountability for IoT updates by means of a blockchain. In 2017 IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy Workshops (EuroS&PW) (pp. 50–58). IEEE.

16.

Bozic

Pujolle

Secci

(2016). A tutorial on blockchain and applications to secure network control-planes. In 2016 3rd Smart Cloud Networks & Systems (SCNS) (pp. 1–8). IEEE.

17.

Carey

M. J.

Jin

(2019). Tribe of hackers: Cybersecurity advice from the best hackers in the world. John Wiley & Sons.

18.

Chen

N.-S.

(2018). Exploring blockchain technology and its potential applications for education. Smart Learning Environments, 5(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-017-0050-x

19.

Chen

Wei

Wang

Mobarak

W. F. M.

Albahar

M. A.

Shaikh

Z. A.

(2024). The role of blockchain in finance beyond cryptocurrency: Trust, data management, and automation. IEEE Access, 12, 64861–64885.

20.

Chen

Zhang

Han

Siddula

Cai

(2022). A survey on blockchain systems: Attacks, defenses, and privacy preservation. High-Confidence Computing, 2(2), 100048. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hcc.2021.100048

21.

Chowdhury

Stasi

Pellegrino

(2023). Blockchain technology in financial accounting: Emerging regulatory issues. Review of Financial Economics, 21, 862–868.

22.

Costea

C. G.

(2019). Blockchain-based solutions for financially distressed or insolvent companies. Challenges of the Knowledge Society, 276–280.

23.

Craggs

Rashid

(2019). Trust beyond computation alone: human aspects of trust in blockchain technologies. In Proceedings of the 41st International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Society (pp. 21–30). IEEE Press.

24.

Dasgupta

Shrein

J. M.

Gupta

K. D.

(2019). A survey of blockchain from security perspective. Journal of Banking and Financial Technology, 3(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42786-018-00002-6

25.

De Filippi

Hassan

(2018). Blockchain technology as a regulatory technology: From code is law to law is code. arXiv preprint arXiv:1801.02507.

26.

Dinh

T. T. A.

Liu

Zhang

Chen

Ooi

B. C.

Wang

(2018). Untangling blockchain: A data processing view of blockchain systems. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 30(7), 1366–1385. https://doi.org/10.1109/TKDE.2017.2781227

27.

Di Vaio

Hassan

Palladino

(2023). Blockchain technology and gender equality: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Information Management, 68, 1–23.

28.

Dobrovnik

Herold

Fürst

Kummer

(2018). Blockchain for and in logistics: What to adopt and where to start. Logistics, 2(3), 18. https://doi.org/10.3390/logistics2030018

29.

Efanov

Roschin

(2018). The all-pervasiveness of the blockchain technology. Procedia Computer Science, 123, 116–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2018.01.019

30.

Eliwa

E. H. I.

El Koshiry

A. M.

Abd El-Hafeez

Omar

(2024). Secure and transparent lung and colon cancer classification using blockchain and Microsoft Azure. Advances in Respiratory Medicine, 92(5), 395. https://doi.org/10.3390/arm92050037

31.

El Koshiry

Eliwa

Abd El-Hafeez

Shams

M. Y.

(2023). Unlocking the power of blockchain in education: An overview of innovations and outcomes. Blockchain: Research and Applications, 4(4), 100165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bcra.2023.100165

32.

Feeney

P. J.

(2016a). System and method for user authentication using crypto-currency transactions as access tokens. U.S. Patent Application 14/958,427, filed June 9, 2016.

33.

Feeney

P. J.

(2016b). System and method for block-chain verification of goods. U.S. Patent Application 14/504,356, filed April 7, 2016.

34.

Felin

Lakhani

(2018). What problems will you solve with blockchain? MIT Sloan Management Review, 60(1), 32–38.

35.

Ferdous

M. S.

Chowdhury

M. J. M.

Hoque

M. A.

(2021). A survey of consensus algorithms in public blockchain systems for crypto-currencies. Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 103035. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnca.2021.103035

36.

Fosso Wamba

Kamdjoug

Robert

Bawack

Keogh

J. G.

(2020). Bitcoin, blockchain, and FinTech: A systematic review and case studies in the supply chain. Production Planning and Control, 31(2-3), 115–142.

37.

Francisco

Swanson

(2018). The supply chain has no clothes: Technology adoption of blockchain for supply chain transparency. Logistics, 2(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.3390/logistics2010002

38.

Glaser

Hawlitschek

Notheisen

(2019). Blockchain as a platform. In Business transformation through blockchain (pp. 121–143). Palgrave Macmillan.

39.

Hazari

S. S.

Mahmoud

Q. H.

(2019). A parallel proof of work to improve transaction speed and scalability in blockchain systems. In 2019 IEEE 9th Annual Computing and Communication Workshop and Conference (CCWC) (pp. 0916–0921). IEEE.

40.

Heber

D. T.

Groll

M. W.

(2018). A meta-model to connect model-based systems engineering with product data management by dint of the blockchain. In 2018 International Conference on Intelligent Systems (IS) (pp. 280–287). IEEE.

41.

Hjálmarsson

F. Þ.

Hreiðarsson

G. K.

Hamdaqa

Hjálmtýsson

(2018). Blockchain-based e-voting system. In 2018 IEEE 11th International Conference on Cloud Computing (CLOUD) (pp. 983–986). IEEE.

42.

Hofman

Shannon

McManus

Lemieux

Lam

Assadian

(2018). Building Trust & protecting privacy: Analyzing evidentiary quality in a blockchain proof-of-concept for health research data consent management. In 2018 IEEE International Conference on Internet of Things (iThings) and IEEE Green Computing and Communications (GreenCom) and IEEE Cyber, Physical and Social Computing (CPSCom) and IEEE Smart Data (SmartData) (pp. 1650–1656). IEEE.

43.

Holler

Barth

Fuchs

(2019). Trustworthy product lifecycle management using blockchain technology—experience from the automotive ecosystem. In Product lifecycle management (volume 4): The case studies (pp. 13–19). Springer.

44.

https://www.cnet.com/news/Blockchain-explained-builds-trust-when-you-need-it-most/. accessed [24/06/2018].

45.

https://www.techbullion.com/invented-Blockchain-technology/. accessed [27/04/2019].

46.

Huang

Z. F.

Soh

K. Y.

Islam

M. R.

Chua

K. J.

(2023). Development of a novel grid-free district cooling system considering blockchain-based demand response management. Applied Energy, 342, 121152.

47.

Huynh-The

Gadekallu

T. R.

Wang

Yenduri

Ranaweera

Pham

Q.-V.

da Costa

D. B.

Liyanage

(2023). Blockchain for the metaverse: A review. Future Generation Computer Systems, 143, 401–419.

48.

Hwang

Choi

M.-i.

Lee

Jeon

Kim

Park

(2017). Energy prosumer business model using blockchain system to ensure transparency and safety. Energy Procedia, 141, 194–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2017.11.037

49.

Jumani

A. K.

Laghari

A. A.

Khan

A. A.

(2021). Blockchain and big data: Supportive aid for daily life. security issues and privacy concerns in Industry 4.0 applications, 141–178.

50.

Jumani

A. K.

Shi

Laghari

A. A.

Nabi

A. U.

Qian

(2023). Fog computing security: A review. Security and Privacy, 6(6), e313. https://doi.org/10.1002/spy2.313

51.

Kakavand

De Sevres

N. K.

Chilton

(2017). The blockchain revolution: An analysis of regulation and technology related to distributed ledger technologies. Bart, the blockchain revolution: An analysis of regulation and technology related to distributed ledger technologies (January 1, 2017).

52.

Khairy

Mahmoud

T. M.

Abd-El-Hafeez

Mahfouz

(2021). User awareness of privacy, reporting system and cyberbullying on Facebook. In Advanced machine learning technologies and applications: Proceedings of AMLTA 2021 (pp. 613–625). Springer International Publishing.

53.

Khan

A. A.

Dhabi

Yang

Alhakami

Bourouis

Yee

(2024a). B-LPoET: A middleware lightweight proof-of-elapsed time (PoET) for efficient distributed transaction execution and security on blockchain using multithreading technology. Computers and Electrical Engineering, 118, 1–15.

54.

Khan

A. A.

Laghari

A. A.

Awan

Jumani

A. K.

(2021). Fourth industrial revolution application: Network forensics cloud security issues. Security Issues and Privacy Concerns in Industry 4.0 Applications, 15–33.

55.

Khan

A. A.

Laghari

A. A.

Baqasah

A. M.

Alroobaea

Almadhor

Sampedro

G. A.

Kryvinska

(2025b). Blockchain-enabled infrastructural security solution for serverless consortium fog and edge computing. Manuscript in preparation.

56.

Khan

A. A.

Laghari

A. A.

Baqasah

A. M.

Alroobaea

Gadekallu

T. R.

Sampedro

G. A.

Zhu

(2024b). ORAN-B5G: A next generation open radio access network architecture with machine learning for beyond 5G in Industrial 5.0. IEEE Transactions on Green Communications and Networking.

57.

Khan

A. A.

Yang

Awan

S. A.

Baqasah

A. M.

Alroobaea

Chen

Y. L.

Por

L. Y.

(2025a). Artificial intelligence, internet of things, and blockchain empowering future vehicular developments: A comprehensive multi-hierarchical lifecycle review. Human-centric Computing and Information Sciences, 15(13), 1–20.

58.

Kiktenko

E. O.

Pozhar

N. O.

Anufriev

M. N.

Trushechkin

A. S.

Yunusov

R. R.

Kurochkin

Y. V.

Lvovsky

A. I.

Fedorov

A. K.

(2018). Quantum-secured blockchain. Quantum Science and Technology, 3(3), 035004. https://doi.org/10.1088/2058-9565/aabc6b

59.

Kim

Won

(2019). A new cost-saving and efficient method for patch management using blockchain. The Journal of Supercomputing, 1–19.

60.

King

J. C.

Dale

Amigó

J. M.

(2024). Blockchain metrics and indicators in cryptocurrency trading. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 178, 114305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2023.114305

61.

Koutra

Tenentes

(2024). Multi-Vt based energy efficiency optimization for ASIC designs of the double secure hash algorithm towards a sustainable Bitcoin network. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems II: Express Briefs, 71(3), 1596–1600.

62.

Kumar

Lim

W. M.

Sivarajah

Kaur

(2023). Artificial intelligence and blockchain integration in business: Trends from a bibliometric-content analysis. Information Systems Frontiers, 25(2), 871–896.

63.

Laghari

A. A.

Khan

A. A.

Alkanhel

Elmannai

Bourouis

(2023a). Lightweight-BIoV: Blockchain distributed ledger technology (BDLT) for internet of vehicles (IoVs). Electronics, 12(3), 677. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics12030677

64.

Laghari

A. A.

Khan

A. A.

Ksibi

Hajjej

Kryvinska

Almadhor

Alsubai

(2025). A novel and secure artificial intelligence enabled zero trust intrusion detection in industrial internet of things architecture. Scientific Reports, 15(1), 26843. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-11738-9

65.

Laghari

A. A.

Khan

A. A.

Shoulin

Karim

Khani

M. A. K.

(2024). Internet of things (IoT) applications security trends and challenges. Discover Internet of Things, 4(1), 36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43926-024-00090-5

66.

Laghari

A. A.

Shoulin

Karim

Khan

A. A.

Ibrar

(2023b). Blockchain applications for internet of things (IoT): A review. Multiagent and Grid Systems, 19(4), 363–379. https://doi.org/10.3233/MGS-230074

67.

Lei

G.-H.

Xie

Wang

(2021). BFastpay: A routing-free protocol for fast payment in Bitcoin network. In Proceedings of the eleventh ACM conference on data and application security and privacy, CODASPY '21 (pp. 77–87). Association for Computing Machinery.

68.

Lemieux

V. L.

(2016). Trusting records: Is blockchain technology the answer? Records Management Journal, 26(2), 110–139. https://doi.org/10.1108/RMJ-12-2015-0042

69.

Lesavre

Varin

Mell

Davidson

Shook

A Taxonomic approach to understanding emerging blockchain identity management systems. arXiv preprint arXiv:1908.00929.

70.

Lewis

McPartland

Ranjan

(2017). Blockchain and financial market innovation. Economic Perspectives, 41(7), 1–17.

71.

Chen

Qiao

Zhang

Zhu

Conti

(2025). Trust in a decentralized world: data governance from faithful, private, verifiable, and traceable data feeds. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security.

72.

Lim

S. Y.

Fotsing

P. T.

Almasri

Musa

Kiah

M. L. M.

Ang

T. F.

Ismail

(2018). Blockchain technology the identity management and authentication service disruptor: A survey. International Journal on Advanced Science, Engineering and Information Technology, 8(4-2), 1735–1745. https://doi.org/10.18517/ijaseit.8.4-2.6838

73.

Liu

(2019). Method of constructing scalable blockchain by using KanBan to update off-chain transactions states. U.S. Patent Application 15/719,818, filed April 4, 2019.

74.

Lotfy

A. Y.

Zaki

A. M.

Abd-El-Hafeez

Mahmoud

T. M.

(2021, May). Privacy issues of public Wi-Fi networks. In The international conference on artificial intelligence and computer vision (pp. 656–665). Springer International Publishing.

75.

Malik

Appel

Luo

(2023). Blockchain technology for creative industries: Current state and research opportunities. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 40(1), 38–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2022.07.004

76.

Mandolla

Petruzzelli

A. M.

Percoco

Urbinati

(2019). Building a digital twin for additive manufacturing through the exploitation of blockchain: A case analysis of the aircraft industry. Computers in Industry, 109, 134–152.

77.

Manjunath

Herrmann

Sen

(2019). Implementation of blockchain data obfuscation. In Innovation in medicine and healthcare systems, and multimedia (pp. 545–553). Springer.

78.

McConaghy

Marques

Müller

De Jonghe

McConaghy

McMullen

Henderson

Bellemare

Granzotto

(2016). BigchainDB: a scalable blockchain database. white paper, BigChainDB.

79.

Mercan

Kurt

Erdin

Akkaya

(2021). Cryptocurrency solutions to enable micro-payments in consumer IoT. IEEE Consumer Electronics Magazine, 11(2), 97–103.

80.

Min

(2019). Blockchain technology for enhancing supply chain resilience. Business Horizons, 62(1), 35–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2018.08.012

81.

Mohan

(2019). State of public and private blockchains: Myths and reality. In Proceedings of the 2019 International Conference on Management of Data (pp. 404–411). ACM.

82.

Monem

Tamjid Hossain

Alam

M. G. R.

Munir

M. S.

Rahman

M. M.

AlQahtani

S. A.

Almutlaq

Hassan

M. M.

(2024). A sustainable bitcoin blockchain network through introducing dynamic block size adjustment using predictive analytics. Future Generation Computer Systems, 153, 12–26.

83.

Mougayar

(2016). The business blockchain: promise, practice, and application of the next Internet technology. John Wiley & Sons.

84.

Munoz

D.-J.

Constantinescu

D.-A.

Asenjo

Fuentes

(2019). Clinicappchain: A low-cost blockchain Hyperledger solution for healthcare. In International congress on blockchain and applications (pp. 36–44). Springer.

85.

Muzammal

Nasrulin

(2019). Renovating blockchain with distributed databases: An open source system. Future Generation Computer Systems, 90, 105–117.

86.

Nakasumi

(2017). Information sharing for supply chain management based on block chain technology. In 2017 IEEE 19th Conference on Business Informatics (CBI), vol. 1, pp. 140-149. IEEE.

87.

Nalavade

Rawat

Kanakia

(2018). Blockchain technology: Most secure database. In 2018 Second International Conference on Intelligent Computing and Control Systems (ICICCS), pp. 1356-1362. IEEE, 2018.

88.

Narwani

Liaquat

Laghari

A. A.

Jumani

A. K.

Jamshed

Ibrar

(2023, June). Design and implementation of an internet of things-based real-time five-layer security surveillance system. In International conference on artificial intelligence and communication technology (pp. 307–323). Springer Nature Singapore.

89.

Nehith

(2019). Building A Blockchain Dapp From A Web App.

90.

Nofer

Gomber

Hinz

Schiereck

(2017). Blockchain. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 59(3), 183–187. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-017-0467-3

91.

Nowiński

Kozma

(2017). How can blockchain technology disrupt the existing business models? Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review, 5(3), 173–188. https://doi.org/10.15678/EBER.2017.050309

92.

Ozyilmaz

K. R.

Yurdakul

(2019). Designing a Blockchain-based IoT with Ethereum, swarm, and LoRa: The software solution to create high availability with minimal security risks. IEEE Consumer Electronics Magazine, 8(2), 28–34. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCE.2018.2880806

93.

Pan

Koutsoukos

(2019). Building a blockchain simulation using the Idris programming language. In Proceedings of the 2019 ACM Southeast Conference (pp. 190–193). ACM.

94.

Pereira

Tavalaei

M. M.

Ozalp

(2019). Blockchain-based platforms: Decentralized infrastructures and its boundary conditions. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 146, 94–102.

95.

Poon

Dryja

(2016). The Bitcoin lightning network: Scalable off-chain instant payments.

96.

Ramadhan

Fitria

(2024). Iot E-business model: Redesign old business models. In Conference on SDGs transformation through the creative economy: Encouraging innovation and sustainability (TCEEIS 2023) (pp. 127–132). Atlantis Press.

97.

Rane

Choudhary

Rane

(2023). Leading-edge artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning (ML), blockchain, and internet of things (IoT) technologies for enhanced wastewater treatment systems (October 31, 2023).

98.

Reniers

Van Landuyt

Viviani

Lagaisse

Lombardi

Joosen

(2019). Analysis of architectural variants for auditable blockchain-based private data sharing. In Proceedings of the 34th ACM/SIGAPP symposium on applied computing (pp. 346–354). ACM.

99.

Risius

Spohrer

(2017). A blockchain research framework. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 59(6), 385–409. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-017-0506-0

100.

Ruffing

Moreno-Sanchez

Kate

(2017). P2P mixing and unlinkable Bitcoin transactions. In NDSS.

101.

Saab

El Samad

(2024). Blockchain technology through bitcoin and ethereum: A comprehensive review of their interdependent relationship. In M. El Samad, G. Nassreddine, H. El-Chaarani, & S. El Nemar (Eds.), Industrial applications of big data, AI, and blockchain (pp. 130–182). IGI Global Scientific Publishing.

102.

Saberi

Kouhizadeh

Sarkis

Shen

(2019). Blockchain technology and its relationships to sustainable supply chain management. International Journal of Production Research, 57(7), 2117–2135. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2018.1533261

103.

Sankar

L. S.

Sindhu

Sethumadhavan

(2017). Survey of consensus protocols on blockchain applications. In 2017 4th International Conference on Advanced Computing and Communication Systems (ICACCS) (pp. 1–5). IEEE.

104.

Shabir

M. M.

Danish

S. M.

Zhang

(2023). BlockQoS: Fair monetization of on-demand quality-of-service using blockchains. Distributed Ledger Technologies: Research and Practice, 2(2), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1145/3580284

105.

Shaikh

Z. A.

Khan

A. A.

Teng

Wagan

A. A.

Laghari

A. A.

(2022). BIoMT modular infrastructure: The recent challenges, issues, and limitations in blockchain Hyperledger-enabled e-healthcare application. Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing, 2022(1), 3813841.

106.

She

Z.-H.

Lyu

X.-K.

Liu

Tian

Liu

(2019). Homomorphic consortium blockchain for smart home system sensitive data privacy preserving. IEEE Access, 7, 62058–62070.

107.

Sheth

Dattani

(2019). Overview of blockchain technology. Asian Journal For Convergence In Technology (AJCT). ISSN: 2350-1146.

108.

Singh

I.-H.

Meng

Kaur

Cho

G. H.

(2019). SH-BlockCC: A secure and efficient internet of things smart home architecture based on cloud computing and blockchain technology. International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks, 15(4), 1550147719844159. https://doi.org/10.1177/1550147719844159

109.

Singh

(2016). Blockchain: Future of financial and cyber security. In 2016 2nd International Conference on Contemporary Computing and Informatics (IC3I) (pp. 463–467). IEEE.

110.

Smith

Agerstam

Sarathi Kesavan

Sodani

(2019). Secure shipment receive apparatus with delegation-chain. U.S. Patent Application 16/023,892, filed February 7, 2019.

111.

Strepparava

Nespoli

Kapassa

Touloupou

Katelaris

Medici

(2022). Deployment and analysis of a blockchain-based local energy market. Energy Reports, 8, 99–113.

112.

Sultan

Mushtaq

M. A.

Abubakar

(2019). IOT security issues via blockchain: A review paper. In Proceedings of the 2019 International Conference on Blockchain Technology (pp. 60–65). ACM.

113.

Swartz

(2017). Blockchain dreams: Imagining techno-economic alternatives after Bitcoin. In Another economy is possible: Culture and economy in a time of crisis (pp. 82–105). Polity Press.

114.

Taghiyeva-Zeynalova

Wang

Ta'eed

(2019). Blockchain as a value enabler: Bridging financial assets and intangibles.” In Proceedings of the 2019 ACM International Symposium on Blockchain and Secure Critical Infrastructure (pp. 113–119). ACM.

115.

Tapscott

(2017). How blockchain is changing finance. Harvard Business Review, 1(9), 2–5.

116.

Tariq

Colomo-Palacios

(2019). Use of blockchain smart contracts in software engineering: A systematic mapping. In International conference on computational science and its applications (pp. 327–337). Springer.

117.

Tasatanattakool

Techapanupreeda

(2018). Blockchain: Challenges and applications. In 2018 International Conference on Information Networking (ICOIN) (pp. 473–475). IEEE.

118.

Thommandru

Chakka

(2023). Recalibrating the banking sector with blockchain technology for effective anti-money laundering compliances by banks. Sustainable Futures, 5, 100107.

119.

Tumasjan

(2024). The promise and prospects of blockchain-based decentralized business models. In Knowledge and digital technology (pp. 203–224). Springer Nature Switzerland.

120.

Valenta

Sandner

(2017). Comparison of Ethereum, Hyperledger Fabric and Corda. [ebook] Frankfurt School, Blockchain Center.

121.

Viriyasitavat

Hoonsopon

(2021). Augmenting cryptocurrency in smart supply chain. Journal of Industrial Information Integration, 21, 100188.

122.

Witzig

Salomon

(2019). Cutting out the middleman: A case study of Blockchain technology induced reconfigurations in the Swiss financial services industry. In Blockchains, smart contracts, decentralised autonomous organisations and the law. Edward Elgar Publishing.

123.

J. J.

(2016). Are blockchains immune to all malicious attacks? Financial Innovation, 2(1), 25. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40854-016-0046-5

124.

Yang

Lei

Zheng

Leung

V. C.

(2018). Blockchain-based decentralized trust management in vehicular networks. IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 6(2), 1495–1505. https://doi.org/10.1109/JIOT.2018.2836144

125.

Yin

Hua

Langenheldt

Harlev

Rao Mukkamala

Vatrapu

(2019). Regulating cryptocurrencies: A supervised machine learning approach to de-anonymizing the bitcoin blockchain. Journal of Management Information Systems, 36(1), 37–73. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2018.1550550

126.

Yin

Laghari

A. A.

Karim

Jumani

A. K.

(2021). A bagging strategy-based kernel extreme learning machine for complex network intrusion detection. EAI Endorsed Transactions on Scalable Information Systems, 8(33), e8–e8.

127.

Zhang

Wen

(2017). The IoT electric business model: Using blockchain technology for the internet of things. Peer-to-Peer Networking and Applications, 10(4), 983–994. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12083-016-0456-1

128.

Zhang

Lin

Shen

X. S.

(2019a). Blockchain-based public integrity verification for cloud storage against procrastinating auditors. IEEE Transactions on Cloud Computing.

129.

Zhang

Yang

Xue

(2019b). CheaPay: An optimal algorithm for fee minimization in blockchain-based payment channel networks. In ICC 2019-2019 IEEE international conference on communication (ICC) (pp. 1–6). IEEE.

130.

Zheng

Xie

Dai

Chen

Wang

(2017). An overview of blockchain technology: Architecture, consensus, and future trends. In 2017 IEEE International Congress on Big Data (BigData Congress) (pp. 557–564). IEEE.