An edge intelligent control platform data security transmission method based on an internet of things

Abstract

The application discloses an edge intelligent control platform data security transmission method based on Internet of Things, and belongs to the technical field of Internet of Things communication security. A transmission task image is generated, and a transmission condition is represented in combination with a real-time state of an edge node and a link. A calculation transmission risk value is fused to dynamically determine a security level. Differentiated security control parameters are generated on demand and encapsulated into a security transmission envelope. A cross-protocol conversion semantic consistency verification and adaptive transmission disposal mechanism is matched. The method can dynamically match the data protection strength, give consideration to low latency of control instructions and strong protection of high sensitivity data, improve cross-protocol transmission reliability, and reduce edge gateway computing power consumption and operation and maintenance cost.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of Internet of Things (IoT) communication security technology, specifically to a data security transmission method, electronic device, and storage medium based on an IoT-based edge intelligent control platform. Background Technology

[0002] In the data transmission of the park-level edge intelligent control platform, the platform simultaneously connects to various IoT devices, including lighting controllers, air conditioning controllers, power distribution monitoring equipment, charging piles, environmental sensors, security equipment, and energy consumption collection terminals. The different data objects generated by these devices exhibit significant differences in sensitivity levels, control timeliness, and transmission reliability. If the platform cannot implement differentiated transmission control based on data type and business risks, it is prone to problems such as ordinary data consuming excessive security computing resources, increased transmission latency of control commands, and insufficient protection for highly sensitive data. Secure IoT data transmission is achieved through methods such as encrypted transmission, identity authentication, and access control. Edge gateways typically first perform protocol parsing, identity authentication, and data aggregation on terminal data before sending it to the edge intelligent control platform or business management platform via an encrypted channel. For control commands issued by the platform, methods such as certificate verification, channel encryption, command signing, replay verification, and log auditing are used to improve the identity credibility, data integrity, and traceability of the transmission process.

[0003] Existing technologies struggle to meet the high-efficiency and secure transmission requirements of edge intelligent control platforms: unified secure transmission strategies cannot adapt to the differentiated requirements of various data types; excessive protection of ordinary data consumes gateway computing power, increases control command latency, and raises the risk of device miscontrol; the granularity of protection for highly sensitive control and alarm data is insufficient, posing security and compliance risks related to data tampering and leakage; cross-protocol conversion only performs byte-level verification, failing to identify semantic errors such as field mapping, unit conversion, and control direction, making fault diagnosis difficult and maintenance costs high; and the lack of adaptive handling mechanisms for weak network and node degradation scenarios results in insufficient transmission stability. These issues directly restrict the platform's operational efficiency and security reliability. Summary of the Invention

[0004] In park-level edge intelligent control platforms, the sensitivity levels, control timeliness, and protocol formats of various types of IoT data differ significantly. Existing methods often employ unified encryption, unified authentication, or message-level verification, which makes it difficult to dynamically adjust the protection strength according to data risk and transmission status. This can easily lead to increased control latency and insufficient protection for highly sensitive data. At the same time, the lack of semantic consistency verification after cross-protocol conversion can easily result in issues such as channel security but incorrect field meanings, location objects, or control directions.

[0005] To at least partially solve the above problems, this invention proposes a data security transmission method, electronic device, and storage medium for an edge intelligent control platform based on the Internet of Things.

[0006] In a first aspect, the present invention proposes a data security transmission method for an edge intelligent control platform based on the Internet of Things, comprising:

[0007] Acquire IoT transmission task data and extract transmission task features to generate transmission task profiles;

[0008] Collect real-time status data of edge nodes and communication links, characterize the real-time status data, and generate transmission condition results;

[0009] The transmission risk value is calculated based on the transmission task profile and transmission condition results as constraints, and the transmission security level is determined.

[0010] Based on the transmission security level, secure transmission control parameters are generated, and the data to be transmitted is encapsulated according to the secure transmission control parameters to generate a secure transmission envelope.

[0011] Perform semantic consistency verification on the secure transmission envelope, and perform data transmission based on the semantic consistency verification result to obtain the secure data transmission result.

[0012] As a preferred implementation, the transmission task features are extracted to generate a transmission task profile, including:

[0013] The task fields of the IoT transmission task data are parsed to obtain candidate task fields;

[0014] The candidate task fields are categorized and bound to obtain the transmission task features corresponding to the data to be transmitted.

[0015] Based on the characteristics of the transmission task, construct a task association record for the data to be transmitted;

[0016] The task association records are hierarchically processed according to preset profiling rules to generate the transmission task profile.

[0017] As a preferred implementation, the real-time state data is characterized to generate transmission condition results, including:

[0018] Extract node status features and link status features from the real-time status data;

[0019] Based on the node state characteristics, a trustworthy mapping is performed to generate a node trustworthy representation result.

[0020] Based on the link state characteristics, a carrying capacity mapping is performed to generate a link carrying capacity characterization result.

[0021] The transmission condition results are generated by integrating the node trustworthiness characterization results and the link bearer characterization results.

[0022] As a preferred implementation, the transmission risk value is calculated and the transmission security level is determined based on the transmission task profile and transmission condition results as constraints, including:

[0023] Extract task risk characterization from the transmission task profile, and extract transmission environment risk characterization from the transmission condition results;

[0024] Risk fusion is performed based on the aforementioned task risk characterization and transmission environment risk characterization to obtain the transmission risk value;

[0025] The transmission risk value is converted into a transmission security level according to a preset level mapping rule.

[0026] As a preferred embodiment, secure transmission control parameters are generated based on the transmission security level, including:

[0027] The transmission protection strength and transmission handling boundary of the data to be transmitted are determined based on the aforementioned transmission security level.

[0028] Based on the transmission protection strength, protection parameters are matched to generate data protection parameters;

[0029] Based on the aforementioned transmission processing boundary, execution parameters are matched to generate transmission execution parameters;

[0030] The data protection parameters and transmission execution parameters are associated to generate secure transmission control parameters.

[0031] As a preferred embodiment, the data to be transmitted is encapsulated according to the secure transmission control parameters to generate a secure transmission envelope, including:

[0032] The protected objects and transmission constraints of the data to be transmitted are determined based on the aforementioned secure transmission control parameters;

[0033] Security protection is performed on the data to be transmitted according to the protected object, and a security protection result is obtained;

[0034] The transmission constraints are parsed, and transmission control information is generated based on the parsing results;

[0035] Semantic element processing is performed on the data to be transmitted to generate a semantic fingerprint before conversion;

[0036] The security protection result, transmission control information, and semantic fingerprint before conversion are encapsulated into the envelope structure corresponding to the transmission task to generate the secure transmission envelope.

[0037] As a preferred embodiment, performing a transformation semantic consistency check on the secure transmission envelope includes:

[0038] When the data to be transmitted involves a protocol conversion, the semantic fingerprint before the conversion and the semantic fingerprint after the conversion are obtained respectively.

[0039] The semantic fingerprints before and after the conversion are compared for consistency to obtain the semantic consistency verification result.

[0040] As a preferred implementation, obtaining the semantic fingerprint before and after conversion includes:

[0041] Read the pre-conversion semantic fingerprint of the data to be transmitted before protocol conversion from the secure transmission envelope;

[0042] Semantic element parsing is performed on the data to be transmitted after protocol conversion to obtain the converted semantic elements;

[0043] Based on the summarization rules corresponding to the semantic fingerprint before conversion, the semantic elements after conversion are summarized to obtain the semantic fingerprint after conversion.

[0044] As a preferred implementation, data transmission is performed based on the semantic consistency verification result to obtain a secure data transmission result, including:

[0045] Based on the semantic consistency verification result and the secure transmission envelope, a receive verification is performed to generate a transmission verification result;

[0046] The transmission execution method is determined based on the transmission verification results and secure transmission control parameters.

[0047] The transmission process is performed according to the transmission execution method described above to obtain the secure data transmission result.

[0048] As a preferred embodiment, it further includes:

[0049] The historical records of the data security transmission results are aggregated according to a preset aggregation dimension to obtain historical transmission statistics;

[0050] Calculate the transmission performance correction amount based on the historical transmission statistics;

[0051] The secure transmission control parameters are corrected according to the transmission performance correction amount to obtain the corrected secure transmission control parameters.

[0052] The data to be transmitted is encapsulated according to the modified secure transmission control parameters.

[0053] In a second aspect, the present invention provides an electronic device including a memory and a processor, wherein the memory stores a computer program, and the processor executes the computer program to implement the steps of the method in the first aspect.

[0054] Thirdly, the present invention provides a computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, wherein the computer program, when executed by a processor, implements the steps of the method in the first aspect.

[0055] Compared with the prior art, the present invention has the following advantages:

[0056] This invention employs a dynamic risk grading mechanism with dual constraints of transmission task profiling and node link status. It matches differentiated security protection parameters as needed, achieving precise allocation of security resources, effectively reducing unnecessary computing power consumption at the edge gateway, compressing control command transmission latency, and ensuring strong protection for highly sensitive data, balancing transmission efficiency and data security. Through semantic fingerprint consistency verification before and after cross-protocol conversion, it overcomes the limitations of traditional byte-level verification, accurately identifying semantic deviations such as field mapping, unit conversion, and control direction, reducing hidden business failures and lowering maintenance and troubleshooting costs. Coupled with full-dimensional receive verification and adaptive transmission handling, it uses historical transmission performance to close-loop correct security parameters, improving transmission stability in weak network and node degradation scenarios, ensuring continuous and reliable operation of platform services. The entire solution is adaptable to multi-protocol and multi-data type transmission scenarios in park-level edge intelligent control platforms, with low deployment costs and strong feasibility. Attached Figure Description

[0057] To more clearly illustrate the technical solutions of the embodiments of this application, the accompanying drawings used in the embodiments will be briefly introduced below. It should be understood that the following drawings only show some embodiments of this application and should not be regarded as a limitation on the scope of this application.

[0058] Figure 1 This is an exemplary flowchart of the data security transmission method for the edge intelligent control platform provided in this embodiment of the invention;

[0059] Figure 2 This is a schematic diagram illustrating the effect of the edge intelligent control platform data security transmission method provided in this embodiment of the invention compared with the prior art, wherein gray bars represent the prior art and black bars represent the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0060] To make the technical means, creative features, objectives, and effects of this invention easier to understand, the invention is further described below with reference to specific embodiments. However, the following embodiments are merely preferred embodiments of this invention and not all of them. Other embodiments obtained by those skilled in the art based on the embodiments described herein without creative effort are all within the protection scope of this invention.

[0061] Example 1:

[0062] To achieve the above objectives, please refer to Figures 1 to 2This invention provides a method for secure data transmission on an edge intelligent control platform based on the Internet of Things, the method comprising the following steps:

[0063] Task profile generation: Acquire IoT transmission task data and extract transmission task features to generate a transmission task profile;

[0064] Transmission status characterization: Collect real-time status data of edge nodes and communication links, characterize the status of the real-time status data, and generate transmission condition results;

[0065] Risk level determination: The transmission risk value is calculated based on the transmission task profile and transmission condition results as constraints to determine the transmission security level;

[0066] Envelope security encapsulation: Based on the transmission security level, secure transmission control parameters are generated, and the data to be transmitted is encapsulated according to the secure transmission control parameters to generate a secure transmission envelope;

[0067] Semantic verification transmission: Perform semantic consistency verification on the secure transmission envelope, and perform data transmission based on the semantic consistency verification result to obtain the secure data transmission result.

[0068] In this embodiment, the specific steps for generating the task profile are as follows:

[0069] Acquire IoT transmission task data, which is a collection of messages to be transmitted between various types of IoT terminals, edge gateways, and business management platforms. These messages carry at least one of the following: device start / stop commands, access control linkage commands, charging power adjustment commands, or abnormal alarm data. When an edge node receives a transmission request, it collects the message corresponding to this transmission request, along with its protocol header, control payload, and timing information, as a whole as a transmission task and assigns a task identifier to the transmission task.

[0070] The IoT transmission task data is parsed to obtain candidate task fields. The task field parsing splits the message field by field according to the field definition of the communication protocol used in the transmission task. The candidate task fields include device location number, field name, field unit, control direction, service purpose, and task timestamp. The device location number is the unique addressing identifier of the terminal in the edge intelligent control platform; the control direction is the value of the field indicating whether it belongs to uplink acquisition or downlink control; the service purpose is the service category to which the field belongs; and the task timestamp includes the acquisition time of uplink data, the generation time of downlink control instructions, or the reception time of the edge node. When a field unit is missing in a candidate task field, the field unit is marked as null or a default unit is added according to the protocol field definition. In one implementation, the communication protocol is Modbus or MQTT. When the communication protocol is Modbus, the field is located by function code and register address; when the communication protocol is MQTT, the field is located by topic and payload key value. The task field parsing is implemented using existing message parsing programs, such as Modbus message parsing based on libmodbus or MQTT message parsing based on Eclipse Paho.

[0071] Furthermore, the candidate task fields are categorized and bound to obtain transmission task features corresponding to the data to be transmitted. The categorization involves assigning candidate task fields to corresponding feature groups based on identification, content, timing, and control categories. The binding involves establishing a correspondence between each feature group and the task identifier of this transmission task. The identification category includes the device location number; the content category includes the field name, field unit, and business purpose; the timing category includes the task timestamp; and the control category includes the control direction.

[0072] Based on the transmission task characteristics, a task association record for the data to be transmitted is constructed. The task association record uses the task identifier as the primary key and the categorized feature groups as fields to record all transmission task feature values ​​of the data to be transmitted in this transmission.

[0073] The task association records are graded according to preset profiling rules to generate the transmission task profile. The graded processing involves performing sensitivity assessment and timeliness assessment on the transmission task features in the task association records to obtain the data sensitivity level and control timeliness level, respectively. The transmission task profile consists of a task identifier, a data sensitivity level, and a control timeliness level. The data sensitivity level represents the degree of impact on edge intelligent control services when the data to be transmitted is stolen or tampered with, and the control timeliness level represents the maximum allowable delay constraint from the time the data to be transmitted is sent to the time it takes effect.

[0074] The sensitivity assessment takes control direction, business purpose, and field name as input, and is performed using a scoring, accumulation, and interval mapping method. Specifically, firstly, a sensitivity baseline score is assigned based on the control direction: 2 points for downlink control and 1 point for uplink acquisition. Then, business points are added based on the business purpose: 2 points for access control linkage or charging power adjustment, 1 point for device start / stop, and 0 points for normal status acquisition. Next, it is determined whether the field name matches a preset set of sensitive fields; 1 point is added if it matches, and 0 points are added if it does not. This completes the process. The sensitivity score is obtained by adding the sensitivity baseline score, business score, and field score. The sensitivity score is then converted into a data sensitivity level according to a preset sensitivity mapping range. The preset sensitive field set is a set of field names that represent control targets, control values, or identity credentials, including charging power setting values, access control switch status, equipment start / stop flags, and alarm levels. In one embodiment, the sensitivity mapping range is: a sensitivity score of not less than 4 points is high sensitivity, 2 to 3 points is medium sensitivity, and not more than 1 point is low sensitivity. The data sensitivity level is divided into three levels: high sensitivity, medium sensitivity, and low sensitivity.

[0075] The timeliness assessment takes control direction, business purpose, and task timestamp as inputs and is performed using a scoring, deduction, and interval mapping method. Specifically, firstly, it is determined whether the data to be transmitted is a control command or abnormal alarm data. If so, a timeliness baseline score of 2 points is assigned; otherwise, 1 point is assigned. Then, the difference between the task timestamp and the current time of the edge node is used as the task latency difference. If the task latency difference is not less than a preset timeliness window, 1 point is deducted from the timeliness baseline score; if it is less than the preset timeliness window, no deduction is made, resulting in a timeliness score. Then, the timeliness score is converted into a control timeliness level according to a preset timeliness mapping interval. In one embodiment, the timeliness mapping interval is: a timeliness score not less than 2 points is strong real-time, equal to 1 point is near real-time, and not greater than 0 points is non-real-time. The control timeliness level is three levels: strong real-time, near real-time, and non-real-time. The timeliness window is 200ms.

[0076] Furthermore, when the same data to be transmitted, after being assessed by sensitivity evaluation and timeliness evaluation, points to different profile processing directions, the dominant level of the data to be transmitted in the transmission task profile is determined according to the order of sensitivity priority over timeliness, and the control timeliness level is retained as an additional constraint along with the dominant level; the sensitivity evaluation and timeliness evaluation are independent of each other, each is executed once and the scores are not written back to each other; the transmission task profile is output with the task identifier as the index.

[0077] In this embodiment, the specific steps for representing the transmission state are as follows:

[0078] Real-time status data of edge nodes and communication links are collected. The edge node is an edge gateway or edge server carrying this transmission task, and the communication link is the link between the edge node and the service management platform carrying this transmission task. The real-time status data includes the processor utilization rate, memory utilization rate, queue length of pending tasks, and safe operation status of the edge node, as well as the available bandwidth, transmission latency, packet loss rate, and jitter of the communication link. When the edge node receives a transmission request, the above status values ​​are read according to a preset collection period, and a collection time is added to each status value. In one embodiment, the collection period is 1 second.

[0079] Furthermore, node status features and link status features are extracted from the real-time status data. The node status features are state variables characterizing the trustworthiness of the edge node's own operation, including processor utilization, memory utilization, length of the pending task queue, and secure operation status. The link status features are state variables characterizing the carrying capacity of the communication link, including available bandwidth, transmission latency, packet loss rate, and jitter. Among them, the secure operation status is the value of whether the edge node is authenticated and has no unhandled security alarms at the time of this collection. Authentication means that the edge node holds an unexpired identity credential issued by the platform at the time of this collection. No unhandled security alarms means that there are no security alarm entries with an unhandled status in the edge node's local security monitoring records. The secure operation status is read using existing programs, such as reading the identity credential validity period and alarm records based on the edge node's local security agent.

[0080] Based on the node state characteristics, a trustworthy mapping is performed to generate a node trustworthy representation result. Using processor utilization, memory utilization, the length of the pending task queue, and the safe operating status as inputs, the process is executed using a scoring, accumulation, and interval mapping method. Specifically, firstly, a trustworthy baseline score is assigned based on the safe operating status: 2 points are assigned if the safe operating status is authenticated and there are no unhandled security alarms; otherwise, 0 points are assigned. Next, it is determined whether both processor utilization and memory utilization are not greater than a preset load threshold. If both are not greater, 2 points are added; if one is greater, 1 point is added; if both are greater, 0 points are added. Finally, it is determined whether the length of the pending task queue is... If the node's trust score is greater than a preset queue threshold, add 1 point if it is not greater than the threshold, and add 0 points if it is greater than the threshold. The trust baseline score, load score, and queue score are then added together to obtain the node's trust score. This node's trust score is then converted into a node trust representation result according to a preset trust mapping interval. In one embodiment, the load threshold is 80%, and the queue threshold is 100. The trust mapping interval is: a node trust score of not less than 4 points is considered high trust, 2 to 3 points is considered medium trust, and not greater than 1 point is considered low trust. The node trust representation result is categorized into three levels: high trust, medium trust, and low trust. The node trust score is calculated using the following formula:

[0081] ,

[0082] Where U is the node's trust score; This is the safe operating status value. It is set to 1 if the system is authenticated and there are no unhandled safety alarms, and 0 otherwise. , These are processor usage and memory usage, respectively. , Set its normalization upper limit; The length of the queue of tasks to be processed. The upper limit for queue normalization; , , , As for the weights of each item, in one implementation, the... The value is 0.4, the The value is 0.2, the The value is 0.2, the The value is 0.2, the The value is 100%, the The value is 100%, the The value is 200. Then, the node credibility score is converted into the node credibility representation result according to the preset credibility mapping interval.

[0083] Based on the link state characteristics, a carrying capacity mapping is performed to generate a link carrying capacity representation result. The carrying capacity mapping takes available bandwidth, transmission delay, packet loss rate, and jitter as inputs and is executed using a scoring, accumulation, and interval mapping method. Specifically, first, it is determined whether the available bandwidth is not less than a preset bandwidth threshold; if not, 2 points are assigned, and if less, 1 point is assigned. Next, it is determined whether the transmission delay and packet loss rate are both not greater than their corresponding preset delay thresholds and preset packet loss thresholds; if both are not greater, 2 points are added, if one is greater, 1 point is added, and if both are greater, 0 points are added. Finally, it is determined whether the jitter is not greater than a preset jitter threshold; if not, 1 point is added. If the score is greater than 0, add 0 points; at this point, the bandwidth score, quality score, and jitter score are added together to obtain the link carrying score. The link carrying score is then converted into a link carrying characterization result according to a preset carrying mapping interval. In one embodiment, the bandwidth threshold is 10Mbps, the latency threshold is 50ms, the packet loss threshold is 1%, and the jitter threshold is 20ms. The carrying mapping interval is as follows: a link carrying score of not less than 4 points indicates strong carrying, 2 to 3 points indicates medium carrying, and not greater than 1 point indicates weak carrying. The link carrying characterization result is classified into three levels: strong carrying, medium carrying, and weak carrying.

[0084] The transmission condition result is generated by fusing the node trustworthiness representation result and the link bearer representation result. The fusion involves weighting and combining the node trustworthiness score and the link bearer score, and applying an imbalance penalty. The transmission condition result is composed of the node trustworthiness representation result, the link bearer representation result, and the comprehensive transmission condition level. First, the comprehensive transmission condition score is calculated using the following formula:

[0085] ,

[0086] in, The overall score is based on transmission conditions. The node's trust score. The link carrying score, For node trust weights, The penalty coefficient for the imbalance between trustworthiness and carrying capacity. The absolute value of the difference between the node trust score and the link bearer score is used to lower the overall transmission condition score when there is an imbalance between the node trust score and the link bearer score; in one embodiment, the... The value is 0.5, the The value is 0.5; then the transmission condition comprehensive score is converted into a transmission condition comprehensive level according to the preset condition mapping interval; in one embodiment, the condition mapping interval is: the transmission condition comprehensive score is not less than 4 points, which is good; less than 4 points and not less than 2 points, which is restricted; and less than 2 points, which is deteriorated; the transmission condition comprehensive level is three levels: good, restricted, and deteriorated.

[0087] When the overall transmission condition level of the same edge node is different in adjacent acquisition cycles, the overall transmission condition level obtained in the most recent acquisition cycle shall prevail; the trusted mapping and the carrying capacity mapping are independent of each other, each is executed once and the scores are not written back to each other.

[0088] The transmission condition results are output with the task identifier of this transmission task as the index, and serve as the source of transmission environment risk characterization in subsequent steps of calculating transmission risk value and determining transmission security level based on transmission task profile and transmission condition results as constraints.

[0089] In this embodiment, the specific steps for determining the risk level are as follows:

[0090] The task risk characterization quantity is extracted from the transmission task profile, and the transmission environment risk characterization quantity is extracted from the transmission condition result. The task risk characterization quantity is a value that characterizes the consequences of the data to be transmitted being attacked and the urgency of the timeliness, including a sensitive risk component and a timeliness risk component. The sensitive risk component is mapped from the data sensitivity level in the transmission task profile, with a value of 3 for high sensitivity, 2 for medium sensitivity, and 1 for low sensitivity. The timeliness risk component is mapped from the control timeliness level in the transmission task profile, with a value of 3 for strong real-time, 2 for near real-time, and 1 for non-real-time.

[0091] The transmission environment risk characterization value is a value that characterizes the risk resistance capability of the node and link environment in this transmission, including a trusted risk component and a bearer risk component. The trusted risk component is mapped from the node trusted characterization result in the transmission condition result, with a value of 3 for low trustedness, 2 for medium trustedness, and 1 for high trustedness. The bearer risk component is mapped from the link bearer characterization result in the transmission condition result, with a value of 3 for weak bearer, 2 for medium bearer, and 1 for strong bearer.

[0092] Risk fusion is performed based on the aforementioned task risk characterization and transmission environment risk characterization to obtain the transmission risk value; risk fusion is performed using a component-weighted summation method, and the transmission risk value is calculated using the following formula:

[0093] ,

[0094] Where R is the transmission risk value, and S is the sensitive risk component, which is obtained by mapping from the data sensitivity level. C is the timeliness risk component, which is obtained by mapping the control timeliness level; L is the trust risk component, which is obtained by mapping the node trustworthiness representation result; and L is the bearer risk component, which is obtained by mapping the link bearer representation result. , For task-side component weights; , For environmental component weights; Assign weights to the task side; As environmental side weights; in one embodiment, the The value is 0.6, the The value is 0.4, the The value is 0.5, the The value is 0.5, the The value is 0.6, the The value is 0.4; the transmission risk value increases monotonically with the increase of data sensitivity level, the increase of control timeliness level, the decrease of node trust characterization result or the decrease of link bearer characterization result, so that the subsequent secure transmission control parameters are enhanced with the deterioration of the four elements.

[0095] The transmission risk value is converted into a transmission security level according to a preset level mapping rule. The transmission security level is one of the following: normal secure transmission, enhanced secure transmission, strong protection transmission, and blocking transmission. Normal secure transmission causes subsequent secure transmission control parameters to adopt the basic protection strength and prioritizes low latency; enhanced secure transmission increases the protection strength of subsequent secure transmission control parameters; strong protection transmission uses the highest protection strength for subsequent secure transmission control parameters; and blocking transmission causes subsequent transmission to stop the current transmission and trigger abnormal handling. In one embodiment, the level mapping rule is: a transmission risk value not greater than 1.5 is normal secure transmission; a value greater than 1.5 but not greater than 2.2 is enhanced secure transmission; a value greater than 2.2 but less than 3.0 is strong protection transmission; and a value not less than 3.0 or meeting a preset blocking condition is blocking transmission. The preset blocking condition is that the data sensitivity level of the data to be transmitted is high sensitivity, and the overall transmission condition level in the transmission condition result is deteriorated.

[0096] When the above setting is inconsistent with the transmission security level obtained by the level mapping rule, the transmission blocking obtained by the setting shall prevail, that is, the determination of transmission blocking has a higher priority than the determination result of the level mapping rule; risk fusion and level mapping are each executed once, level mapping is executed before the above setting, and the above setting has a covering relationship with the level mapping result.

[0097] The transmission security level is output with the task identifier of this transmission task as the index, and serves as the level input for the subsequent step of generating secure transmission control parameters based on the transmission security level. This enables the step to configure field-level encryption, time-limited tokens, fragmentation verification, replay window and transmission path in a coordinated manner.

[0098] In this embodiment, the specific steps of the envelope security encapsulation are as follows:

[0099] The transmission security level determines the transmission protection strength and transmission handling boundary of the data to be transmitted. The transmission protection strength determines the strength level of the data protection parameter values, representing the field-level encryption range, key strength, signature method, and fragmentation verification granularity applied to the data to be transmitted. The transmission handling boundary determines the handling constraints of the transmission execution parameter values, representing the allowed validity period of the timed token, replay window size, transmission path selection method, and maximum number of retransmissions for this transmission. In one embodiment, the correspondence between the transmission security level, transmission protection strength, and transmission handling boundary is as follows: ordinary secure transmission corresponds to basic protection strength and lenient handling boundary; enhanced secure transmission corresponds to medium protection strength and medium handling boundary; strong protection transmission corresponds to the highest protection strength and strict handling boundary; and blocked transmission corresponds to abort handling boundary.

[0100] Based on the transmission protection strength, protection parameters are matched to generate data protection parameters. The matching process reads the corresponding field-level encryption range, key strength, signature method, and fragmentation verification granularity from a preset protection parameter table according to the transmission protection strength. The data protection parameters include the encrypted field range, encryption algorithm and key length, signature flag and signature algorithm, fragment length, and fragmentation verification method. The encrypted field range is the set of field names in the data to be transmitted that require field-level encryption. In one embodiment, the protection parameter table is configured according to protection strength levels as follows: At basic protection strength, the encrypted field range is empty, no signature is applied, the fragment length is 1024 bytes, and the fragmentation verification method is cyclic redundancy check; at medium protection strength, the encrypted field range is the set of preset sensitive fields that are hit. For the first field, the encryption algorithm is Advanced Encryption Standard (AES), the key length is 128 bits, and a signature is applied using a hash-based Message Authentication Code (MAC) algorithm. The fragment length is 512 bytes, and the fragment verification method is Cyclic Redundancy Check (CRC). At the highest protection strength, the encrypted field range includes all content-type fields, the encryption algorithm is AES, the key length is 256 bits, and a signature is applied using a hash-based MAC algorithm. The fragment length is 256 bytes, and the fragment verification method is per-fragment digest check (CRC). The field-level encryption, signing, and fragment verification are implemented using existing cryptographic and verification procedures, such as AES-based encryption based on OpenSSL, message signing based on HMAC-SHA256, and fragment cyclic redundancy check based on CRC32.

[0101] Based on the transmission handling boundary, execution parameters are matched to generate transmission execution parameters. The execution parameter matching reads the corresponding validity period of the time-sensitive token, replay window size, transmission path selection method, and maximum retransmission count from a preset execution parameter table according to the transmission handling boundary. The transmission execution parameters include the time-sensitive token and its validity period, replay window, transmission path identifier, and maximum retransmission count. The time-sensitive token is a time-limited credential binding the current transmission task identifier and the token generation time. The replay window is the allowed time interval used by the receiver to determine duplicate messages. The transmission path identifier is the path number selected from the set of available transmission paths. The set of available transmission paths is the set of currently connected transmission paths from the edge node to the service management platform, obtained by the edge node probing the connectivity of each candidate path according to a preset collection cycle. The selection is based on the link carrying score among paths that meet the path conditions defined by the handling boundary. The first path from high to low is taken as the transmission path identifier. When no path meets this condition, the default path is used. In one implementation, the execution parameter table is as follows: for lenient handling boundaries, no time-limited token is bound, the replay window is 2000ms, the transmission path selection method is the default path, and the maximum number of retransmissions is 3; for medium handling boundaries, a time-limited token is bound, the effective duration is 1000ms, the replay window is 1000ms, the transmission path selection method is the default path, and the maximum number of retransmissions is 2; for strict handling boundaries, a time-limited token is bound, the effective duration is 500ms, the replay window is 500ms, the transmission path selection method is selected from the paths with high credibility in the node credibility representation results of the transmission condition results, and the maximum number of retransmissions is 1. The time-limited token generation and replay window determination are implemented using existing programs, such as time-limited token generation based on HMAC and replay determination based on sliding time windows.

[0102] The data protection parameters and transmission execution parameters are associated to generate secure transmission control parameters. The data protection parameters and transmission execution parameters are bound to the same parameter set with the task identifier of this transmission task as the primary key. The secure transmission control parameters consist of the task identifier, data protection parameters, and transmission execution parameters, so that field-level encryption, signature, fragmentation verification, time-limited token, replay window, and transmission path are uniformly valued and take effect in conjunction under the same task identifier.

[0103] Based on the secure transmission control parameters, the protection object and transmission constraints of the data to be transmitted are determined; the protection object is the range of data to be transmitted pointed to by the data protection parameters in the secure transmission control parameters, including the fields listed in the encrypted field range and the entire message with the signature applied; the transmission constraints are the execution restrictions pointed to by the transmission execution parameters in the secure transmission control parameters, including the validity period of the timed token, the replay window, the transmission path identifier, and the upper limit of the number of retransmissions.

[0104] Security protection is performed on the data to be transmitted according to the protected object to obtain a security protection result. The protected object is processed item by item according to the data protection parameters. Specifically, firstly, the fields listed in the encrypted field range are encrypted field by field according to the encryption algorithm and key length, and the original value of the field in the message is replaced with ciphertext. Fields outside the encrypted field range in the message are kept in plaintext to obtain encrypted fields. Then, when the signature flag is set to apply a signature, the signature value is calculated on the data to be transmitted according to the signature algorithm. Then, the data to be transmitted is divided into data fragments according to the fragment length, and the fragment verification value is calculated for each data fragment according to the fragment verification method. Thus, the security protection result includes encrypted fields, signature value, data fragments, and fragment verification value.

[0105] The transmission constraints are parsed, and transmission control information is generated based on the parsing results. The constraint parsing involves separating time constraints, replay constraints, path constraints, and retransmission constraints from the transmission constraints. The transmission control information includes a time token and its validity period, a replay window, a transmission path identifier, and an upper limit for the number of retransmissions. The transmission control information is sent to the receiving end along with the secure transmission envelope for time verification and replay determination on the receiving side.

[0106] Further, semantic element processing is performed on the data to be transmitted to generate a semantic fingerprint before conversion. Semantic elements are extracted from the transmission task features corresponding to the data to be transmitted and a digest calculation is performed. Specifically, semantic elements are first extracted according to a preset set of semantic elements, which include device location number, field name, field unit, acquisition time, control direction, and service purpose. The acquisition time is taken from the uplink data acquisition time component of the task timestamp, and the downlink control command is taken from the command generation time component of the task timestamp. Then, the semantic elements are normalized according to a preset digest rule. The normalization is to concatenate the values ​​of each semantic element into a semantic element string according to a preset field order, and then normalize the values. The case sensitivity, spaces, and unit writing styles in the text are standardized according to a unified writing standard. This unified writing standard involves converting all letters to lowercase, deleting leading, trailing, and middle whitespace characters from values, and mapping field units to standard unit writing according to a preset unit alias table. Then, a digest calculation is performed on the semantic element string according to the digest rules to obtain the semantic fingerprint before conversion. In one embodiment, the digest rule uses the SHA-256 digest algorithm. The digest rule is retained with the secure transmission envelope and used to calculate the converted semantic fingerprint according to the same digest rule after protocol conversion. The digest calculation of semantic elements is implemented using existing digest programs, such as SHA-256 digest calculation based on OpenSSL.

[0107] The security protection result, transmission control information, and semantic fingerprint before conversion are encapsulated into the envelope structure corresponding to the transmission task to generate the secure transmission envelope. The above content is written into the corresponding fields according to the preset envelope structure. The envelope structure includes a task identifier field, a security protection field, a transmission control field, and a semantic fingerprint field. The task identifier field is written with the task identifier of this transmission task. The security protection field is written with the encryption field, signature value, data fragmentation, and fragmentation verification value. The transmission control field is written with the validity token and its validity period, replay window, transmission path identifier, and maximum number of retransmissions. The semantic fingerprint field is written with the semantic fingerprint before conversion and its corresponding digest rule identifier.

[0108] The secure transmission envelope is output with the task identifier of this transmission task as the index, and serves as the input for the verification object of the subsequent semantic consistency verification step of the secure transmission envelope. The semantic fingerprint before conversion in the semantic fingerprint field serves as the benchmark for comparing the semantic consistency before and after the protocol conversion.

[0109] In this embodiment, the specific steps of the semantic verification transmission are as follows:

[0110] When the data to be transmitted undergoes a protocol conversion, the semantic fingerprint before the conversion and the semantic fingerprint after the conversion are obtained respectively. The protocol conversion is when the data to be transmitted is converted from the message format of one communication protocol to the message format of another communication protocol at the edge node, such as from Modbus message to MQTT message. When the edge node determines that the message format of this transmission task has undergone the above conversion on the transmission path, the conversion semantic consistency check is triggered. If no protocol conversion occurs, the check is not triggered and the secure transmission envelope is directly transferred to the receiving check.

[0111] Read the pre-conversion semantic fingerprint of the data to be transmitted before protocol conversion from the secure transmission envelope; locate the semantic fingerprint field according to the envelope structure of the secure transmission envelope; extract the pre-conversion semantic fingerprint and its corresponding digest rule identifier from the semantic fingerprint field. The pre-conversion semantic fingerprint is calculated by the digest rule for the semantic elements before protocol conversion during the encapsulation stage and is used as the benchmark for this comparison.

[0112] Semantic element parsing is performed on the data to be transmitted after protocol conversion to obtain converted semantic elements. The message is then split field by field according to the field definition of the communication protocol used in the converted message, and the set of semantic elements is identified according to the digest rules in the semantic fingerprint field. The device location number, field name, field unit, acquisition time, control direction and service purpose are extracted from the splitting results to obtain the converted semantic elements. The meaning of each semantic element is consistent with that before conversion. The acquisition time is taken from the acquisition time component of the task timestamp when it is uplink data, and from the instruction generation time component of the task timestamp when it is downlink control instructions. The field-by-field splitting of the converted message is implemented using MQTT message parsing.

[0113] Based on the digest rule corresponding to the semantic fingerprint before conversion, a digest calculation is performed on the semantic elements after conversion to obtain the semantic fingerprint after conversion. According to the digest rule indicated by the digest rule identifier, the semantic elements after conversion are first normalized according to the same preset field order and unified writing standard as in the encapsulation stage. The values ​​of each semantic element are concatenated into a string of semantic elements after conversion. Then, a digest is calculated on the semantic element string according to the digest algorithm used by the digest rule to obtain the semantic fingerprint after conversion. The digest rule is the same as the digest rule used to generate the semantic fingerprint before conversion in the encapsulation stage, ensuring that the same fingerprint is obtained before and after conversion under the same input semantics. In one embodiment, the digest algorithm used by the digest rule is a secure hash algorithm, and the digest calculation of the semantic fingerprint after conversion is implemented using SHA-256.

[0114] The semantic fingerprints before and after the conversion are compared for consistency to obtain a semantic consistency verification result. The consistency comparison involves comparing the semantic fingerprints before and after the conversion bit by bit. Specifically, if the two are the same, the semantics are considered consistent, and the semantic consistency verification result is "verification passed." If the two are different, the semantics are considered to have changed during the protocol conversion, and the semantic consistency verification result is "verification failed." The semantic element items in the semantic elements after the conversion that are inconsistent with those before the conversion are recorded. The recording of the semantic element items in the semantic elements after the conversion that are inconsistent with those before the conversion involves recalculating the summary of each semantic element before and after the conversion for each item in the semantic element set when the fingerprint comparison fails, and comparing them. The names of the inconsistent semantic elements are recorded in the semantic consistency verification result. The semantic consistency verification result indicates whether the device location number, field name, field unit, acquisition time, control direction, and business purpose carried by the data to be transmitted maintain the same meaning before and after the protocol conversion, making the protocol conversion process verifiable.

[0115] Based on the semantic consistency check result and the secure transmission envelope, a receive check is performed to generate a transmission check result. The receive check is performed at the receiving end by verifying the transmission control information and security protection results in the secure transmission envelope item by item. First, the semantic consistency check result is verified to see if it passes. Then, the validity period of the validity token in the transmission control information is verified to see if it is within the validity period, and the replay window is verified to see if the current message falls into the replay window of the received message. Then, the fragmentation check value in the security protection result is used to verify whether the data fragments are complete, and the signature of the message is verified to see if it is valid. Finally, the above verification results are combined into a transmission check result. The transmission check result is considered qualified when all items pass, and unqualified when any item fails, and the unqualified item is recorded.

[0116] The transmission execution mode is determined based on the transmission verification result and the secure transmission control parameters. Specifically, if the transmission verification result is successful, the transmission execution mode is to receive and submit the data to be transmitted to the service management platform; if the transmission verification result is unsuccessful and the failure item is fragment integrity failure, the transmission execution mode is to request retransmission of the corresponding data fragment within the maximum number of retransmissions according to the transmission execution parameters; if the transmission verification result is unsuccessful and the failure item is semantic consistency, timeliness, or signature failure, the transmission execution mode is to discard the data to be transmitted and return an exception handling flag to the upper layer.

[0117] The transmission process is executed according to the aforementioned transmission execution method to obtain the secure data transmission result. Delivery, retransmission, or discarding is performed according to the selected transmission execution method, and the entire transmission process record is compiled. The secure data transmission result includes the task identifier, transmission security level, semantic consistency verification result, transmission verification result, and final action. The final action is one of successful delivery, successful delivery after retransmission, retransmission exceeding limits and discarding, or abnormal discarding. The secure data transmission result is derived step-by-step from the transmission security level determined by the transmission task profile and transmission condition results, the security protection result carried by the secure transmission envelope, the semantic fingerprint before conversion, and the semantic fingerprint after protocol conversion, through receiving verification. The secure data transmission result guides edge nodes in performing delivery, fragmentation, retransmission, or blocking and discarding transmission actions for this transmission task, and serves as the basis for determining link anomalies and protocol conversion anomalies, feeding back to the transmission condition acquisition stage. This allows for adjustments to the transmission conditions and security levels of subsequent similar transmission tasks. The secure data transmission results enable device start / stop commands, access control linkage commands, charging power adjustment commands, and abnormal alarm data to receive differentiated field-level encryption, time-sensitive tokens, fragmentation verification, and replay window protection within the same transmission task, based on their data sensitivity and control timeliness levels. This allows for comparative verification of data semantics before and after protocol conversion, and adaptive degradation or blocking of the transmission when the node's trusted state or link health deteriorates. Thus, on the edge intelligent control platform, this simultaneously achieves low-latency transmission of control data, on-demand enhanced protection of highly sensitive data, and verifiable protocol conversion. This effectively reduces gateway computing power consumption and operating costs, minimizes equipment failures and maintenance expenses caused by semantic errors, improves the overall security level and business operation stability of the platform, and addresses the shortcomings of existing technologies that use a unified secure transmission strategy for different data objects, resulting in high-intensity protection leading to increased control latency, and lightweight transmission lacking field-level protection and replay protection. Figure 2This is a schematic diagram illustrating the effect of a data security transmission method for an edge intelligent control platform based on the Internet of Things. The horizontal axis lists key performance indicators, and the vertical axis represents exemplified performance scores, ranging from 0 to 100%. Higher values ​​indicate better performance. The aim is to intuitively demonstrate the expected improvement of the present invention in key capabilities compared to typical existing technologies. The control command latency compliance rate increased from 64.3% to 97.1%, thanks to the invention's provision of basic protection for control commands based on low sensitivity / strong real-time performance and prioritizing low-latency paths. This avoids the gateway queuing and latency increases caused by the existing technology's uniform high-strength whole-packet encryption of all data. The on-demand protection hit rate for high-sensitivity data increased from 60.8% to 98.2%, thanks to the invention's matching of medium or highest protection strength to high-sensitivity data based on data sensitivity levels and performing field-level encryption and signing. This avoids the insufficient protection of high-sensitivity data under the existing unified strategy with a lightweight baseline. The cross-protocol semantic tampering detection rate increased from 42.5% to 95.8%, thanks to the invention's verification of semantic fingerprints after cross-protocol changes. Existing byte-level integrity checks cannot determine whether semantic tampering has occurred because the bytes have already changed after protocol conversion. The correctness of abnormal link adaptive handling increased from 56.7% to 93.6%, thanks to the invention's inclusion of node trust status and link health status in the comprehensive transmission condition level and the setting of blocking coverage for high-sensitivity data on deteriorating links. Existing fixed strategies do not adjust with link status.

[0118] Example 2:

[0119] In Example 1, the edge intelligent control platform can determine the transmission security level based on the transmission task profile of the data to be transmitted, the edge node status, and the link status, and generate secure transmission control parameters accordingly, so that a single transmission task can obtain security protection that matches its sensitivity level, control timeliness, and transmission environment.

[0120] However, during the long-term operation of a park-level edge intelligent control platform, the actual transmission performance of the same type of terminal, the same business command, or the same communication link will continuously change with equipment load, network congestion, gateway operating status, and peak business periods. If the secure transmission control parameters are determined only based on the current transmission security level and preset parameter table, without feeding back historical transmission delays, retransmission counts, semantic verification failures, reception verification results, and final handling actions to the parameter correction process, problems such as repeated timeouts of similar control commands, insufficient protection strength for similar high-sensitivity data, or excessive protection for low-sensitivity data are likely to occur. This makes it difficult for differentiated transmission control to maintain a balance between security and real-time performance as the operating environment changes.

[0121] In this embodiment, historical data secure transmission results are aggregated according to a preset aggregation dimension to obtain historical transmission statistics corresponding to the category of the data to be transmitted. Using the aggregation dimension as the grouping key, the historical data secure transmission results stored locally on the edge node are classified into the corresponding category. The aggregation dimension includes terminal type, service instruction type, and communication link. The terminal type is determined by the device category to which the device location number belongs, the service instruction type is determined by the service purpose and control direction, and the communication link is determined by the transmission path identifier. Historical data secure transmission results for each category within a preset statistical window are statistically analyzed. The historical transmission statistics include average transmission latency, average retransmission count, semantic verification failure rate, reception verification failure rate, and blocking handling ratio. The average transmission latency is the number of retransmissions within the statistical window for each category. The average transmission delay is the mean of the transmission latency. The average number of retransmissions is the mean of the number of retransmissions for each transmission within the statistical window for this category. The semantic verification failure rate is the ratio of the number of times the semantic consistency verification result of this category fails to pass verification to the total number of transmissions within the statistical window for this category. The reception verification failure rate is the ratio of the number of times the transmission verification result of this category fails to pass verification to the total number of transmissions within the statistical window for this category. The blocking handling ratio is the ratio of the number of times the final handling action of this category is retransmission exceeding the limit and discarding or abnormally discarding to the total number of transmissions within the statistical window for this category. In one implementation, the statistical window is the value of the most recent 100 transmissions or the transmissions within the most recent 1 hour. The retention and statistics of historical data secure transmission results are implemented using existing programs, such as storing the data secure transmission results of each transmission based on the local time-series database of the edge node and performing group statistics according to the aggregation dimension.

[0122] Further, a transmission performance correction amount is calculated based on the historical transmission statistics. The calculation involves first determining whether each item in the historical transmission statistics exceeds its corresponding preset correction trigger threshold, and then weighting the items that exceed the threshold to synthesize the transmission performance correction amount using the following formula:

[0123] ,

[0124] in, For transmission performance correction; This is a delay limit violation flag; it is set to 1 if the average transmission delay exceeds the preset delay correction threshold, and 0 otherwise. This is a retransmission limit violation flag; it is set to 1 if the average number of retransmissions exceeds the preset retransmission correction threshold, and 0 otherwise. This is a semantic failure flag; it is set to 1 if the semantic verification failure rate is greater than the preset semantic failure threshold, and 0 otherwise. This is a reception failure flag; it is set to 1 if the reception verification failure rate is greater than the preset reception failure threshold, and 0 otherwise. The blocking indicator is set to 1 if the blocking rate is greater than the preset blocking rate threshold, and 0 otherwise. , , , , These are the correction weights for each of the following sub-items: latency, retransmission, semantic failure, reception failure, and blocking. In one implementation, the latency correction threshold is set to the timeliness window corresponding to the control timeliness level of this category; the retransmission correction threshold is set to 1 time; the semantic failure threshold is set to 1%; the reception failure threshold is set to 5%; and the blocking percentage threshold is set to 5%. The value of is -1, the The value of is 1, the The value of is 1, the The value of is 1, the The value of is 1.

[0125] The secure transmission control parameters are corrected according to the transmission performance correction amount to obtain the corrected secure transmission control parameters; the transmission protection strength and transmission handling boundary obtained from the lookup table in the envelope security encapsulation are adjusted according to the transmission performance correction amount: when the transmission performance correction amount is greater than 0, the transmission protection strength is increased by the corresponding number in the protection parameter table and the transmission handling boundary is tightened by the corresponding number in the execution parameter table; when the transmission performance correction amount is less than 0, the transmission protection strength is decreased by the corresponding number in the protection parameter table and the transmission handling boundary is widened by the corresponding number in the execution parameter table; transmission performance When the correction amount is equal to 0, the transmission protection strength and transmission handling boundary maintain the level obtained from the lookup table; the corresponding level number is the number of levels obtained by rounding down the absolute value of the transmission performance correction amount, and the level after adjustment or reduction will not exceed the boundary with the highest and lowest levels of the protection parameter table and the execution parameter table. In one embodiment, the adjustable range of the transmission protection strength is three levels: basic protection strength, medium protection strength and highest protection strength, and the adjustable range of the transmission handling boundary is three levels: lenient handling boundary, medium handling boundary and strict handling boundary; the transmission security level is that the correction is not performed when the transmission is blocked.

[0126] When the same category of data to be transmitted simultaneously hits the delay limit flag, the retransmission limit flag, or the semantic failure flag, the sign of the transmission performance correction is determined in the order of positive priority over negative priority. That is, as long as any of the retransmission, semantic failure, reception failure, or blocking exceeds the limit, the transmission performance correction will not take a negative value, so that the protection strength will not be reduced due to a single delay limit exceeding the limit. The transmission feedback correction is performed once before each encapsulation and is calculated only based on the historical transmission statistics before the correction, and is not written back in the current transmission.

[0127] The data to be transmitted is encapsulated according to the modified secure transmission control parameters to generate a secure transmission envelope. The encapsulation method is the same as the envelope secure encapsulation in Embodiment 1. The difference is that this embodiment uses the modified transmission protection strength and transmission handling boundary to match the protection parameters and execution parameters.

[0128] The corrected secure transmission control parameters are output with the task identifier of the current transmission task as the index, and serve as the parameter input for the steps of encapsulating the data to be transmitted and generating a secure transmission envelope in this embodiment. The transmission feedback correction continuously adjusts the secure transmission control parameters of similar terminals, similar service instructions, or similar communication links according to changes in historical transmission delay, retransmission count, semantic verification failure, reception verification results, and final handling actions. This tightens the transmission handling boundary when similar control instructions repeatedly time out, increases the transmission protection strength when similar high-sensitivity data protection is insufficient, and decreases the transmission protection strength when low-sensitivity data protection is excessive. Thus, in the long-term operation of the park-level edge intelligent control platform, the differentiated transmission control continuously maintains a balance between security and real-time performance as equipment load, network congestion, gateway operating status, and peak business periods change. This solves the defects in Embodiment 1, where the secure transmission control parameters are determined only based on the current transmission security level and a preset parameter table, and historical transmission performance is not fed back to the parameter correction process, resulting in repeated timeouts of similar control instructions, insufficient protection strength for similar high-sensitivity data, or excessive protection for low-sensitivity data.

[0129] The embodiments of the present invention described above are subject to modification and change of method by those skilled in the art without departing from the embodiments and broader aspects of the present invention. The appended claims are intended to include all such modifications and changes of method that do not depart from the present invention.

[0130] Those skilled in the art should understand that the embodiments of the present invention can be implemented using a pure hardware architecture, a pure software architecture, or an integrated hardware and software architecture. The present invention can be prepared as a computer program product, which can be stored in various non-volatile computer-readable storage media, including but not limited to solid-state drives, flash memory chips, mobile storage devices, optical discs, cloud storage servers, and other standardized storage media, and is not limited to traditional storage media.

[0131] Based on the foregoing description in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, those skilled in the art will understand that the embodiments of this application can also be implemented by software programs. Therefore, this application also provides a computer-readable storage medium. This computer-readable storage medium stores computer-readable instructions thereon, which, when executed by one or more processors, implement the method described above in conjunction with the accompanying drawings.

[0132] Through the above description of the embodiments, those skilled in the art can clearly understand that each embodiment can be implemented by means of software plus necessary general-purpose hardware platforms, and of course, it can also be implemented by hardware. Based on this understanding, the above technical solutions, in essence or the part that contributes to the prior art, can be embodied in the form of a software product. This computer software product can be stored in a computer-readable storage medium, such as ROM / RAM, magnetic disk, optical disk, etc., and includes several instructions to cause a computer device (which may be a personal computer, server, or network device, etc.) to execute the methods described in the various embodiments or some parts of the embodiments.

[0133] It should be noted that although the operations of the method of this application are described in a specific order in the accompanying drawings, this does not require or imply that these operations must be performed in that specific order, or that all the operations shown must be performed to achieve the desired result. On the contrary, the steps depicted in the flowchart can be performed in a different order. Additionally or alternatively, certain steps may be omitted, multiple steps may be combined into one step, and / or one step may be broken down into multiple steps.

[0134] It should be understood that when the terms "first," "second," "third," and "fourth," etc., are used in the claims, specification, and drawings of this application, they are used only to distinguish different objects and not to describe a specific order. The terms "comprising" and "including" as used in the specification and claims of this application indicate the presence of the described features, integrals, steps, operations, elements, and / or components, but do not exclude the presence or addition of one or more other features, integrals, steps, operations, elements, components, and / or collections thereof.

[0135] It should also be understood that the terminology used herein is for the purpose of describing particular embodiments only and is not intended to limit the application. As used in this specification and claims, the singular forms “a,” “an,” and “the” are intended to include the plural forms unless the context clearly indicates otherwise. It should also be understood that the term “and / or” as used in this specification and claims refers to any combination and all possible combinations of one or more of the associated listed items, and includes such combinations.

[0136] Although the embodiments of this application are described above, the content is merely an example adopted for the purpose of facilitating understanding of this application and is not intended to limit the scope and application scenarios of this application. Any person skilled in the art described in this application may make any modifications and changes in the form and details of the implementation without departing from the spirit and scope disclosed in this application, but the scope of patent protection of this application shall still be determined by the scope defined in the appended claims.

Claims

1. A method for secure data transmission in an edge intelligent control platform based on the Internet of Things, characterized in that, include: Acquire IoT transmission task data and extract transmission task features to generate transmission task profiles; Collect real-time status data of edge nodes and communication links, characterize the real-time status data, and generate transmission condition results; The transmission risk value is calculated based on the transmission task profile and transmission condition results as constraints, and the transmission security level is determined. Based on the transmission security level, secure transmission control parameters are generated, and the data to be transmitted is encapsulated according to the secure transmission control parameters to generate a secure transmission envelope. Perform semantic consistency verification on the secure transmission envelope, and perform data transmission based on the semantic consistency verification result to obtain the secure data transmission result.

2. The edge intelligent control platform data secure transmission method according to claim 1, characterized in that, Extract transmission task features and generate a transmission task profile, including: The task fields of the IoT transmission task data are parsed to obtain candidate task fields; The candidate task fields are categorized and bound to obtain the transmission task features corresponding to the data to be transmitted. Based on the characteristics of the transmission task, construct a task association record for the data to be transmitted; The task association records are hierarchically processed according to preset profiling rules to generate the transmission task profile.

3. The edge intelligent control platform data secure transmission method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The real-time status data is characterized to generate transmission condition results, including: Extract node status features and link status features from the real-time status data; Based on the node state characteristics, a trustworthy mapping is performed to generate a node trustworthy representation result. Based on the link state characteristics, a carrying capacity mapping is performed to generate a link carrying capacity characterization result. The transmission condition results are generated by integrating the node trustworthiness characterization results and the link bearer characterization results.

4. The edge intelligent control platform data secure transmission method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The transmission risk value is calculated based on the transmission task profile and transmission condition results as constraints to determine the transmission security level, including: Extract task risk characterization from the transmission task profile, and extract transmission environment risk characterization from the transmission condition results; Risk fusion is performed based on the aforementioned task risk characterization and transmission environment risk characterization to obtain the transmission risk value; The transmission risk value is converted into a transmission security level according to a preset level mapping rule.

5. The edge intelligent control platform data secure transmission method according to claim 1, characterized in that, Based on the aforementioned transmission security level, secure transmission control parameters are generated, including: The transmission protection strength and transmission handling boundary of the data to be transmitted are determined based on the aforementioned transmission security level. Based on the transmission protection strength, protection parameters are matched to generate data protection parameters; Based on the aforementioned transmission processing boundary, execution parameters are matched to generate transmission execution parameters; The data protection parameters and transmission execution parameters are associated to generate secure transmission control parameters.

6. The edge intelligent control platform data secure transmission method according to claim 1, characterized in that, Encapsulating the data to be transmitted according to the aforementioned secure transmission control parameters to generate a secure transmission envelope includes: The protected objects and transmission constraints of the data to be transmitted are determined based on the aforementioned secure transmission control parameters; Security protection is performed on the data to be transmitted according to the protected object, and a security protection result is obtained; The transmission constraints are parsed, and transmission control information is generated based on the parsing results; Semantic element processing is performed on the data to be transmitted to generate a semantic fingerprint before conversion; The security protection result, transmission control information, and semantic fingerprint before conversion are encapsulated into the envelope structure corresponding to the transmission task to generate the secure transmission envelope.

7. The edge intelligent control platform data secure transmission method according to claim 1, characterized in that, Performing a transformation semantic consistency check on the secure transport envelope includes: When the data to be transmitted involves a protocol conversion, the semantic fingerprint before the conversion and the semantic fingerprint after the conversion are obtained respectively. The semantic fingerprints before and after the conversion are compared for consistency to obtain the semantic consistency verification result.

8. The edge intelligent control platform data secure transmission method according to claim 7, characterized in that, Obtain the semantic fingerprint before and after transformation, including: Read the pre-conversion semantic fingerprint of the data to be transmitted before protocol conversion from the secure transmission envelope; Semantic element parsing is performed on the data to be transmitted after protocol conversion to obtain the converted semantic elements; Based on the summarization rules corresponding to the semantic fingerprint before conversion, the semantic elements after conversion are summarized to obtain the semantic fingerprint after conversion.

9. The data security transmission method for the edge intelligent control platform according to claim 1, characterized in that, Data transmission is performed based on the semantic consistency verification result, resulting in secure data transmission, including: Based on the semantic consistency verification result and the secure transmission envelope, a receive verification is performed to generate a transmission verification result; The transmission execution method is determined based on the transmission verification results and secure transmission control parameters. The transmission process is performed according to the transmission execution method described above to obtain the secure data transmission result.

10. The edge intelligent control platform data secure transmission method according to claim 1, characterized in that, Also includes: The historical records of the data security transmission results are aggregated according to a preset aggregation dimension to obtain historical transmission statistics; Calculate the transmission performance correction amount based on the historical transmission statistics; The secure transmission control parameters are corrected according to the transmission performance correction amount to obtain the corrected secure transmission control parameters. The data to be transmitted is encapsulated according to the modified secure transmission control parameters.

Images