Modeling Liability Data Collection Systems for Intelligent Transportation Infrastructure Using Hyperledger Fabric

  • Luis Cintron
  • Scott GrahamEmail author
  • Douglas Hodson
  • Barry Mullins
Conference paper
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 570)


Distributed ledger technology is transforming environments where the participating entities have low trust. Employing distributed ledgers for intelligent transportation infrastructure communications and operations enables decentralized collaboration between entities that do not fully trust each other. This chapter models a transportation event data collection system as a Hyperledger Fabric blockchain network and simulates it using a transportation environment modeling tool. Data structures model the data collected about accidents involving vehicles and witness reports from nearby vehicles and road-side units that observed the events. The chaincode developed for the collection, validation and corroboration of the reported data is presented. Network performance results for various configurations are discussed. Optimization of the network configuration parameters resulted in a 48.1% improvement in transaction throughput. The experiments demonstrate that a distributed ledger technology such as Hyperledger Fabric holds promise for the collection of transportation data and the collaboration of applications and services that consume the data.


Intelligent transportation infrastructure distributed ledger blockchain 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    E. Androulaki, A. Barger, V. Bortnikov, C. Cachin, K. Christidis, A. De Caro, D. Enyeart, C. Ferris, G. Laventman, Y. Manevich, S. Muralidharan, C. Murthy, B. Nguyen, M. Sethi, G. Singh, K. Smith, A. Sorniotti, C. Stathakopoulou, M. Vukolic, S. Weed Cocco and J. Yellick, Hyperledger Fabric: A distributed operating system for permissioned blockchains, Proceedings of the Thirteenth European Conference on Computer Systems, article no. 30, 2018Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    L. Baird, The Swirlds Hashgraph Consensus Algorithm: Fair, Fast, Byzantine Fault Tolerance, Technical Report SWIRLDS-TR-2016-01, Swirlds, College Station, Texas, 2016Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    F. Bencic and I. Zarko, Distributed ledger technology: Blockchain compared to directed acyclic graph, Proceedings of the Thirty-Eighth IEEE International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, pp. 1569–1570, 2018Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    P. Bernstein and N. Goodman, Multiversion concurrency control – Theory and algorithms, ACM Transactions on Database Systems, vol. 8(4), pp. 465–483, 1983MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    V. Buterin, On public and private blockchains, Ethereum Foundation Blog (, August 6, 2015Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    M. Castro and B. Liskov, Practical Byzantine fault tolerance, Proceedings of the Third Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation, pp. 173–186, 1999Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    M. Cebe, E. Erdin, K. Akkaya, H. Aksu and S. Uluagac, Block4Forensic: An integrated lightweight blockchain framework for forensic applications of connected vehicles, IEEE Communications, vol. 56(10), pp. 50–57, 2018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    A. Dorri, M. Steger, S. Kanhere and R. Jurdak, Blockchain: A distributed solution to automotive security and privacy, IEEE Communications, vol. 55(12), pp. 119–125, 2017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    J. Kang, R. Yu, X. Huang, S. Maharjan, Y. Zhang and E. Hossain, Enabling localized peer-to-peer electricity trading among plug-in hybrid electric vehicles using consortium blockchains, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, vol. 13(6), pp. 3154–3164, 2017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Y. Kopylova, C. Farkas and W. Xu, Accurate accident reconstruction in VANET, in Data and Applications Security and Privacy XXV, Y. Li (Ed.), Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, Germany, pp. 271–279, 2011Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    L. Lamport, R. Shostak and M. Pease, The Byzantine generals problem, ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, vol. 4(3), pp. 382–401, 1982CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Linux Foundation, Bringing up a Kafka-Based Ordering Service, San Francisco, California (, 2019Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Linux Foundation, Hyperledger Composer, San Francisco, California (, 2019Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Linux Foundation, Hyperledger Explorer, San Francisco, California (, 2019Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Linux Foundation, Hyperledger Fabric (1.2) Glossary, San Francisco, California (, 2019Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    S. Nakamoto, Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System (, 2008Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    New York City Department of Transportation, NYC Connected Vehicle Project for Safer Transportation, New York (, 2019Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    C. Oham, R. Jurdak, S. Kanhere, A. Dorri and S. Jha, B-FICA: Blockchain-Based Framework for Auto-Insurance Claim and Adjudication, arXiv:1806.06169 (, 2018
  19. 19.
    C. Oham, S. Kanhere, R. Jurdak and S. Jha, A Blockchain-Based Liability Attribution Framework for Autonomous Vehicles, arXiv: 1802.05050 (, 2018
  20. 20.
    C. Papadimitriou and P. Kanellakis, On concurrency control by multiple versions, Proceedings of the First ACM SIGACT-SIGMOD Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, pp. 76–82, 1982Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    M. Pilkington, Blockchain technology: Principles and applications, in Research Handbook on Digital Transformations, F. Olleros and M. Zhegu (Eds.), Edward Elgar, Northampton, Massachusetts, pp. 225–246, 2016Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Y. Qian, K. Lu and N. Moayeri, A secure VANET MAC protocol for DSRC applications, Proceedings of the IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference, 2008Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    M. Singh and S. Kim, Blockchain-Based Intelligent Vehicle Data Sharing Framework, arXiv:1708.09721 (, 2017
  24. 24.
    J. Sousa, A. Bessani and M. Vukolic, A Byzantine fault-tolerant ordering service for the Hyperledger Fabric blockchain platform, Proceedings of the Forty-Eighth Annual IEEE/IFIP International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks, pp. 51–58, 2018Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    A. Sumalee and H. Ho, Smarter and more connected: Future intelligent transportation systems, IATSS Research, vol. 42(2), pp. 67–71, 2018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Tampa Hillsborough Expressway Authority, THEA Connected Vehicle Pilot, Tampa, Florida (, 2019Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    P. Thakkar, S. Nathan and B. Viswanathan, Performance benchmarking and optimizing the Hyperledger Fabric blockchain platform, Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth IEEE International Symposium on Modeling, Analysis and Simulation of Computer and Telecommunication Systems, pp. 264–276, 2018Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    U.S. Department of Transportation, ITS Strategic Plan 2015–2019, FHWA-JPO-14-145, Washington, DC (, 2014Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Y. Yuan and F. Wang, Towards blockchain-based intelligent transportation systems, Proceedings of the Nineteenth IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems, pp. 2663–2668, 2016Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Luis Cintron
    • 1
  • Scott Graham
    • 1
    Email author
  • Douglas Hodson
    • 1
  • Barry Mullins
    • 1
  1. 1.Air Force Institute of Technology, Wright-Patterson AFBOhioUSA

Personalised recommendations