# Survey on Security Threats in Agricultural IoT and Smart Farming
## 3 Security Threats in Modern Agriculture
### Cybercrime and Cybersecurity in Agriculture
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**Security** & **Examples of Attacks** & **Agriculture Consequences** & **Studies** \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Privacy} & Physical Attack & The collection of information regarding the type and possible usage of devices concerning agriculture projects. These security leaks can be used in order to get access to infrastructure and production standards as well as getting privacy data and compromising the privacy of the system. Then and analysis purposes can be the outcome of a possible violation of privacy. & [62; 78; 79; 80; 81; 82; 83; 84; 85; 86; 87; 88; 89; 90; 91; 92] \\  & Replay Attack & & \\  & Masquerade Attack & & \\  & & & \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Confidentiality} & \multirow{4}{*}{Tracing Attack} & The usage of various communication devices in a smart farming or an agriculture system based on ICT can outcome into data travelling through several interconnected devices and protocols from source to destination. Possible confidentiality problems can lead to the persistence, on many occasions, of loss of privacy and data or information breaches. The unauthorized access to important data as a result of the confidentiality loss could lead to their key information and also cause serious threats over the involved agriculture system users’ confidential information. & \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Integrity} & Forgery Attack & As a result of possible unauthorized or improper changes in the trustworthiness of data or resources, information between agriculture ICT or smart farming systems can be no longer reliable or accurate. The transmitted information data between the devices and/or the people/farmerns/stakeholders that are involved in an agriculture business or even a process can lead to possible financial or authentication frauds due to the lack of the assurance that the information is sufficiently accurate for its purpose. & [62; 79; 90; 91; 92; 93; 94; 95; 96] \\  & Denial of Service & operations in order to keep a real-world impact. An attacker can suspend the activities of the installed smart farming network or even establish the services unavailable to the farmers. The lack of availability of the provided services can lead to business disruption, possible loss of customer’s confidence and revenue. & \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Authenticity} & Attacks against Authentication & Authenticity ensures the authentication of certain information provided from a valid/authorized source. Forged attackers’ identities can mimic legal/authorized persons and gain access to the smart farming system. Possible results can be the data breach/loss and/or alternation, service unavailability, loss of devices connectivity or even smart farming agriculture system corruption and/or destruction. & \\  & Hijacking, Spoofing & During the authentication process, a commonly known service that provides proof of the integrity as well as the origin of data, both in an unforgeable relationship, and can be verified by any third party at any time with high assurance and genuiness, is non-repeulation. The reputation of information allows an attacker to repudicate all the power consumption, generated information and production processes of an agriculture ICT system, which can lead to a situation of refusing services, authentication information of data transmissions, through the nodes of the system. & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Overview of possible attacks per security aspect in agricultural cybersecurity.