## 3 Related Work  
Over the past decade, both researchers and industries have demonstrated a keen interest in deploying diverse Integrity, Trust, Privacy, and Scalability solutions for VANETs. Our analysis in this section reflects changing security, privacy, and trust management needs. Centralized architectures consistently face security and privacy vulnerabilities, potentially leading to irreversible scenarios of attacks and damages. Existing conventional PKI-based solutions have drawbacks such as centralized entities being eliminated, increasing memory usage for certificates and Certificate Revocation Lists (CRLs), and reducing single points of failure. Trust management is a substantial obstacle in VANETs, wherein the process of authentication is employed to validate the legitimacy of vehicle-to-vehicle communication. However, it is unable to effectively mitigate the risk of permitted vehicles engaging in the deliberate transmission of fraudulent or modified communications. Many privacy-preserving authentication surveys for VANETs have been conducted in [10; 34; 35; 36; 37]. These studies cover VANET routing protocols, security, privacy, and hazards and threats. However, only a few of them provide detailed descriptions in algorithmic/protocol level and trust assumptions, privacy versus unlinkability, reliability of resources, and potential future challenges. Radio communication interfaces will enable VANETs as vehicles become more intelligent. Vehicles serve as mobile nodes in these specialized mobile ad hoc networks. VANETs have significant node mobility and short connection periods, making typical security methods ineffective. Vehicular communication has unique security and privacy challenges, prompting a surge in study. The survey in [38] covers VANET advances, their communication architecture, and the crucial privacy and security challenges that must be addressed for their safe and effective use. It categorizes VANET cryptographic security issues. It consolides, compares, and analyses VANET-specific cryptographic techniques. The study also evaluates these methods and discusses future cryptographic protocol research for intelligent transportation systems. However, [PERSON] et al. [39] examines the delicate balance between security and privacy in cooperative vehicular networks, especially for safety-critical applications. Node and message authentication, as well as vehicle and driver privacy, are stressed. The survey emphasizes the increased focus on vehicular network pseudonym solutions to fulfill these twin objectives. It describes the particular challenges and requirements of pseudonym systems and presents an abstract pseudonym lifecycle model. The study analyses and categorizes contemporary pseudonym systems based on public key and identity-based encryption, group signatures, and symmetric authentication. It compares various techniques, updates standardization initiatives, and identifies research needs and issues in this subject. The survey in [40] examines VANETs, which have great potential to improve academic and industrial driving. VANETs' open-access environment makes security and privacy difficult, which may limit their adoption. The study begins by explaining VANETs and categorizing their security concerns. It then lists the basic requirements for VANET security and privacy solutions. The study surveys and analyses authentication algorithms for secure processes. It also studies VANET privacy approaches, emphasizing the delicate balance between security and privacy. The conclusion discusses more effective methods for detecting and revoking malicious nodes and highlights the unresolved issues in this evolving field. [PERSON] et al. [34] discusses a crucial stage in VANET deployment and highlights current research problems, with a focus on location privacy. Recognizing academic and business consensus, the research examines the pseudonym-changing strategy, extensively used to protect VANET users' geographical privacy.