# Hyperledger Fabric Access Control for Industrial Internet of Things
## 4 Results
### Hyperledger-IIoT Implementation Process
#### 4.2.1 Hyperledger-ItoT Management Rank Implement  
The biggest difference between Hyperledger Fabric and other blockchain systems is being private. Hyperledger Fabric registers all members through the Membership Service Provider (MSP). Credentials need to be created for members before establishing a Hyperledger Fabric network. Hyperledger Fabric provides the ability to create channels, allowing participants to create a separate ledger for transactions as shown in Figure 12. This feature becomes extremely important when some of the participants in the network are competitors because these participants do not want all the information to be open to all participants in the network. Only participants in the same channel will have the ledger in the channel, and other participants who are not in the channel will not see the ledger. After the Peer Node and the Orderer Node are successfully established, the channel is established, and the channel is added to the ledger, and create a genesis block, as shown in Figure 13.  
Chaincode is a program written in Go language that can implement predefined interfaces. Chaincode runs in a protected Docker container and can be initialized and managed by the state of the transaction reconciliation submitted by the application. After the establishment of Hyperledger Fabric network, the smart contract is then written. The administrator can use the Fabric SDK to deploy the smart contract to peer nodes, install the chaincode, and initialize it as shown in Figure 14.  
Figure 14: Deploy smart contracts.  
Figure 12: Member certificate.  
Figure 13: Channel establishment.  
By comparing the time cost of Hyperledger-IIoT and PoW consensus algorithms under different node trees from 10 to 100, as shown in Figure 25 and Table 2, the time required for Hyperledger-IIoT to reach consensus is less than PoW. Because Hyperledger's consensus is different from PoW, the consensus is driven by individual nodes who are responsible for authorizing a transaction and push into blockchain those nodes known as endorsers node, and the distribution of blocks is given to special nodes called Orderers. Hyperledger-IIoT can have higher throughput in an environment with a large number of requests sent and can reach consensus more efficiently in a distributed system.  
We also compare our work with other studies for access control, blockchain, access log, access timeliness, and usage of one-time URL, as shown in Table 3. [PERSON] et al. [5] proposed a framework based on smart contracts, it consists of multiple access control contracts (ACCs), a judgment contract (JC), and a registration contract (RC), to achieve distributed and trusted access control to IoT systems. [PERSON] et al. [15] proposed an IoT access control system named fabric-iot, the system is based on the Hyperledger Fabric blockchain framework and attribute-based access control (ABAC). [PERSON] et al., [23] integrate a  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Hyprledger-IIoT**} \\ \hline
**Node** & **Consensus Speed (Second)** & **PoW** \\ \hline
10 & 0.6 & 0.6 \\ \hline
50 & 0.8 & 2.4 \\ \hline
80 & 0.8 & 3.6 \\ \hline
100 & 0.8 & 5.5 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 2: Consensus Speed.  
Figure 24: Time cost of Access Contract (AC).  
Figure 25: Consensus speed comparison between Hyperledger-IIoT and PoW(Proof of Work).  
permissioned blockchain (HLF), an attribute-based access control (ABAC), and an identity-based signature (IBS) to build a secure, lightweight, and cross-domain based Blockchain-based IoT access control system.  
This research combines Hyperledger technology with the ABAC model. It adapts the blockchain to execute smart contracts, implement ABAC policies, and upload records of legal access to the blockchain. In addition, using a one-time URL ensures the security of the shared data sharing once.