pith. sign in

arxiv: 2607.01019 · v1 · pith:MQGNKICNnew · submitted 2026-07-01 · 💻 cs.CR

Toward a Unified Security and Privacy Framework for AI-Native 6G Networks

Bidushi Barua , Ahsan Khan , Kangfeng Ye , Panagiotis Papanastasiou , Yifan Liu , Mohit Bidikar , Anthony Moulds , Julie McCann
show 1 more author
Poonam Yadav
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-07-02 10:24 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.CR
keywords 6G networksAI-nativesecurity frameworkprivacythreat taxonomycross-layerstandardizationunified framework
0
0 comments X

The pith

Fragmented security and privacy approaches across technologies and architectures require a unified cross-layer framework for AI-native 6G networks.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper surveys security and privacy in AI-native 6G networks, which integrate communication, computing, sensing, and artificial intelligence into autonomous ecosystems. It shows that existing approaches remain fragmented across emerging technologies, network architectures, AI systems, and standardization efforts, creating a heterogeneous landscape that isolated solutions cannot cover. The authors develop a cross-layer threat taxonomy spanning infrastructure, network and architectural, AI, privacy, and security management domains, then map threats to countermeasures that include standards harmonization. This work supplies researchers and standardization communities with a holistic foundation for designing and deploying trustworthy systems. A reader would care because 6G's promised intelligent services depend on addressing these integrated risks from the start.

Core claim

The paper establishes that AI-native 6G networks generate a heterogeneous security and privacy landscape that cannot be addressed through isolated, technology-specific solutions, and therefore advances a unified cross-layer framework that includes a threat taxonomy across five domains and maps those threats to corresponding countermeasures, with standards harmonization treated as one security function, while also identifying research gaps for secure and interoperable ecosystems.

What carries the argument

The unified security and privacy framework, built from a cross-layer threat taxonomy that organizes threats in infrastructure, network, AI, privacy, and management domains and links them to countermeasures.

If this is right

  • The cross-layer threat taxonomy allows systematic analysis of threats across infrastructure, network and architectural, AI, privacy, and security management domains.
  • Mapping threats to countermeasures supports the inclusion of standards harmonization as an explicit security function.
  • Identification of critical research gaps directs future priorities toward secure, interoperable, and trustworthy AI-native 6G ecosystems.
  • The framework supplies a foundation for the design, evaluation, and deployment of privacy-preserving and resilient 6G networks.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The taxonomy could be applied to evaluate security in pre-6G or non-AI-native networks to test its generality.
  • Standards harmonization as a function might reduce overlap among separate standardization bodies working on 6G components.
  • Future work could validate the mapped countermeasures through simulation of integrated AI-native 6G scenarios.
  • The framework's emphasis on global interoperability points to potential alignment with regional privacy regulations.

Load-bearing premise

Isolated technology-specific solutions cannot adequately address the heterogeneous security and privacy landscape created by AI-native 6G integration.

What would settle it

An empirical testbed demonstration in which a collection of isolated, technology-specific solutions successfully mitigates the full range of representative threats identified in the taxonomy would falsify the premise that a unified framework is required.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.01019 by Ahsan Khan, Anthony Moulds, Bidushi Barua, Julie McCann, Kangfeng Ye, Mohit Bidikar, Panagiotis Papanastasiou, Poonam Yadav, Yifan Liu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Fragmentation in Security and Privacy of AI-native 6G Networks. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Proposed Unified Security and Privacy Framework for AI-Native 6G Networks. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Cross-Layer Taxonomy of Threats in AI-Native 6G. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Sixth Generation (6G) communication networks are expected to evolve into AI-native, highly autonomous ecosystems that integrate communication, computing, sensing, and artificial intelligence. While these capabilities enable unprecedented connectivity and intelligent services, they also create a highly heterogeneous security and privacy landscape that cannot be addressed through isolated, technology-specific solutions. This paper presents a comprehensive survey of security and privacy in AI-native 6G networks from a cross-layer perspective. We first examine the fragmentation of existing security and privacy approaches across emerging technologies, network architectures, AI systems, and standardization efforts, motivating the need for a unified security and privacy framework. Building upon this framework, we develop a cross-layer threat taxonomy encompassing infrastructure, network and architectural, AI, privacy, and security management domains, and analyze representative threats across key AI-native 6G technologies. Furthermore, we map these threats to corresponding cross-layer countermeasures, including standards harmonization as a security function, and identify critical research gaps and future priorities for secure, interoperable, and trustworthy AI-native 6G ecosystems. Finally, we discuss future research directions toward realizing secure, privacy-preserving, resilient, and globally interoperable 6G networks. This survey provides researchers, practitioners, and standardization communities with a holistic foundation for the design, evaluation, and deployment of trustworthy AI-native 6G systems.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper is a literature survey claiming that security and privacy approaches for AI-native 6G networks are fragmented across emerging technologies, network architectures, AI systems, and standardization efforts. This fragmentation motivates a unified cross-layer framework. The authors develop a threat taxonomy spanning infrastructure, network/architectural, AI, privacy, and security management domains; map threats to countermeasures (including standards harmonization as a security function); and identify research gaps and future priorities for trustworthy 6G ecosystems.

Significance. If the literature synthesis proves representative, the cross-layer taxonomy and mapping provide a useful organizing structure for researchers and standards bodies working on AI-native 6G security, highlighting interactions that technology-specific solutions may miss.

major comments (1)
  1. [section examining fragmentation of existing approaches] The section examining fragmentation of existing approaches: the central motivation—that isolated, technology-specific solutions cannot adequately address the heterogeneous landscape—is load-bearing for the call to unification, yet the paper provides no explicit inclusion criteria, search methodology, or scope statement for the surveyed literature, preventing assessment of selection bias or completeness.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states that standards harmonization is treated 'as a security function' but does not preview how this function is operationalized in the taxonomy or mapping; a brief clarifying sentence would improve readability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comment on the survey methodology. We address this point directly below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [section examining fragmentation of existing approaches] The section examining fragmentation of existing approaches: the central motivation—that isolated, technology-specific solutions cannot adequately address the heterogeneous landscape—is load-bearing for the call to unification, yet the paper provides no explicit inclusion criteria, search methodology, or scope statement for the surveyed literature, preventing assessment of selection bias or completeness.

    Authors: We agree that the absence of an explicit methodology section limits the ability to assess the survey's scope and potential biases, and that this is important given the central role of the fragmentation analysis. In the revised manuscript we will insert a dedicated subsection (placed immediately after the introduction) that specifies: (1) the databases and repositories searched (IEEE Xplore, ACM DL, arXiv, 3GPP/ETSI/ITU documents), (2) the keyword combinations and Boolean strings employed, (3) the time window (primarily 2020–2024 with selected foundational works), (4) inclusion criteria (peer-reviewed journal/conference papers and official standards documents that explicitly address security or privacy in AI-integrated or AI-native 6G contexts), and (5) exclusion criteria (purely theoretical works without 6G relevance, non-English sources, and duplicate entries). The subsection will also describe how the collected corpus was thematically coded to identify fragmentation patterns. This addition will make the selection process transparent without altering the existing analysis or conclusions. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity

full rationale

The paper is a literature survey whose central claim is the existence of fragmentation across technologies, architectures, AI systems, and standards, which motivates (rather than derives) a cross-layer taxonomy. No equations, derivations, fitted parameters, or self-referential constructions appear anywhere in the manuscript. All load-bearing statements rest on external citations rather than reducing to the paper's own inputs by definition or construction. This is the standard structure for a survey paper and meets the criteria for a self-contained analysis against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the domain assumption that current approaches are fragmented and insufficient for the integrated AI-native setting. No free parameters or invented entities are introduced.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Existing security and privacy approaches across technologies, architectures, AI systems, and standardization are fragmented and cannot be addressed through isolated solutions.
    Invoked in the abstract as the motivation for developing a unified framework.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5802 in / 1170 out tokens · 34273 ms · 2026-07-02T10:24:31.007472+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

135 extracted references · 28 canonical work pages · 4 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Shimaa A Abdel Hakeem, Hanan H Hussein, and HyungWon Kim. 2022. Security requirements and challenges of 6g technologies and applications. Sensors, 22, 5, 1969

    2022

  2. [2]

    EU Artificial Intelligence Act. 2024. The eu artificial intelligence act.European Union

    2024

  3. [3]

    Ijaz Ahmad, Shahriar Shahabuddin, Tanesh Kumar, Jude Okwuibe, Andrei Gurtov, and Mika Ylianttila. 2019. Security for 5g and beyond.IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, 21, 4, 3682–3722

    2019

  4. [4]

    NIST AI. 2023. Artificial intelligence risk management framework (ai rmf 1.0).URL: https://nvlpubs. nist. gov/nistpubs/ai/nist. ai, 100–1

    2023

  5. [5]

    Henrik Åkesson and Diana Pamela Moya Osorio. 2024. Privacy-preserving framework for cell-free mimo isac systems.arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.12874

    work page arXiv 2024

  6. [6]

    Gorjan Alagic et al. 2020. Status Report on the Second Round of the NIST Post-Quantum Cryptography Standardization Process. NIST Intera- gency/Internal Report (NISTIR) 8309. National Institute of Standards and Technology. doi:10.6028/NIST.IR.8309

    work page doi:10.6028/nist.ir.8309 2020

  7. [7]

    Gorjan Alagic et al. 2022. Status Report on the Third Round of the NIST Post-Quantum Cryptography Standardization Process. NIST Intera- gency/Internal Report (NISTIR) 8413. National Institute of Standards and Technology. doi:10.6028/NIST.IR.8413. Manuscript submitted to ACM 28 Barua, et al

    work page doi:10.6028/nist.ir.8413 2022

  8. [8]

    Sebastien Andreina, Giorgia Azzurra Marson, Helen Möllering, and Ghassan Karame. 2021. Baffle: backdoor detection via feedback-based federated learning. In2021 IEEE 41st International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS), 852–863. doi:10.1109/ICDCS51616.2021.00086

    work page doi:10.1109/icdcs51616.2021.00086 2021

  9. [9]

    Chafika Benzaid and Tarik Taleb. 2020. Zsm security: threat surface and best practices.IEEE Network, 34, 3, 124–133

    2020

  10. [10]

    Ferhat Ozgur Catak, Murat Kuzlu, Evren Catak, Umit Cali, and Devrim Unal. 2022. Security concerns on machine learning solutions for 6g networks in mmwave beam prediction.Physical Communication, 52, 101626

    2022

  11. [11]

    Xu Chen, Wei Feng, Ning Ge, and Yan Zhang. 2023. Zero trust architecture for 6g security.IEEE Network, 38, 4, 224–232

    2023

  12. [12]

    Guanjie Cheng, Yan Chen, Shuiguang Deng, Honghao Gao, and Jianwei Yin. 2021. A blockchain-based mutual authentication scheme for collaborative edge computing.IEEE Transactions on Computational Social Systems, 9, 1, 146–158

    2021

  13. [13]

    Kanza Cherkaoui Dekkaki, Igor Tasic, and Maria-Dolores Cano. 2024. Exploring post-quantum cryptography: review and directions for the transition process.Technologies, 12, 12, 241. doi:10.3390/technologies12120241

    work page doi:10.3390/technologies12120241 2024

  14. [14]

    Arsenia Chorti, André Noll Barreto, Stefan Köpsell, Marco Zoli, Marwa Chafii, Philippe Sehier, Gerhard Fettweis, and H Vincent Poor. 2022. Context-aware security for 6g wireless: the role of physical layer security.IEEE Communications Standards Magazine, 6, 1, 102–108

    2022

  15. [15]

    Alexander Clemm, Mohamed Faten Zhani, and Raouf Boutaba. 2020. Network management 2030: operations and control of network 2030 services. Journal of Network and Systems Management, 28, 4, 721–750

    2020

  16. [16]

    Mingyao Cui, Linglong Dai, Zhaocheng Wang, Shidong Zhou, and Ning Ge. 2022. Near-field rainbow: wideband beam training for xl-mimo.IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, 22, 6, 3899–3912

    2022

  17. [17]

    2019.EU personal data protection in policy and practice

    Bart Custers, Alan M Sears, Francien Dechesne, Ilina Georgieva, Tommaso Tani, and Simone Van der Hof. 2019.EU personal data protection in policy and practice. Vol. 29. Springer

    2019

  18. [18]

    Badhan Chandra Das, M Hadi Amini, and Yanzhao Wu. 2025. Security and privacy challenges of large language models: a survey.ACM Computing Surveys, 57, 6, 1–39

    2025

  19. [19]

    Prajnamaya Dass, Sonika Ujjwal, Jiri Novotny, Yevhen Zolotavkin, Zakaria Laaroussi, and Stefan Köpsell. 2024. Addressing privacy concerns in joint communication and sensing for 6g networks: challenges and prospects. InAnnual Privacy Forum. Springer, 87–111

    2024

  20. [20]

    Avani Dave, Nilanjan Banerjee, and Chintan Patel. 2020. Sracare: secure remote attestation with code authentication and resilience engine. In 2020 IEEE international conference on embedded software and systems (ICESS). IEEE, 1–8

    2020

  21. [21]

    Chamitha De Alwis, Pawani Porambage, Kapal Dev, Thippa Reddy Gadekallu, and Madhusanka Liyanage. 2023. A survey on network slicing security: attacks, challenges, solutions and research directions.IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials

    2023

  22. [22]

    Cynthia Dwork, Aaron Roth, et al. 2014. The algorithmic foundations of differential privacy.Foundations and Trends®in Theoretical Computer Science, 9, 3–4, 211–407

    2014

  23. [23]

    Antonio Matencio Escolar, Jorge Bernal Bernabe, Jose Maria Alcaraz Calero, Qi Wang, and Antonio Skarmeta. 2024. Network slicing as 6g security mechanism to mitigate cyber-attacks: the rigourous approach. In2024 IEEE 10th International Conference on Network Softwarization (NetSoft). IEEE, 387–392

    2024

  24. [24]

    Eslam Farsimadan, Leila Moradi, and Francesco Palmieri. 2025. A review on security challenges in v2x communications technology for vanets. IEEE Access

    2025

  25. [25]

    Alexey K. Fedorov. 2023. Deploying hybrid quantum-secured infrastructure for applications: when quantum and post-quantum can work together. Frontiers in Quantum Science and Technology, 2, 1164428. doi:10.3389/frqst.2023.1164428

    work page doi:10.3389/frqst.2023.1164428 2023

  26. [26]

    Hailin Feng, Thippa Reddy Gadekallu, Yuchao Xia, Yongkang Zhao, Zhihao Wen, Jijing Cai, Pronaya Bhattacharya, Kai Fang, and Madhusanka Liyanage. 2026. Agentic ai security in 6g networks: a survey of emerging attack vectors, vulnerabilities, and defenses.IEEE Open Journal of the Communications Society

    2026

  27. [27]

    Mohamed Amine Ferrag, Othmane Friha, Burak Kantarci, Norbert Tihanyi, Lucas Cordeiro, Merouane Debbah, Djallel Hamouda, Muna Al- Hawawreh, and Kim-Kwang Raymond Choo. 2023. Edge learning for 6g-enabled internet of things: a comprehensive survey of vulnerabilities, datasets, and defenses.IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, 25, 4, 2654–2713

    2023

  28. [28]

    European Union Agency for Cybersecurity (ENISA). 2021. Post-Quantum Cryptography: Current State and Quantum Mitigation. Tech. rep. ENISA. https://www.enisa.europa.eu/publications/post-quantum-cryptography-current-state-and-quantum-mitigation

    2021

  29. [29]

    Xenofon Foukas, Georgios Patounas, Ahmed Elmokashfi, and Mahesh K Marina. 2017. Network slicing in 5g: survey and challenges.IEEE communications magazine, 55, 5, 94–100

    2017

  30. [30]

    Framework and overall objectives of the future development of IMT for 2030 and beyond

    2023. Framework and overall objectives of the future development of IMT for 2030 and beyond. Tech. rep. Recommendation ITU-R M.2160. International Telecommunication Union, Radiocommunication Sector (ITU-R). https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-R/Pages/default.aspx

    2023

  31. [31]

    Wenjie Fu, Huandong Wang, Chen Gao, Guanghua Liu, Yong Li, and Tao Jiang. 2024. Membership inference attacks against fine-tuned large language models via self-prompt calibration.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 37, 134981–135010

    2024

  32. [32]

    Sandro Rodriguez Garzon, Hakan Yildiz, and Axel Küpper. 2022. Decentralized identifiers and self-sovereign identity in 6g.IEEE Network, 36, 4, 142–148

    2022

  33. [33]

    Jiahui Geng, Yongli Mou, Qing Li, Feifei Li, Oya Beyan, Stefan Decker, and Chunming Rong. 2023. Improved gradient inversion attacks and defenses in federated learning.IEEE Transactions on Big Data, 1–13. doi:10.1109/TBDATA.2023.3239116

    work page doi:10.1109/tbdata.2023.3239116 2023

  34. [34]

    Mir Ghoraishi et al. [n. d.] Itrust6g: zero-trust security for 6g networks.methods, 5, 6. Manuscript submitted to ACM Toward a Unified Security and Privacy Framework for AI-Native 6G Networks 29

  35. [35]

    Harald Gjermundrød, Ioanna Dionysiou, and Kyriakos Costa. 2016. Privacytracker: a privacy-by-design gdpr-compliant framework with verifiable data traceability controls. InCurrent Trends in Web Engineering: ICWE 2016 International Workshops, DUI, TELERISE, SoWeMine, and Liquid Web, Lugano, Switzerland, June 6-9, 2016. Revised Selected Papers 16. Springer, 3–15

    2016

  36. [36]

    Explaining and Harnessing Adversarial Examples

    Ian J. Goodfellow, Jonathon Shlens, and Christian Szegedy. 2015. Explaining and harnessing adversarial examples. (2015). https://arxiv.org/abs/14 12.6572 arXiv: 1412.6572[stat.ML]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  37. [37]

    Joshua Groen, Salvatore D’Oro, Utku Demir, Leonardo Bonati, Michele Polese, Tommaso Melodia, and Kaushik Chowdhury. 2024. Implementing and evaluating security in o-ran: interfaces, intelligence, and platforms.IEEE Network, 39, 1, 227–234

    2024

  38. [38]

    Onur Günlü, Matthieu Bloch, Rafael F Schaefer, and Aylin Yener. 2022. Secure joint communication and sensing. In2022 IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory (ISIT). IEEE, 844–849

    2022

  39. [39]

    Shaolong Guo, Yuntao Wang, Ning Zhang, Zhou Su, Tom H Luan, Zhiyi Tian, and Xuemin Shen. 2024. A survey on semantic communication networks: architecture, security, and privacy.IEEE communications surveys & tutorials, 27, 5, 2860–2894

    2024

  40. [40]

    Ehsan Hallaji, Roozbeh Razavi-Far, and Mehrdad Saif. 2022. Federated and transfer learning: a survey on adversaries and defense mechanisms. In Federated and Transfer Learning. Springer, 29–55

    2022

  41. [41]

    Ehsan Hallaji, Roozbeh Razavi-Far, Mehrdad Saif, and Enrique Herrera-Viedma. 2023. Label noise analysis meets adversarial training: a defense against label poisoning in federated learning.Knowledge-Based Systems, 266, 110384. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2023.110384

    work page doi:10.1016/j.knosys.2023.110384 2023

  42. [42]

    Eric Hanselman. 2020. Security Benefits of Open Virtualized RAN. Tech. rep. 451 Research, (May 2020). https://www.cisco.com/c/dam/en/us/solu tions/service-provider/pdfs/5g-network-architecture/white-paper-sp-open-vran-security-benefits.pdf

    2020

  43. [43]

    Beliatis

    Asim Ul Haq, Seyed Salar Sefati, Syed Junaid Nawaz, Albena Mihovska, and Michail J. Beliatis. 2025. Need of uavs and physical layer security in next-generation non-terrestrial wireless networks: potential challenges and open issues.IEEE Open Journal of Vehicular Technology, 6, 554–595. doi:10.1109/OJVT.2025.3525781

    work page doi:10.1109/ojvt.2025.3525781 2025

  44. [44]

    Hexa-X-II Consortium. 2023. Deliverable D1.2 – 6G Use Cases and Requirements. Technical Report D1.2. Hexa-X-II Project, (Dec. 2023). https://hexa-x-ii.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Hexa-X-II_D1.2.pdf

    2023

  45. [45]

    Iqbal, M

    A. Iqbal, M. L. Tham, Y. J. Wong, A. A. Al-Habashna, G. Wainer, Y. X. Zhu, and T. Dagiuklas. 2023. Empowering non-terrestrial networks with artificial intelligence: a survey.IEEE Access, 11, 100986–101006

    2023

  46. [46]

    Fauzia Irram, Mudassar Ali, Muhammad Naeem, and Shahid Mumtaz. 2022. Physical layer security for beyond 5g/6g networks: emerging technologies and future directions.Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 206, 103431

    2022

  47. [47]

    ISG ZSM Activity Report 2023

    2023. ISG ZSM Activity Report 2023. Tech. rep. ETSI ISG ZSM. https://www.etsi.org/committee-activity/activity-report-zsm

    2023

  48. [48]

    Weiqiang Jin, Hongyang Du, Biao Zhao, Xingwu Tian, Bohang Shi, and Guang Yang. 2025. A comprehensive survey on multi-agent cooperative decision-making: scenarios, approaches, challenges and perspectives.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.13415

    work page arXiv 2025

  49. [49]

    Waqas Khalid, Muhammad Atif Ur Rehman, Trinh Van Chien, Zeeshan Kaleem, Howon Lee, and Heejung Yu. 2023. Reconfigurable intelligent surface for physical layer security in 6g-iot: designs, issues, and advances.IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 11, 2, 3599–3613

    2023

  50. [50]

    Akmal Khan, Amini Hikmatullah, and Masud Jabir. 2026. Hybrid 5g 6g atomic laser networks for quantum resilient non terrestrial connectivity. Discover Quantum Science, 2, 1, 9

    2026

  51. [51]

    Latif U Khan, Zhu Han, Walid Saad, Ekram Hossain, Mohsen Guizani, and Choong Seon Hong. 2022. Digital twin of wireless systems: overview, taxonomy, challenges, and opportunities.IEEE Communications Surveys and Tutorials, 24, 4, 2230–2254

    2022

  52. [52]

    Siyavushkhon Kholmatov, Seongsik Cho, Song Chong, and Kyunghan Lee. 2026. Toward ai-on-ran: enabling on-ran edge intelligence for ai-native 6g networks.IEEE Network

    2026

  53. [53]

    Myoungsu Kim, Insu Oh, Kangbin Yim, Mahdi Sahlabadi, and Zarina Shukur. 2023. Security of 6g-enabled vehicle-to-everything communication in emerging federated learning and blockchain technologies.IEEE Access, 12, 33972–34001

    2023

  54. [54]

    Joonas Kokkoniemi, Alexandros-Apostolos A Boulogeorgos, Mubarak Aminu, Janne Lehtomäki, Angeliki Alexiou, and Markku Juntti. 2020. Impact of beam misalignment on thz wireless systems.Nano Communication Networks, 24, 100302

    2020

  55. [55]

    Ilia Lebedev, Kyle Hogan, and Srinivas Devadas. 2018. Secure boot and remote attestation in the sanctum processor. In2018 IEEE 31st Computer Security Foundations Symposium (CSF). IEEE, 46–60

    2018

  56. [56]

    Aris Leivadeas and Matthias Falkner. 2022. A survey on intent-based networking.IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, 25, 1, 625–655

    2022

  57. [57]

    Peng Li and Jianing Du. 2025. Brand design data security and privacy protection under 6g network slicing architecture.International Journal of Network Management, 35, 2, e70009

    2025

  58. [58]

    Qinbin Li et al. 2024. Llm-pbe: assessing data privacy in large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.12787

    work page arXiv 2024

  59. [59]

    Yang Liu, Yan Kang, Tianyuan Zou, Yanhong Pu, Yuanqin He, Xiaozhou Ye, Ye Ouyang, Ya-Qin Zhang, and Qiang Yang. 2024. Vertical federated learning: concepts, advances, and challenges.IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering

    2024

  60. [60]

    Madhusanka Liyanage, An Braeken, Shahriar Shahabuddin, and Pasika Ranaweera. 2023. Open ran security: challenges and opportunities. Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 214, 103621

    2023

  61. [61]

    Shihang Lu et al. 2024. Integrated sensing and communications: recent advances and ten open challenges.IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 11, 11, 19094–19120

    2024

  62. [62]

    Xiaozhen Lu, Liang Xiao, Pengmin Li, Xiangyang Ji, Chenren Xu, Shui Yu, and Weihua Zhuang. 2023. Reinforcement learning-based physical cross-layer security and privacy in 6g.IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, 25, 1, 425–466. doi:10.1109/COMST.2022.3224279. Manuscript submitted to ACM 30 Barua, et al

    work page doi:10.1109/comst.2022.3224279 2023

  63. [63]

    Bomin Mao, Jiajia Liu, Yingying Wu, and Nei Kato. 2023. Security and privacy on 6g network edge: a survey.IEEE communications surveys & tutorials, 25, 2, 1095–1127

    2023

  64. [64]

    Sasa Maric, Rasil Baidar, Robert Abbas, and Sam Reisenfeld. 2025. System security framework for 5g advanced/6g iot integrated terrestrial network-non-terrestrial network (tn-ntn) with ai-enabled cloud security.arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.05707

    work page arXiv 2025

  65. [65]

    Jämes Ménétrey, Christian Göttel, Anum Khurshid, Marcelo Pasin, Pascal Felber, Valerio Schiavoni, and Shahid Raza. 2022. Attestation mechanisms for trusted execution environments demystified. InIFIP International Conference on Distributed Applications and Interoperable Systems. Springer, 95–113

    2022

  66. [66]

    Miroslav Mitev, Arsenia Chorti, H Vincent Poor, and Gerhard P Fettweis. 2023. What physical layer security can do for 6g security.IEEE Open Journal of Vehicular Technology, 4, 375–388

    2023

  67. [67]

    Michele Mosca. 2018. Cybersecurity in an era with quantum computers: will we be ready?IEEE Security & Privacy, 16, 5, 38–41

    2018

  68. [68]

    Lorenzo Mucchi et al. 2021. Physical-layer security in 6g networks.IEEE Open Journal of the Communications Society, 2, 1901–1914

    2021

  69. [69]

    Hyeran Mun, Kyusuk Han, Ernesto Damiani, Hyun Ku Yeun, Tae-Yeon Kim, Luigi Martino, and Chan Yeob Yeun. 2025. A comprehensive survey on digital twin: focusing on security threats and requirements.IEEE Access, 13, 73362–73390. doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2025.3563621

    work page doi:10.1109/access.2025.3563621 2025

  70. [70]

    Faisal Naeem, Mansoor Ali, Georges Kaddoum, Chongwen Huang, and Chau Yuen. 2023. Security and privacy for reconfigurable intelligent surface in 6g: a review of prospective applications and challenges.IEEE Open Journal of the Communications Society, 4, 1196–1217

    2023

  71. [71]

    Nurun Nahar, Karl Andersson, Olov Schelén, and Saguna Saguna. 2024. A survey on zero trust architecture: applications and challenges of 6g networks.IEEE Access

    2024

  72. [72]

    William Newhouse et al. 2023. Migration to Post-Quantum Cryptography: Preparation and Strategy. NIST Special Publication 1800-38B. Preliminary Draft. National Institute of Standards and Technology, (Dec. 2023). https://www.nccoe.nist.gov/sites/default/files/2023-12/pqc-migr ation-nist-sp-1800-38b-preliminary-draft.pdf

    2023

  73. [73]

    Cong T Nguyen et al. 2024. Emerging technologies for 6g non-terrestrial-networks: from academia to industrial applications.IEEE Open Journal of the Communications Society

    2024

  74. [74]

    Dinh C Nguyen, Ming Ding, Pubudu N Pathirana, Aruna Seneviratne, Jun Li, and H Vincent Poor. 2021. Federated learning for internet of things: a comprehensive survey.IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, 23, 3, 1622–1658

    2021

  75. [75]

    Huan X Nguyen, Ramona Trestian, Duc To, and Mallik Tatipamula. 2021. Digital twin for 5g and beyond.IEEE Communications Magazine, 59, 2, 10–15

    2021

  76. [76]

    Tam Nguyen, Moses Ndebugre, and Dheeraj Arremsetty. 2026. Security considerations for multi-agent systems.arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.09002

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  77. [77]

    Van-Linh Nguyen, Po-Ching Lin, Bo-Chao Cheng, Ren-Hung Hwang, and Ying-Dar Lin. 2021. Security and privacy for 6g: a survey on prospective technologies and challenges.IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, 23, 4, 2384–2428

    2021

  78. [78]

    Nonso Okika, Gift Aruchi Nwatuzie, Hamed Salam Olarinoye, Augustine A Nwaka, Emmanuel Igba, and Roland Dunee. 2025. Assessing the vulnerability of traditional and post-quantum cryptographic systems through penetration testing and strengthening cyber defenses with zero trust security in the era of quantum computing.International Journal of Innovative Scien...

    2025

  79. [79]

    OPPO. 2025. 6g security architecture: intelligent security built on zero trust. https://www.oppo.com/content/dam/oppo/common/mkt/footer /OPPO-6G-Security-WhitePaper-EN.pdf

    2025

  80. [80]

    Diana Pamela Moya Osorio, Ijaz Ahmad, José David Vega Sánchez, Andrei Gurtov, Johan Scholliers, Matti Kutila, and Pawani Porambage. 2022. Towards 6g-enabled internet of vehicles: security and privacy.IEEE Open Journal of the Communications Society, 3, 82–105

    2022

Showing first 80 references.