An Aspect-Oriented Approach for Software Security Hardening: from Design to Implementation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Security is a very challenging task in software engineering. Enforcing security policies should be taken care of during the early phases of the software development life cycle to prevent security breaches in the final product. Since security is a crosscutting concern that pervades the entire software, integrating security solutions at the software design level may result in scattering and tangling security features throughout the entire design. To address this issue, we propose in this paper an aspect-oriented approach for specifying and enforcing security hardening solutions. This approach provides software designers with UML-based capabilities to perform security hardening in a clear and organized way, at the UML design level, without the need to be security experts. We also present the SHP profile, a UML-based security hardening language to describe and specify security hardening solutions at the UML design level. Finally, we explore the efficiency and the relevance of our approach by applying it to a real world case study and present the experimental results.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it