MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1899838367 · doi:10.1002/sec.413

A secure, efficient, and cost‐effective distributed architecture for spam mitigation on LTE 4G mobile networks

2012· article· en· W1899838367 on OpenAlexaff
Elias Bou‐Harb, Makan Pourzandi, Mourad Debbabi, Chadi Assi

Bibliographic record

VenueSecurity and Communication Networks · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInternet Traffic Analysis and Secure E-voting
Canadian institutionsEricsson (Canada)Concordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer networkDimensioningFlooding (psychology)ArchitectureDistributed computingNetwork packetNetwork architectureCellular networkComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The 4G of mobile networks will be a technology‐opportunistic and user‐centric system, combining the economical and technological advantages of various transmission technologies. As a part of its new architecture, LTE networks will implement an evolved packet core. Although this will provide various critical advantages, it will, on the other hand, expose telecom networks to serious IP‐based attacks. One often adopted solution to mitigate such attacks is based on a centralized security architecture. However, this approach requires large processing and memory resources to handle huge amounts of traffic, which, in turn, causes a significant over dimensioning problem in the centralized nodes. Hence, it may cause this approach to fail from achieving its security task. In this paper, we focus on a SPAM flooding attack, namely SMTP SPAM, and demonstrate, through simulations and discussion, its DoS impact on the Long Term Evolution (LTE) network and subsequent effects on the mobile network operator. Our main contribution involves proposing a distributed architecture on the LTE network that is secure and that mitigates attacks efficiently by solving the over dimensioning problem. It is also cost‐effective by utilizing ‘off‐the‐shelf’ low‐cost hardware in the distributed nodes. Through additional simulation and analysis, we demonstrate the feasibility and effectiveness of our approach. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.234 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSecurity and Communication NetworksSame topicInternet Traffic Analysis and Secure E-votingFrench-language works237,207