MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1985019380 · doi:10.1108/17440080911006216

Schema‐level access control policies for XML documents

2009· article· en· W1985019380 on OpenAlexaff
Tomasz Müldner, Gregory Leighton, Jan Krzysztof Miziołek

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Web Information Systems · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCryptography and Data Security
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaAcadia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceEncryptionCorrectnessDocument Structure DescriptionAccess controlScalabilityXMLSchema (genetic algorithms)DatabaseTheoretical computer scienceInformation retrievalComputer securityProgramming languageWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to consider the secure publishing of XML documents, where a single copy of an XML document is disseminated and a stated role‐based access control policy (RBACP) is enforced via selective encryption. It describes a more efficient solution over previously proposed approaches, in which both policy specification and key generation are performed once, at the schema‐level. In lieu of the commonly used super‐encryption technique, in which nodes residing in the intersection of multiple roles are encrypted with multiple keys, it describes a new approach called multi‐encryption that guarantees each node is encrypted at most once. Design/methodology/approach This paper describes two alternative algorithms for key generation and single‐pass algorithms for multi‐encrypting and decrypting a document. The solution typically results in a smaller number of keys being distributed to each user. Findings The paper proves the correctness of the presented algorithms, and provides experimental results indicating the superiority of multi‐encryption over super‐encryption, in terms of encryption and decryption time requirements. It also demonstrates the scalability of the approach as the size of the input document and complexity of the schema‐level RBACP are increased. Research limitations/implications An extension of this work involves designing and implementing re‐usability of keyrings when a schema or ACP is modified. In addition, more flexible solutions for handling cycles in schema graphs are possible. The current solution encounters difficulty when schema graphs are particularly deep and broad. Practical implications The experimental results indicate that the proposed approach is scalable, and is applicable to scenarios in which XML documents conforming to a common schema are to be securely published. Originality/value This paper contributes to the efficient implementation of secure XML publication systems.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.009
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Web Information SystemsSame topicCryptography and Data SecurityFrench-language works237,207