MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029540594 · doi:10.1016/j.procs.2012.06.059

On the Necessary Conditions for Covert Channel Existence: A State-of-the-Art Survey

2012· article· en· W2029540594 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProcedia Computer Science · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInternet Traffic Analysis and Secure E-voting
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCovert channelCovertComputer scienceChannel (broadcasting)Set (abstract data type)State (computer science)Computer securityComputer networkAlgorithmProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the ability to leak confidential information in a secret manner, covert channels pose a significant threat to the confidentiality of a system. Due to this threat, the identification of covert channel existence has become an important part of the evaluation of secure systems. In this paper, we present a state-of-the-art survey discussing the conditions for covert channel existence found in the literature and we point to their inadequacy. We also examine how conditions for covert channel existence are handled by information theory. We propose a set of necessary and verifiable conditions for covert channel existence in systems of communicating agents. We aim to provide an improved understanding of covert channel communication and to build a foundation for developing effective and efficient mechanisms for mitigating covert channels in systems of communicating agents at the early stages of software development

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.976
Threshold uncertainty score0.517

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0030.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.236 · 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