MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063939659 · doi:10.1109/comst.2015.2392629

A Survey of Security Attacks in Information-Centric Networking

2015· article· en· W2063939659 on OpenAlexafffund
Eslam G. AbdAllah, Hossam S. Hassanein, Mohammad Zulkernine

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCaching and Content Delivery
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaBell Canada Enterprises
KeywordsComputer scienceConfidentialityComputer securityInformation-centric networkingInternet privacyRelation (database)Computer networkWorld Wide WebThe InternetDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Information-centric networking (ICN) is a new communication paradigm that focuses on content retrieval from a network regardless of the storage location or physical representation of this content. In ICN, securing the content itself is much more important than securing the infrastructure or the endpoints. To achieve the security goals in this new paradigm, it is crucial to have a comprehensive understanding of ICN attacks, their classification, and proposed solutions. In this paper, we provide a survey of attacks unique to ICN architectures and other generic attacks that have an impact on ICN. It also provides a taxonomy of these attacks in ICN, which are classified into four main categories, i.e., naming, routing, caching, and other miscellaneous related attacks. Furthermore, this paper shows the relation between ICN attacks and unique ICN attributes, and that between ICN attacks and security requirements, i.e., confidentiality, integrity, availability, and privacy. Finally, this paper presents the severity levels of ICN attacks and discusses the existing ICN security solutions.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.008
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.116
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations200
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Communications Surveys & TutorialsSame topicCaching and Content DeliveryFrench-language works237,207