MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075371926 · doi:10.1002/sec.164

Enhancing identity trust in cryptographic key management systems for dynamic environments

2010· article· en· W2075371926 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

VenueSecurity and Communication Networks · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCryptography and Data Security
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCollusionComputer scienceKey managementKey (lock)Computer securityHeuristicCryptographyKey distributionThe InternetAccess controlEncryptionComputer networkPublic-key cryptographyWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Cryptographic key management (CKM) schemes can be used to support identity management (IM) systems where linking users securely to data objects is important. CKM schemes enforce data security by encrypting data granting access only to authorized users and security compromises are prevented by updating any keys that are held by users from whom access rights have been revoked. Handling key updates efficiently and providing security against collusion attacks is challenging in dynamic environments like the Internet where manual Security management increases the likelihood of delayed responses. Delay increases the system's vulnerability to security attacks and the potential of the system's violating its service level agreements. Adaptive CKM has emerged as a possibility of addressing this problem but needs to be designed in a way that justifies the cost/benefit tradeoff. In this paper, we show that the key update and collusion avoidance problems are NP‐complete and need heuristic algorithms to prevent performance degradations in comparison to standard CKM schemes. As an example of the benefits of a good heuristic, we present a collusion detection and resolution algorithm whose running time is polynomial in the number of keys. The algorithm operates by mapping the generated key set onto a key graph whose independent set is computed. In the key graph, the vertices represent the keys and the edges the probability that their endpoints can be combined to provoke a collusion attack. Collusion possibilities are resolved by applying a heuristic that resets the probability to zero. The performance of our algorithm is analyzed in comparison to the Akl and Taylor scheme that is secure against collusion attack, and the experimental results indicate that collusion prevention can be done dynamically without affecting performance. Copyright © 2010 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.

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 categoriesnone
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 score0.846
Threshold uncertainty score0.675

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.226 · 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