MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075530749 · doi:10.1109/mobserv.2014.25

Intrusion Prevention in Asterisk-Based Telephony System

2014· article· en· W2075530749 on OpenAlexaff
Richard K. Lomotey, Ralph Deters

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCaching and Content Delivery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsteriskComputer scienceComputer securityComputer networkTelephonyDenial-of-service attackMiddleware (distributed applications)Intrusion detection systemCall controlVoice over IPOperating systemThe Internet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most enterprises today have their own Private Branch Exchange (PBX) systems that enable them to communicate on-premise and with the external or public switch telephone network. Companies that rely on heavy phone calls (especially, debt collectors) find the approach cost effective especially when automation techniques are introduced for auto dialing as a measure to reduce the number of employees who have to do the manual calls. The challenge however is that, PBX telephone systems have long been the target of attacks such as call stealing, server attacks, and sometimes user private data stealing. In this work, we investigate the best ways to prevent intrusion of attackers in a proposed PBX telephone system that is built in Asterisk environment. Instead of using the Asterisk platform as a complete solution, we proposed a cloud-based middleware layer that keeps the most sensitive part of the caller information, and rely on Asterisk only for call dialing, routing, and receiving. The middleware uses the REST standard to interact with the Asterisk platform and other proposed techniques such as message marshaling and demarshaling to enhance privacy. The pilot testing of the proposed approach shows high threshold for security enforcement and intrusion denial.

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)0.000
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 score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score0.210

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.199 · 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.

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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCaching and Content DeliveryFrench-language works237,207