MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088025244 · doi:10.1145/1878537.1878780

Enhancing broadcast authentication in sensor networks

2010· article· en· W2088025244 on OpenAlexaff
Arayeh Norouzi, Abdolreza Abhari, Truman Yang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSecurity in Wireless Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceAuthentication (law)Computer securityComputer networkEncryptionReliability (semiconductor)Wireless sensor networkDenial-of-service attackAuthentication protocolMessage authentication codeAdversaryCryptographyThe Internet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to the nature of wireless sensor networks, security is a critical problem that needs to be further researched and developed. Resource constrained and usually unattended sensors are much vulnerable to malicious attackers that may impersonate the senders by altering broadcast messages. Authenticating received messages is a crucial matter that needs to be investigated closely in this regard. Recently proposed TESLA based techniques have embarked on resolving the authentication problem by employing symmetric encryption and achieving the desired security level by mimicking asymmetric encryption through delayed key disclosure. The suggested delay renders the network vulnerable to Denial of Service attack since an adversary can flood the nodes by sending bogus messages and forcing the sensors to buffer the messages until they receive the corresponding delayed keys. Several novel techniques have been proposed to achieve immediate authentication in TESLA methods to alleviate this threat. In the process, other factors such as reliability, security and buffer requirements may have been compromised which need careful consideration. In this paper a Low Buffer μ Tesla protocol which has been presented in [1] is adapted and is altered to achieve reliability by integrating a technique presented in [2]. The integrated method should be able to achieve immediate authentication while preserving desired security and reliability and reducing memory requirements in sensor nodes.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSecurity in Wireless Sensor NetworksFrench-language works237,207