MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113456791

Distributed firewall anomaly detection through LTL model checking

2013· article· en· W2113456791 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

VenueIntegrated Network Management · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Packet Processing and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFirewall (physics)Computer scienceAnomaly detectionModel checkingAnomaly (physics)Data miningDistributed computingTheoretical computer scienceEntropy (arrow of time)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An anomaly in a firewall is a relationship between two of its rules that may hint at a possible misconfiguration of its filter. While checking anomalies within a single firewall is well understood, identifying anomalies across multiple firewalls in a network is a much harder problem that has only been studied for restricted cases. In particular, we show that the correct identification of anomalies must take into account the routing function performed in each node of the network. We introduce a formal model of firewalls and routing tables that generalizes past work on the topic; in particular, we show how the detection of anomalies in this model reduces to the model checking of particular instances of Linear Temporal Logic formulae. An implementation of an anomaly detector that leverages existing model checkers reveals that distributed anomalies can be identified at a reasonable cost.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.858
Threshold uncertainty score0.962

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.211
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