MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2121577686 · doi:10.1109/apscc.2008.169

Contract-Based Security Monitors for Service Oriented Software Architecture

2008· article· en· W2121577686 on OpenAlexaff
Alexander M. Hoole, Issa Traoré

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSecurity and Verification in Computing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSoftware security assuranceSecurity testingSecurity bugComputer securitySecure codingSecurity serviceService (business)AssertionFalse positive paradoxSecurity information and event managementCloud computing securityInformation securityCloud computingOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Monitors have been used for real-time systems to ensure proper behavior; however, most approaches do not allow for the addition of relevant fields required to identify and react to security vulnerabilities. Contracts can provide a useful mechanism for identifying and tracking vulnerabilities. Currently, contracts have been proposed for reliability and formal verification; yet, their use in security is limited. Static analysis methods are able to identify many known vulnerabilities; however, they suffer from a high rate of false-positives. The creation of a mechanism that can verify identified vulnerabilities is therefore warranted. We propose a contract-based security assertion monitoring framework (CB SAMF) for reducing the number of security vulnerabilities that are exploitable. CB SAMF will span multiple software layers and be used in an enhanced systems development life cycle (SDLC) including service-oriented analysis and design (SOAD).

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.794
Threshold uncertainty score0.526

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.231 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSecurity and Verification in ComputingFrench-language works237,207