An Information Flow Method to Detect Denial of Service Vulnerabilities
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Meadows recently proposed a formal cost-based framework for the analysis of denial of service, showing how to formalize some existing principles used to make cryptographic protocols more resistant to denial of service by comparing the cost to the defender against the cost to the attacker. The firrst contribution of this paper is to introduce a new security property called impassivity designed to capture the abiity of a protocol to achieve these goals in the framework of a generic value-passing process algebra called Security Process Algebra (SPPA) extended with local function calls, cryptographic primitives and special semantic features in order to handle cryptographic protocols. Impassivity is defined as an information flow property founded on bisimulation-based non-deterministic admissible interference. A sound and complete proof method for impassivity is provided. The method extends previous results of the authors on bisimulation-based non-deterministic admissible interference and its application to the analysis of cryptographic protocols. It is illustrated by its application to the TCP/IP protocol. Key Words: Denial of service, Protocols, Ad
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it