MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145301534 · doi:10.1109/glocom.2008.ecp.365

Security Analysis and Authentication Improvement for IEEE 802.11i Specification

2008· article· en· W2145301534 on OpenAlexaff
Xinyu Xing, Elhadi Shakshuki, Darcy Benoit, Tarek Sheltami

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Authentication Protocols Security
Canadian institutionsAcadia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer securityIEEE 802.1XAuthentication (law)Computer networkIEEE 802Network Access ControlCryptographyIEEE 802.11sWireless networkInsiderIEEE 802.11WirelessCloud computing securityWireless mesh networkTelecommunicationsCloud computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The IEEE 802.11i amendment has been finalized to address the security issues in wireless local area networks. A prodigious amount of research has demonstrated that the IEEE 802.11i specification is sufficient to prevent unauthorized access and use. In this paper, we analyze the IEEE 802.11i wireless networking amendment with respect to data confidentiality, integrity, mutual authentication and availability. Our analysis indicates that a number of serious threats have still not been addressed by the 802.11i amendment. This includes DoS attacks, insider attacks, offline guessing attacks, etc. Furthermore, configuring security features on a commercial Wi-Fi network is moderately-to-very difficult. Towards this end, this paper proposes an improved authentication mechanism which adopts asymmetric cryptography and thus accomplishes link-layer frame protection. Through our further analysis and discussion, we conclude that the proposed mechanism not only prevents potential security threats but also accomplishes autonomic security configuration without human intervention.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations21
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Authentication Protocols SecurityFrench-language works237,207