MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2147395772 · doi:10.1109/infcom.2009.5062036

Null Keys: Limiting Malicious Attacks Via Null Space Properties of Network Coding

2009· article· en· W2147395772 on OpenAlexaff
Elias Kehdi, B. Li

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceLinear network codingTheoretical computer scienceNull (SQL)Subspace topologyHash functionRedundancy (engineering)AlgorithmComputer networkData miningComputer securityArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The performance of randomized network coding can suffer significantly when malicious nodes corrupt the content of the exchanged blocks. Previous work have introduced error correcting codes by generalizing some well known bounds in coding theory. Such codes are based on introducing redundancy in space domain. Other approaches require the use of homomorphic hashing functions, which are computationally expensive. In this paper, we present a novel and computationally efficient security algorithm, referred to as Null Keys, to detect and contain malicious attacks based on the subspace properties of random linear network coding. The participating nodes verify the integrity of a block by checking if it belongs to the subspace spanned by the source blocks. This is possible when every node has a vector orthogonal to all the combinations of the source blocks. These vectors, referred to as null keys, belong to the null space of the source blocks and go through a random combination when distributed by the source. Unlike previous security approaches, our Null Keys algorithm allows nodes to rapidly detect corrupted blocks without changing the code or imposing redundancy on the exchanged data. We analytically evaluate the pollution produced by jamming attacks, and demonstrate the effectiveness of Null Keys by varying the strength of the malicious nodes. We also show, through extensive simulations, that the Null Keys approach is more effective than cooperative security using homomorphic hashing when it comes to limiting the pollution spread.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations123
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCooperative Communication and Network CodingFrench-language works237,207