MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161404485 · doi:10.1109/pst.2011.5971976

Model-based systems security quantification

2011· article· en· W2161404485 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInformation and Cyber Security
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceProbabilistic logicSystems Modeling LanguageModel checkingComputer security modelCryptographic protocolThreat modelFormal verificationComputer securityFormal methodsAdversarial systemUnified Modeling LanguageSoftware engineeringCryptographyTheoretical computer scienceProgramming languageArtificial intelligenceSoftware

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we address the issue of security verification and evaluation of systems at the design level. To this end, we elaborate a practical and formal framework that enables security risk assessment and security requirements verification on systems that are designed using SysML activity diagrams. Our approach is based on probabilistic adversarial interactions between potential attackers and the system design models. These interactions result in a global model that is used to quantify security risks by applying probabilistic model-checking. We rely on a standard catalogue of attack patterns to build a library of attacks' design patterns. To demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach, we apply it on a real-life case study related to the Secure Real Time Streaming Protocol.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score0.368

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInformation and Cyber SecurityFrench-language works237,207