MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2261408704

Software diversity: security, entropy and game theory

2012· article· en· W2261408704 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

VenueUSENIX conference on Hot topics in security · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInformation and Cyber Security
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceTestbedBipartite graphEntropy (arrow of time)Computer securitySoftwareSoftware security assuranceGame theoryTheoretical computer scienceDiversity (politics)GraphWorld Wide WebInformation securityMathematical economicsMathematicsProgramming language
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although many have recognized the risks of software monocultures, it is not currently clear how much and what kind of diversity would be needed to address these risks. Here we attempt to provide insight into this issue using a simple model of hosts and vulnerabilities connected in a bipartite graph. We use this graph to compute diversity metrics as Renyi entropy and to formulate an anti-coordination game to understand why computer host owners would choose to diversify. Since security isn't the only factor considered when choosing software in the real world, we propose a slight variation of the popular security wargame Capture the Flag that can serve as a testbed for understanding the utility of diversity as a defense strategy.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.911

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.227 · 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