MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2516285842 · doi:10.1145/2976749.2978372

Hypnoguard

2016· article· en· W2516285842 on OpenAlexafffund
Lianying Zhao, Mohammad Mannan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSecurity and Verification in Computing
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceEncryptionPasswordPlaintextOn-the-fly encryptionComputer securityDisk encryptionEmbedded systemOperating systemComputer networkComputer hardware

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Attackers can get physical control of a computer in sleep (S3/suspend-to-RAM), if it is lost, stolen, or the owner is being coerced. High-value memory-resident secrets, including disk encryption keys, and private signature/encryption keys for PGP, may be extracted (e.g., via cold-boot or DMA attacks), by physically accessing such a computer. Our goal is to alleviate threats of extracting secrets from a computer in sleep, without relying on an Internet-facing service. We propose Hypnoguard to protect all memory-resident OS/user data across S3 suspensions, by first performing an in-place full memory encryption before entering sleep, and then restoring the plaintext content at wakeup-time through an environment-bound, password-based authentication process. The memory encryption key is effectively "sealed" in a Trusted Platform Module (TPM) chip with the measurement of the execution environment supported by CPU's trusted execution mode (e.g., Intel TXT, AMD-V/SVM). Password guessing within Hypnoguard may cause the memory content to be permanently inaccessible, while guessing without Hypnoguard is equivalent to brute-forcing a high-entropy key (due to TPM protection). We achieved full memory encryption/decryption in less than a second on a mainstream computer (Intel i7-4771 CPU with 8GB RAM, taking advantage of multi-core processing and AES-NI), an apparently acceptable delay for sleep-wake transitions. To the best of our knowledge, Hypnoguard provides the first wakeup-time secure environment for authentication and key unlocking, without requiring per-application changes.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.109
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1090.053

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations8
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSecurity and Verification in ComputingFrench-language works237,207