DADI: Defending against distributed denial of service in information‐centric networking routing and caching
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Information‐centric networking (ICN) is a new communication paradigm for the upcoming next‐generation internet (NGI). ICN is an open environment that depends on in‐network caching and focuses on contents. These attributes make ICN architectures subject to different types of routing and caching attacks. An attacker publishes invalid contents or announces malicious routes and sends malicious requests for available and unavailable contents. These types of attacks can cause distributed denial of service (DDoS) and cache pollution in ICN architectures. In this paper,we propose a D efending solution A gainst D DoS in I CN routing and caching (DADI) that detects and prevents these DDoS attacks. This solution allows ICN routers to differentiate between legitimate and attack behaviors in the detection phase based on threshold values. In the prevention phase, ICN routers are able to take actions against these attacks. In our experiments, we measure satisfied requests for legitimate users and cache hit ratio for ICN routers, which are evaluated over different scenarios when there are 20%, 50%, and 80% attackers with respect to legitimate users. The experiments show that the proposed solution effectively mitigates routing‐ and caching‐related DDoS attacks in ICN and enhances ICN performance in the existence of DDoS attacks.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it