MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2902856285 · doi:10.1145/3274694.3274695

MemCloak

2018· article· en· W2902856285 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
TopicSecurity and Verification in Computing
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceObfuscationMemory protectionOverhead (engineering)Address spaceEmbedded systemMemory managementOperating systemExtended memoryDistributed computingComputer securitySemiconductor memory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Access patterns over untrusted memory have long been exploited to infer sensitive information like program types or even secret keys. Most existing obfuscation solutions hide real memory accesses among a sufficiently large number of dummy memory accesses. Such solutions lead to a heavy communication overhead and more often apply to the client/server scenario instead of the CPU/memory architecture. Sporadic obfuscation solutions strive for an affordable memory bandwidth cost at the expense of security degradation. For example, they may have to obfuscate accesses over a limited range of memory space to control the overhead.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.916
Threshold uncertainty score0.982

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations9
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSecurity and Verification in ComputingFrench-language works237,207