MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2903853604 · doi:10.3233/jcs-181137

Learning probabilistic dependencies among events for proactive security auditing in clouds

2018· article· en· W2903853604 on OpenAlexaff
Suryadipta Majumdar, Azadeh Tabiban, Yosr Jarraya, Momen Oqaily, Amir Alimohammadifar, Makan Pourzandi, Lingyu Wang, Mourad Debbabi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computer Security · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Security and Intrusion Detection
Canadian institutionsEricsson (Canada)Concordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAuditComputer scienceProbabilistic logicComputer securityArtificial intelligenceBusinessAccounting

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Security compliance auditing is a viable solution to ensure the accountability and transparency of a cloud provider to its tenants. However, the sheer size of a cloud, coupled with the high operational complexity implied by the multi-tenancy and self-service nature, can easily render existing runtime auditing techniques too expensive and non-scalable. To this end, a proactive approach, which prepares for the auditing ahead of critical events, is a promising solution to reduce the response time to a practical level. However, a key limitation of such approaches is their reliance on manual efforts to extract the dependency relationships among events, which greatly restricts their practicality. What makes things worse is the fact that, as the most important input to security auditing, the logs and configuration databases of a real world cloud platform can be unstructured and not ready to be used for efficient security auditing. In this paper, we first propose a log processing technique, which prepares raw cloud logs for different analysis purposes, and then design a learning-based proactive security auditing system, namely, [Formula: see text]. To this end, we conduct case studies on current log formats in different real-world OpenStack (a popular cloud platform) deployments, and identify major challenges in log processing. Later, we design a stand-alone log processor for clouds, which may potentially be used for various log analyses. Consequently, we leverage the log processor outputs to extract probabilistic dependencies from runtime events for the dependency models. Finally, through these dependency models, we proactively prepare for security critical events and prevent security violations resulting from those critical events. Furthermore, we integrate [Formula: see text] to OpenStack and perform extensive experiments in both simulated and real cloud environments that show a practical response time (e.g., 6 ms to audit a cloud of 100,000 VMs) and a significant improvement (e.g., about 50% faster) over existing proactive approaches. In addition, we successfully and efficiently apply our log processor outputs to other learning techniques (e.g., executing sequence pattern mining algorithms within 18 ms for 50,000 events).

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)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations11
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Computer SecuritySame topicNetwork Security and Intrusion DetectionFrench-language works237,207