MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2989044540 · doi:10.1145/3342559.3365335

Toward scaling hardware security module for emerging cloud services

2019· article· en· W2989044540 on OpenAlexaff
Juhyeng Han, Seongmin Kim, Taesoo Kim, Dongsu Han

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSecurity and Verification in Computing
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScalabilityComputer scienceMicroservicesCloud computingKey managementComputer securityCryptographyCloud computing securityHardware security moduleWorkloadSoftware deploymentCryptographic primitiveKey (lock)Security serviceDistributed computingComputer networkCryptographic protocolOperating systemInformation security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The hardware security module (HSM) has been used as a root of trust for various key management services. At the same time, rapid innovation in emerging industries, such as container-based microservices, accelerates demands for scaling security services. However, current on-premises HSMs have limitations to afford such demands due to the restricted scalability and high price of deployment. This paper presents ScaleTrust, a framework for scaling security services by utilizing HSMs with SGX-based key management service (KMS) in a collaborative, yet secure manner. Based on a hierarchical model, we design a cryptographic workload distribution between HSMs and KMS enclaves to achieve both the elasticity of cloud software and the hardware-based security of HSM appliances. We demonstrate practical implications of ScaleTrust using two case studies that require secure cryptographic operations with low latency and high scalability.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations18
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSecurity and Verification in ComputingFrench-language works237,207