MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2999961398 · doi:10.1145/2007477.1952702

Patch auditing in infrastructure as a service clouds

2011· article· en· W2999961398 on OpenAlexaff
Lionel Litty, David Lie

Bibliographic record

VenueACM SIGPLAN Notices · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSecurity and Verification in Computing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCloud computingHypervisorVirtualizationOperating systemOverhead (engineering)Leverage (statistics)SoftwareBinary translationAuditDistributed computingComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A basic requirement of a secure computer system is that it be up to date with regard to software security patches. Unfortunately, Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) clouds make this difficult. They leverage virtualization, which provides functionality that causes traditional security patch update systems to fail. In addition, the diversity of operating systems and the distributed nature of administration in the cloud compound the problem of identifying unpatched machines. In this work, we propose P2, a hypervisor-based patch audit solution. P2 audits VMs and detects the execution of unpatched binary and non-binary files in an accurate, continuous and OSagnostic manner. Two key innovations make P2 possible. First, P2 uses efficient information flow tracking to identify the use of unpatched non-binary files in a vulnerable way.We performed a patch survey and discover that 64% of files modified by security updates do not contain binary code, making the audit of non-binary files crucial. Second, P2 implements a novel algorithm that identifies binaries in mid-execution to allow handling of VMs resumed from a checkpoint or migrated into the cloud. We have implemented a prototype of P2 and and our experiments show that it accurately reports the execution of unpatched code while imposing performance overhead of 4%.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM SIGPLAN NoticesSame topicSecurity and Verification in ComputingFrench-language works237,207