MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3036969479 · doi:10.1109/jiot.2020.3002709

DACIoT: Dynamic Access Control Framework for IoT Deployments

2020· article· en· W3036969479 on OpenAlexaff
Ashraf Alkhresheh, Khalid Elgazzar, Hossam S. Hassanein

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Internet of Things Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAccess Control and Trust
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech UniversityQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsXACMLComputer scienceAccess controlAdaptabilityMarkup languageComputer securityInternet of ThingsEnforcementSecurity policyDistributed computingComputer networkXMLWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents a dynamic access control framework for the Internet of Things (DACIoT). The main objective of DACIoT is to prevent unauthorized access to IoT devices and tightens the authorized access while an IoT device is in use. The rigidness of existing access control (AC) techniques in terms of manual policy specification, discontinuity of access decision making, and immutability to changing access behaviors makes these solutions fall short in highly dynamic IoT environments. DACIoT supports three functionalities that are lacking in existing AC solutions: 1) automatic policy generation; 2) continuous policy enforcement; and 3) adaptive policy adjustment. The DACIoT extends the standard reference model of the extensible AC markup language (XACML) with the added three functionalities to improve the adaptability of attribute-based AC policies to highly dynamic IoT environments. Results show that DACIoT provides improved security, dynamic adaptability, and can scale efficiently to IoT environments.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.328 · 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

Citations24
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Internet of Things JournalSame topicAccess Control and TrustFrench-language works237,207