MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3091567099 · doi:10.1109/jiot.2020.3027536

Intelligent Trust-Based Public-Key Management for IoT by Linking Edge Devices in a Fog Architecture

2020· article· en· W3091567099 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Sayad Haghighi, Maryam Ebrahimi, Sahil Garg, Alireza Jolfaei

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Internet of Things Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSecurity in Wireless Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie SupérieureUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCloud computingServerComputer networkRevocation listAuthentication (law)Computer securityEdge computingKey managementKey (lock)Public-key cryptographyPublic key infrastructureEncryptionOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to memory and processing limitations, Internet-of-Things (IoT) devices require external fog servers to perform some of their tasks. However, this offloading of tasks comes at the cost of more interactions whose security cannot be guaranteed without the authentication and key management scheme. Traditional prescriptions, such as those used for securing the Web, require referring to central agents, such as certificate authorities (CA) or online certificate status protocol (OCSP) responders, that sit in the cloud. This poses many challenges, including additional communication costs and repetitive delays which work against the low latency and energy efficiency goals of edge networking. In this article, we propose a novel semidecentralized public-key management scheme for smart IoT systems in which devices intelligently decide whether to look for the keying material locally at the edge or refer to the cloud for this purpose. The result is a security architecture that links IoT devices, fog servers, and cloud, but with minimal dependency on the latter. In the proposed solution, devices work collaboratively to deliver revocation lists and digital certificates of fog servers to each other. The decision to go for edge nodes or cloud CA/OCSP responders is made intelligently by each node upon learning its neighborhood and network statistics. The core idea is based on the Web of trust, but unlike that, whenever a material is not found locally, cloud servers are queried. Experiments show that through this intelligent approach, the cost of key management operations, e.g., delay, can be reduced by up to 50%.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.002
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations25
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Internet of Things JournalSame topicSecurity in Wireless Sensor NetworksFrench-language works237,207