MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3124396779

Security in Xml-Based Financial Reporting Services on the Internet

2005· article· en· W3124396779 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Reporting and XBRL
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThe InternetXBRLComputer securityInformation securityComputer scienceBusinessInternet privacyWorld Wide Web
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many companies are attempting to leverage the power of financial information by creating corporate websites to provide such information to employees, investors, and financial analysts. Extensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL) was developed to provide users with an efficient and effective means of preparing and exchanging financial information over the Internet. Extensible Assurance Reporting Language (XARL) was designed to enable assurance providers to report on the integrity of information distributed over the Internet and help users and companies place warranted reliance on such information.The XBRL and XARL services are Internet-based message exchange methods. The Internet is insecure in nature. Without good security, XBRL and XARL services will not reach their full potential. Today's security approaches consist of a combination of user IDs and passwords and point-to-point, transport-level security for data transmissions over the Internet such as SSL/TLS, S-HTTP, and VPN. Access control techniques based on user IDs and passwords can protect files or data from unauthorized access but cannot guarantee the integrity of the information. Transport-level, point-to-point security is not sufficient for securing information that travels between several intermediaries or for encrypting only selected portions of an information set. Thus, alternative security approaches are needed to compensate for these limitations.This paper addresses security in financial reporting services. First, it describes Web services and conceptualizes financial reporting services such as XBRL and XARL as Web Services. Next, it discusses security threats and limitations of current security technologies. Then, it identifies security requirements that should be considered to ensure reliable, trustworthy XBRL and XARL services. Finally, the paper explains several proposed security standards and proposes Web Services Security Architecture as a suitable security mechanism for financial reporting services.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.198
Threshold uncertainty score0.868

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.217 · 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