MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

HBD-Authority: Streaming Access Control Model for Hadoop

2020· article· en· W3132863693 on OpenAlexafffund
Congwei Chen, Marwa Elsayed, Mohammad Zulkernine

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCryptography and Data Security
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsComputer scienceAccess controlBig dataComputer securityCryptocurrencyCloud computingKerberosScalabilityAnalyticsTransparency (behavior)CorrectnessAuthentication (law)DatabaseWorld Wide WebOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Big data analytics, in essence, is becoming the revolution of business intelligence around the world. This momentum has given rise to the hype around analytic technologies, including Apache Hadoop. Hadoop was not originally developed with security in mind. Despite the evolving efforts to integrate security in Hadoop through developing new tools (e.g., Apache Sentry and Ranger) and employing traditional mechanisms (e.g., Kerberos and LDAP), they mainly focus on providing encryption and authentication features, albeit with limited authorization support. Existing solutions in the literature extended these evolving efforts. However, they suffer from limitations, hindering them from providing robust authorization that effectively meets the unique requirements of big data environments. Towards covering this gap, this paper proposes a hybrid authority (HBD-Authority) as a formal attribute-based access control model with context support. This model is established on a novel hybrid approach of authorization transparency that pertains to three fundamental properties of accuracy: correctness, security, and completeness. The model leverages streaming data analytics to foster distributed parallel processing capabilities that achieve multifold benefits: a) efficiently managing the security policies and promptly updating the privileges assigned to a high number of users interacting with the analytic services; b) swiftly deciding and enforcing authorization of requests over data characterized by the 5Vs; and c) providing dynamic protection for data which is frequently updated. The implementation details and experimental evaluation of the proposed model are presented, demonstrating its performance efficiency.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.966
Threshold uncertainty score0.391

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCryptography and Data SecurityFrench-language works237,207