MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4226407543 · doi:10.22215/etd/2022-14833

Assessing Security in the Multi-Stakeholder Premise of 5G: A Survey and an Adapted Security Metrics Approach

2022· dissertation· en· W4226407543 on OpenAlexaff
Muhammad Shafayat Oshman

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware-Defined Networks and 5G
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSecurity information and event managementComputer securitySet (abstract data type)StakeholderProcess (computing)Data scienceSecurity serviceCloud computing securityInformation security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The fifth-generation (5G) mobile telecom network has been a focal point of research amongst the community in recent times.Features and characteristics like dynamicity (which enables the dynamic allocation of resources to stakeholders on a need basis), low latency, higher network capabilities etc., makes 5G attractive to telecom operators.But as is the case with any new technology, new threats have emerged and made their way into the ecosystem.Therefore, we have a need to evaluate these threats and evaluate the state of security of 5G deployments.Security metrics provide a pathway to quantitatively measure the security posture of an environment by taking these new threats into account.Existing literature contains a plethora of security metrics proposals designed for different system setups.We need to analyze if and how existing security metrics can be applied to a 5G environment.As such, this thesis aims to do a state-of-the-art survey to explore the diverse set of security metrics in literature, understand the process of deriving security metrics.We then employ this knowledge to investigate the factors that hinder the usage of existing security metrics in a 5G environment, identify solutions from existing academic proposals on how to address those factors, propose an adapted security metrics approach to address the multi-ownership nature of 5G and discuss the design and analysis of Argus-5, a tool designed to verify the feasibility of the adapted security metrics approach and simulate various scenarios.Dr. AbdelRahman Abdou for their feedback and suggestions during the oral examination, which helped me to further strengthen the quality of my thesis and Dr.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0090.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.009
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.338
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

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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoftware-Defined Networks and 5GFrench-language works237,207