MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4300221961 · doi:10.5383/juspn.03.01.000

Signal-Layer Security and Trust-Boundary Identification based on Hardware-Software Interface Definition

2011· article· en· W4300221961 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Ubiquitous Systems and Pervasive Networks · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSafety Systems Engineering in Autonomy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutomotive industryComputer securityDomain (mathematical analysis)Functional safetyComputer scienceProcess (computing)Identification (biology)Cyber-physical systemRisk analysis (engineering)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An important trend in the automotive domain is to adapt established functional safety processes and methods for security engineering. Although functional safety and cyber-security engineering have a considerable overlap, the trend of adapting methods from one domain to the other is often challenged by non-domain experts. Just as safety became a critical part of the development in the late 20th century, modern vehicles are now required to become resilient against cyber-attacks. As vehicle providers gear up for this challenge, they can capitalize on experiences from many other domains, but must also face several unique challenges. Such as, that cyber-security engineering will now join reliability and safety as a cornerstone for success in the automotive industry and approaches need to be integrated into the mainly safety oriented development lifecycle of the domain. The recently released SAE J3061 guidebook for cyber-physical vehicle systems focus on designing cyber-security aware systems in close relation to the automotive safety standard ISO 26262. The key contribution of this paper is to analyse a method to identify attack vectors on complex automotive systems via signal interfaces and propose a security classification scheme and protection mechanisms on signal layer. To that aim, the hardware-software interface (HSI), a central development artefact of the ISO 26262 functional safety development process, is used and extended to support the cyber-security engineering process and provide cyber-security countermeasures on signal layer.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.008
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Ubiquitous Systems and Pervasive NetworksSame topicSafety Systems Engineering in AutonomyFrench-language works237,207