MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4317393278 · doi:10.18280/ijsse.120611

Attack Detection Using a Lightweight Blockchain Based Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm in Cyber Systems

2022· article· en· W4317393278 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ramesh Vatambeti, Nadella Sree Divya, Hanumantha Rao Jalla, M. Venu Gopalachari

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Safety and Security Engineering · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlockchain Technology Applications and Security
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceElliptic Curve Digital Signature AlgorithmScalabilityDistributed computingOverhead (engineering)Digital Signature AlgorithmDigital signatureComputer networkBlockchainAlgorithmElliptic curve cryptographyComputer securityPublic-key cryptographyHash functionDatabaseEncryption

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cyber-physical systems (CPSs) are highly susceptible to malicious cyberattacks due to their reliance on communication networks. For this reason, many different attack detection techniques have been developed to guarantee the safety of CPSs. This article introduces BlockChain (BC) to address CPS issues such as data security and privacy. Additionally, BC is not well suited for CPS due to its high computing complexity, limited scalability, significant bandwidth overhead, and latency. To meet the requirements of CPS, a light-weight blockchain-based signature algorithm (LWBSA) model is developed in this work. The concept's resource constraints are alleviated by having a single centrally managed manager generate shared keys for outward-bound data transmission requests. The LWBSA paradigm provided herein produces an overlay network where extremely equipped resources can merge into a community BC, hence ensuring both dedicated privileges. Lightweight consensus, the elliptic curve digital signature algorithm (ECDSA), and distributed throughput management (DTM) are the three optimizations implemented in the ELIB model discussed here. Extensive simulation is carried out to examine the implications of different situations on processing time, energy usage, and overhead. The experimental outcomes show that the LWBSA achieves the best possible performance across a wide variety of measures.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.615
Threshold uncertainty score0.550

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 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

Citations15
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Safety and Security EngineeringSame topicBlockchain Technology Applications and SecurityFrench-language works237,207