MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379383052 · doi:10.32920/23296244

A Mutation Framework for Evaluating Security Analysis tools in IoT Applications

2023· preprint· en· W4379383052 on OpenAlexaff
Sajeda Parveen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Malware Detection Techniques
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceInternet of ThingsTaint checkingContext (archaeology)Set (abstract data type)Sensitivity (control systems)Domain (mathematical analysis)Security analysisProcess (computing)Path (computing)Computer securityComputer networkEngineeringSoftwareOperating systemProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the growing and widespread use of the Internet of Things (IoT) in our daily life, the security of IoT is becoming more crucial. To ensure information security, we require better security analysis tools for IoT applications. Hence, this thesis presents an automated framework to evaluate taint-flow analysis tools in the domain of IoT applications. First, we propose a set of mutational operators tailored to evaluate three types of sensitivity analysis, flow, path and context sensitivity. Then we developed mutators to automatically generate mutants for those types. We demonstrated the framework on a subset of mutational operators to evaluate two taint-flow analyzers, SaINT [1] and Taint-Things [2]. To the best of our knowledge, our framework is the first framework to address the need for evaluating taint-flow analysis tools and specifically those developed for IoT SmartThings applications.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.002
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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.327 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Malware Detection TechniquesFrench-language works237,207