A Survey on X.509 Public-Key Infrastructure, Certificate Revocation, and Their Modern Implementation on Blockchain and Ledger Technologies
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cyber-attacks are becoming more common against Internet users due to the increasing dependency on online communication in their daily lives. X.509 Public-Key Infrastructure (PKIX) is the most widely adopted and used system to secure online communications and digital identities. However, different attack vectors exist against the PKIX system, which attackers exploit to breach the security of the reliant protocols. Recently, various projects (e.g., Let’s Encrypt and Google Certificate Transparency) have been started to encrypt online communications, fix PKIX vulnerabilities, and guard Internet users against cyber-attacks. This survey focuses on classical PKIX proposals, certificate revocation proposals, and their implementation on blockchain as well as ledger technologies. First, we discuss the PKIX architecture, the history of the World Wide Web, the certificate issuance process, and possible attacks on the certificate issuance process. Second, a taxonomy of PKIX proposals, revocation proposals, and their modern implementation is provided. Then, a set of evaluation metrics is defined for comparison. Finally, the leading proposals are compared using 15 evaluation metrics and 13 cyber-attacks before presenting the lessons learned and suggesting future PKIX and revocation research.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it