MRAAC: A Multi-stage Risk-aware Adaptive Authentication and Access Control Framework for Android
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adaptive authentication enables smartphones and enterprise apps to decide when and how to authenticate users based on contextual and behavioral factors. In practice, a system may employ multiple policies to adapt its authentication mechanisms and access controls to various scenarios. However, existing approaches suffer from contradictory or insecure adaptations, which may enable attackers to bypass the authentication system. Besides, most existing approaches are inflexible and do not provide desirable access controls. We design and build a multi-stage risk-aware adaptive authentication and access control framework (MRAAC), which provides the following novel contributions: Multi-stage: MRAAC organizes adaptation policies in multiple stages to handle different risk types and progressively adapts authentication mechanisms based on context, resource sensitivity, and user authenticity. Appropriate access control: MRAAC provides libraries to enable sensitive apps to manage the availability of their in-app resources based on MRAAC’s risk awareness. Extensible: While existing proposals are tailored to cater to a single use case, MRAAC supports a variety of use cases with custom risk models. We exemplify these advantages of MRAAC by deploying it for three use cases: an enhanced version of Android Smart Lock, guest-aware continuous authentication, and corporate app for BYOD. We conduct experiments to quantify the CPU, memory, latency, and battery performance of MRAAC. Our evaluation shows that MRAAC enables various stakeholders (device manufacturers, enterprise and secure app developers) to provide complex adaptive authentication workflows on COTS Android with low processing and battery overhead.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".