MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393094652 · doi:10.34190/iccws.19.1.2054

On The Zero-Trust Intranet Certification Problem

2024· article· en· W4393094652 on OpenAlex
Danielle Botha-Badenhorst, André Martin McDonald, Graham David Barbour, Ethan Buckinjohn, Wian Gertenbach

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Conference on Cyber Warfare and Security · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCryptography and Data Security
Canadian institutionsCanadian Society of Intestinal Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCertificationZero (linguistics)IntranetBusinessComputer scienceWorld Wide WebThe InternetManagementEconomicsPhilosophyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Securing corporate networks and ensuring the trustworthiness of network resources are critical security concerns for organisations in today's interconnected digital landscape. The zero-trust security model is an approach to designing and implementing ICT systems which prescribes that clients and servers cannot be trusted automatically, even when connected to networks traditionally considered trusted. The implementation of the zero-trust model within the corporate intranet requires a secure method to verify the identity of local servers. On the Internet, trust in the identity of public servers is established by well-known public Certificate Authorities (CAs), which issue digital certificates to securely identify servers. However, local intranet servers exist within the internal address space of the network. Consequently, it is impossible to naturally obtain digital certificates for these servers, validly signed by a public CA, without publicly disclosing sensitive information such as intranet server Domain Name System (DNS) records. This leaves organisations with the option of relying on endpoint management systems to install custom CA root certificates on all corporate browsers or, in some cases, ignoring the problem altogether. In this paper, we draw on practical experience in the deployment of cybersecurity devices in corporate intranets to formally define the intranet certification problem. We specify five requirements that a solution to this problem must satisfy. We then conduct a comprehensive review of existing candidate solutions and academic research relevant to the intranet certification problem. Specifically, existing ICT systems for public key infrastructure and endpoint management are identified and evaluated with respect to their ability to meet the stated requirements for solving the intranet certification problem, as well as their cost. Our study reveals that solutions that meet the technical and security requirements of the intranet certification problem are beyond the reach of smaller private sector companies and public sector organisations in underdeveloped and emerging economies. The high cost and technical expertise required for their implementation and management render these solutions impractical. Consequently, by relying on servers with self-signed certificates, these entities inadvertently leave their servers susceptible to impersonation, information theft, and unauthorised resource access, thus violating the fundamental principles of the zero-trust model. We conclude that a gap exists for a simple, cost-effective, and easily managed solution to the intranet certification problem.

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 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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.652
Threshold uncertainty score0.826

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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.242 · 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