PerfSPEC: Performance Profiling-Based Proactive Security Policy Enforcement for Containers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Container environments provide cloud native applications with scalability, flexibility, and portable support. As a popular container orchestrator, Kubernetes facilitates automatic deployment and maintenance of a large number of containerized applications. However, potential misconfigurations, vulnerabilities, or implementation flaws may empower attackers to exploit the Kubernetes cluster. Although existing solutions such as runtime security policy enforcement may prevent an attack, they can be inefficient in large scale container environments. In this paper, we propose a performance profiling-based proactive security policy enforcement solution, namely, PerfSPEC. First, we accelerate the proactivization of policies (which typically requires significant manual effort) by proposing to profile and rank existing policies according to their induced overhead. This allows us to better focus our efforts and greatly improve the overall response time (e.g., by 98% in contrast to less than 49%). Then, we address the performance limitations of existing solutions by leveraging learning-based approaches to predict future events and compute their verification results in advance. As a result, PerfSPEC achieves a viable response time (e.g., less than 10 ms in contrast to 600 ms with one of the most popular existing approaches) even for large container environments (up to 800 Pods).
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 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".