MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Securing AWS Lambda: Advanced Strategies and Best Practices

2024· article· en· W4401247868 on OpenAlexaff
Amine Barrak, Gildas Fofe, Léo Mackowiak, Emmanuel Kouam, Fehmi Jaafar

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed systems and fault tolerance
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLambdaComputer sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The emergence of the serverless paradigm, embodied by AWS Lambda functions, has revolutionized the landscape of cloud computing. This model empowers users to offload server management tasks, allowing them to focus their efforts on core business logic while achieving substantial cost savings. However, this transition to serverless exposes significant vulnerabilities, especially in terms of security. This article delves into the specific security challenges associated with AWS Lambda functions, with a focus on major threats such as malicious code injection, sensitive data leaks, DDoS attacks, excessive privileges, vulnerable dependencies, and certificate issues. Our investigation, centered around the AWS Lambda platform, thoroughly analyzes these challenges by identifying underlying mechanisms and inherent risks. We review the state of the art solutions from the literature while examining the strategies adopted by AWS and the industry to enhance security. By implementing these solutions on an AWS server, we concretely illustrate possible protective measures. In this paper, we aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of security issues in the context of Lambda functions, paving the way for recommendations and research directions to bolster the resilience of this essential serverless cloud technology.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.008
Scholarly communication0.0110.023
Open science0.0060.007
Research integrity0.0060.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDistributed systems and fault toleranceFrench-language works237,207