MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Blockchain-based Dual Identity Management and Authentication Framework for IoT Networks

2024· article· en· W4405908425 on OpenAlexaff
Dana Haj Hussein, Ethan Houlahan, Alexandre Janelle-Goode, Thomas Lumsden, Mohamed Ibnkahla

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlockchain Technology Applications and Security
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlockchainIdentity managementAuthentication (law)Computer scienceInternet of ThingsDual (grammatical number)Identity (music)Computer securityComputer networkArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The widespread adoption of Internet of Things (IoT) devices has introduced an era of unparalleled connectivity and data-driven innovation. Nevertheless, this rapid proliferation introduced significant security challenges. The limited computational capabilities of IoT devices impose constraints on the implementation of robust security mechanisms, rendering them susceptible to malicious attacks. Additionally, the dynamic nature of IoT systems which allows multiple administrators to add or remove IoT devices, necessitates the establishment of an identity management system. This system is crucial for managing both devices and system users, ensuring the traceability of device registration activities, and maintaining accountability of system users. Furthermore, traditional centralized authentication systems encounter scalability issues and high costs associated with centralized servers. To address these challenges, this paper proposes a Dual Identity Management and Authentication (DIMA) framework, leveraging blockchain technology. The proposed framework addresses two primary issues. Firstly, it assigns dual identities to each IoT node, facilitating a secure authentication process and regulating network access. Secondly, it supports the traceability of system device registration activities, enabling accountability for system users and ensuring a secure administrator-in-the-loop device identification process. Moreover, experimental testing and security analysis are undertaken to validate the usability and ascertain the critical security strengths of the DIMA framework.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBlockchain Technology Applications and SecurityFrench-language works237,207