MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

BI-MQTT: Broker-Independent Integrity for Publish–Subscribe Messaging with Ring Signatures

2025· article· W7125606402 on OpenAlexaff
Shabnam Saderi Oskouei, Kalikinkar Mandal, Ali.A Ghorbani

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicCryptography and Data Security
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMQTTMessage queueAnonymityRing signatureMessage authentication codeAuthentication (law)Cryptographic protocolData integrityProtocol (science)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Message Queuing Telemetry Transport (MQTT) is a lightweight publish-subscribe protocol widely deployed in Internet of Things (IoT) and cyber-physical systems such as smart grids, industrial automation, and healthcare. However, its reliance on centralized brokers introduces a critical trust dependency: if a broker is compromised or malicious, message integrity and unlinkability cannot be guaranteed. We propose BIMQTT, a broker-independent integrity and origin authentication extension to MQTT that integrates ring signatures into the publish-subscribe workflow. By allowing publishers to sign messages anonymously within a group, BI-MQTT enables subscribers to verify origin authenticity and integrity directly, without relying on broker trust. This preserves the lightweight architecture of MQTT while adding publisher anonymity for privacy-sensitive deployments. To demonstrate practicality, we implement BIMQTT on the widely used Eclipse Mosquitto broker and evaluate its performance under realistic conditions. Experimental results show that ring signature schemes such as RST and Shacham can be integrated into MQTT with tolerable computational and bandwidth overhead, illustrating the feasibility of strengthening MQTT security using cryptographic primitives without sacrificing deployability.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.914
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCryptography and Data SecurityFrench-language works237,207