Identifying and Analyzing Emerging Cyber Security Risks

Abstract: The exponential growth of the Internet interconnections has led to a significant growth of cyber-attack incidents often with disastrous and grievous consequences. Malware is the primary choice of weapon to carry out malicious intents in the cyberspace, either by exploitation into existing vulnerabilities or utilization of unique characteristics of emerging technologies. The development of more innovative and effective malware defense mechanisms has been regarded as an urgent requirement in the cyber security community. To assist in achieving this goal, we first present an overview of the most exploited vulnerabilities in existing hardware, software, and network layers. This is followed by critiques of existing state-of-the-art mitigation techniques as why they do or don’t work. We then discuss new attack patterns in emerging technologies such as social media, cloud computing, smartphone technology, and critical infrastructure. Finally, we describe our speculative observations on future research directions.

Cyber security, intrusion detection, deep learning, machine learning

1. http://www.maawg.org/, last accessed: June 2013. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. http://www.antiphishing.org/, last accessed: June 2013. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. http://www.ostermanresearch.com/downloads.htm, last accessed: June 2013. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mebroot, last accessed: June 2013. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. http://www.emailtrackerpro.com, last accessed: June 2013. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. http://www.tamos.com, last accessed: June 2013. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. https://www.mandiant.com/resources/download/web-historian, last accessed: June 2013. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. http://www.majorgeeks.com/index.dat_analyzer_d5259.html, last accessed: June 2013. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. http://www.winpcap.org/, last accessed: June 2013. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. http://www.riverbed.com/products- solutions/products/performance-management/wireshark- enhancement-products/Wireless-Traffic-Packet-Capture.html, last accessed: June 2013. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/, last accessed: June 2013. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Australian Parliament the report of the inquiry into Cyber Crime, http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/coms/cybercrime/report/full_repor t.pdf. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. www.it2trust.com/pdf/Aladdin.SafeWord_PO_SafeWord.pdf, last accessed: June 2013. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. A. Cardenas, T. Roosta, G. Taban, S. Sastry, Cyber security basic defenses and attack trends, Fujitsu Lab., http://www.flacp.fujitsulabs.com/~cardenas/ Papers/Chap4v2.pdf, last accessed: June 2013. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. DHS S&T, Roadmap for cybersecurity research, Jan. 2009, http://www.cyber.st.dhs.gov/docs/DHS-Cybersecurity-Roadmap.pdf, last accessed: June 2013. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Annual Emerging Cyber Threats Report, Georgia Tech Information Security Center, http://www.gtisc.gatech.edu/, last accessed: June 2013. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Internet Security Threats Report. Symantec, http://www.symantec.com/threatreport/, last accessed: June 2013. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. S.E. Goodman, H.S. Lin (Eds.), Toward a Safer and More Secure Cyberspace, The Nat’l Academics Press, 2007. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. R.C. Newman, Computer Security: Protecting Digital Resources, first edition, Jones & Bartlett Publishers, February 20, 2009. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. B.W. Lampon, Privacy and security – Usable security: how to get it, Commun. ACM 52 (11) (2009) 25–27. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. A. Haeberlen, P. Kouznetsov, P. Druschel, Practical accountability for distributed systems, in: SOSP 2007, pp. 175–188. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. M. Tehranipoor, C. Wang, Introduction to Hardware Security and Trust, Springer, 2011. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. N. Potlapally, Hardware security in practice: Challenges and opportunities, in: HOST 2011, pp. 93–98. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Q. Li, H. Gao, B. Xu, Z. Jiao, Hardware threat: The challenge of information security, in: ISCSCT 2008, pp. 517–520. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. R.S. Chakraborty, S. Narasimhan, S. Bhunia, Hardware Trojan: Threats and emerging solutions, in: HLDVT 2009, pp. 166–171. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. R. Karri, J. Rajendran, K. Rosenfeld, M. Tehranipoor, Trustworthy hardware: Identifying and classifying hardware trojans, IEEE Comput. 43 (10) (2010) 39–46. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. H. Mouratidis, Secure by design: Developing secure software systems from the group up, Intern. J. Secure Software Eng. 2 (3) (2011) 23–41. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. A. Sadeghi, Trusted computing — special aspects and challenges, in: V. Geffert, et al. (Eds.), SOFSEM, in: Lect. Notes Comput. Sci., vol. 4910, Springer, Berlin, 2008, pp. 98–117. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Trusted Computing Group, TPM Main, Part 1, Design Principles, Specification version 1.2. Revision 94, 2006. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Trusted Computing Group, TPM Main, Part 2, TPM Structures, Specification version 1.2. Revision 94, 2006. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Trusted Computing Group, TPM Main, Part 3, Design Principles, Specification version 1.2. Revision 94, 2006. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. B. Beckert, R. Hähnle, P.H. Schmitt (Eds.), Verification of Object- Oriented Software: The KeY Approach, Lect. Notes Comput. Sci., vol. 4334, Springer, Heidelberg, 2007. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. C. Hoare, J. Misra, G.T. Leavens, N. Shankar, The verified software initiative: A manifesto, ACM Comput. Surv. 41 (2009) 1–22. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. K.R.M. Lein, An automatic program verifier for functional correctness, in: E.M. Clarke, A. Voronkov (Eds.), LPAR-16 2010, in: Lect. Notes Comput. Sci., vol. 6355, Springer, Heidelberg, 2010, pp. 348–370. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. M. Sitaraman, B. Adcock, J. Avigad, Building a push-button RESOLVE verifier: Progress and challenges, in: Formal Aspects of Computing, 2010, pp. 1–20. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. J. MaManus, The CERT Sun Microsystems Secure Coding Standard for Java, CERT, 2009. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. R. Seacord, Top 10 Secure Coding Practice, CERT, 2010. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. R. Gennaro, J. Katz, H. Krawczyk, T. Rabin, Secure network coding over the integers, in: P.Q. Nguyen, D. Pointcheval (Eds.), PKC 2010, in: Lect. Notes Comput. Sci., vol. 6056, Springer, Heidelberg, 2010, pp. 142–160. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. M. Howard, D. LeBlanc, J. Viega, 19 Deadly Sins of Software Security, McGraw–Hill, 2005. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. K. Tsipenyuk, B. Chess, G. McGraw, Seven pernicious kingdoms: A taxonomy of software security errors, IEEE Secur. Priv. 3 (6) (2005) 81–84. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. C.B. Haley, R. Laney, J.D. Moffett, B. Nuseibeh, Security requirements engineering: A framework for representation and analysis, IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 34 (1) (2008) 133–153. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. G. McGraw, Software Security: Building Security In, Addison– Wesley, 2006. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. M.I. Sharif, A. Lanzi, J.T. Giffin, W. Lee, Impeding malware analysis using conditional code obfuscation, in: Network and Distributed System Security Symposium (NDSS), 2008. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

44. J.-M. Borello, L. Mé, Code obfuscation techniques for metamorphic viruses, J. Comput. Virol. 4 (3) (2008) 211–220. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

45. F.T. Sheldon, V. Vishik, Moving toward trustworthy systems: R&D essentials, IEEE Comput. Mag. (2010) 31–40. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

46. W. Stallings, Cryptography and Network Security Principles and Practices, third edition, Pearson Educations, 2010. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

47. E. Cole, R. Krutz, J. Conley, Network Security Bible, second edition, Wiley Publishing, 2011. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

48. T. Rubya, N. Prema Latha, B. Sangeetha, A survey on recent security trends using quantum cryptography, IJCSE 2 (9) (2010) 3038–3042. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

49. E.S. Pilli, R.C. Joshi, R. Niyogi, Network forensic frameworks: Survey and research challenges, Dig. Investigation (Int’l. J. Dig. Investigation) (2010), in press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

50. A. Almulhem, I. Traore, Experience with engineering a network forensics system, in: C. Kim (Ed.), ICOIN 2005, in: Lect. Notes Comput. Sci., vol. 3391, Springer, Heidelberg, 2005, pp. 62–71. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

51. B.J. Nikkel, A portable network forensic evidence collector, Dig. Investigation (Int’l. J. Dig. Investigation) 3 (3) (2006) 127–135. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

52. A. Mairh, D. Barik, K. Verma, D. Jena, Honeypot in network security: a survey, in: ICCCS, 2011, pp. 600–605. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

53. F. Fischer, F. Mansmann, D.A. Keim, S. Pietzko, M. Waldvogel, Large-scale network monitoring for visual analysis of attacks, in: [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

54. J.R. Goodall, G.J. Conti, K.-L. Ma (Eds.), VizSEC, in: Lect. Notes Comput. Sci., vol. 5210, Springer, 2008, pp. 111–118. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

55. M. Vrable, J. Ma, J. Chen, D. Moore, E. Vandekieft, A. Snoeren, G. Voelker, S. Savage, Scalability, fidelity and containment in the Potemkin virtual honeyfarm, in: Proceedings of the 2005 Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, October 2005. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

56. H.K. Lu, A. Ali, Communication security between a computer and hardware token, in: ICONS 2008, pp. 220–225. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

57. F. Aloul, S. Zahidi, W. El-Hajj, Two factor authentication using mobile phones, in: IEEE International Conference on Computer Systems and Applications (AICCSA), Rabat, Morocco, May 2009. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

58. D. Ilett, US bank gives two-factor authentication to millions of customers, available at http://www.silicon.com/financialservices/0,3800010322,39153981, 00.htm, 2005. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

59. D. de Borde, Two-factor authentication, Siemens Enterprise Communications UK-Security Solutions, available at http://www.insight.co.uk/files/ whitepapers/Twofactor authentication (White paper).pdf, 2008. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

60. J. Bringer, H. Chabanne, An authentication protocol with encrypted biometric data, in: AFRICACRYPT, in: Lect. Notes Comput. Sci., 2008, pp. 109–124. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

61. M.K. Khan, J.S. Zhang, X.M. Wang, Chaotic hash-based fingerprint biometric remote user authentication scheme on mobile devices, Chaos Solutions & Fractals 35 (2008) 519–524. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

62. G. Coker, J. Guttman, P. Loscocco, J. Sheehy, B. Sniffen, Attestation: Evidence and trust, in: ICICS ’08, 2008, pp. 1–18. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

63. J. Jang, H. Hwang, S. Nepal, Biometric enabled portable trusted computing platform, in: TurstCom 2011, pp. 436–442. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

64. The CERT guide to insider threats: How to prevent, detect, and respond to theft of critical information, sabotage, and fraud, www.cert.org/ archive/pdf/insidercross051105.pdf. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

65. J. Hunker, C.W. Probst, Insiders and insider threats—An overview of definitions and mitigation techniques, J. Wireless Mobile Netw. Ubiquitous Comput. Dependable Appl. 2 (1) (2011) 4–27. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

66. P. Guarda, N. Zannone, Towards the Development of Privacy-Aware Systems, Information and Software Technology, 2008. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

67. K. Dahbur, B. Mohammad, A.B. Tarakji, A survey of risks, threats and vulnerabilities in cloud computing, 2011, pp. 12–18. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

68. H. Takabi, J. Joshi, G. Ahn, Security and privacy challenges in cloud computing environments, IEEE Secur. Priv. (2010) 24–31. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

69. Q. Zhang, L. Cheng, R. Boutaba, Cloud computing: state-of-the-art and research challenges, J. Internet Serv. Appl. 1 (2010) 7–18. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

70. M.T. Louw, J.S. Lim, V.N. Venkatakrishnan, Extensible web browser security, in: B.M. Hammerli, R. Sommer (Eds.), DIMVA, in: Lect. Notes Comput. Sci., vol. 4579, Springer, 2007, pp. 1–19. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

71. C. Soghoian, A remote vulnerability in Firefox extensions, http://paranoia.dubfire.net/2007/05/remote-vulnerability-in- firefox.html, last accessed: June 2013. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

72. C. Reis, A. Barth, C. Pizano, Browser security: lessons from google chrome, Commun. ACM 52 (2009) 45–49. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

73. P. Koopman, Embedded system security, IEEE Comput. 37 (7) (2004) 95–97. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

74. S. Parameswaran, T. Wolf, Embedded systems security – an overview: DAES 2008, vol. 12, pp. 173–183, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10617- 008-9027-x. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

75. J.P. Walters, Z. Liang, Wireless sensor network security: A survey, in: Y. Xiao (Ed.), Security in Distributed, Grid, and Pervasive Computing, Auerbach Publications, CRC Press, 2006. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

76. Y. Zhou, Y. Fang, Y. Zhang, Securing wireless sensor networks: a survey, IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 10 (3) (2008) 6–28. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

77. S.J. Collier, A. Lakoff, The vulnerability of vital systems: How “critical infrastructure” became a security problem, in: Critical Infrastructure, Risk and (In)security, 2008, pp. 17–39. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

78. C.W. Ten, Cybersecurity for critical infrastructures: Attack and defense modeling, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 40 (4) (2010) 853–865. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

79. Critical infrastructure protection report, Government Accountability Office, Washington, DC, May 2005. [Online]. Available: http://www.gao.gov/new. items/d05434.pdf, last accessed: June 2013. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

80. J.M. Weiss, Control systems cybersecurity–maintaining the reliability of the critical infrastructure, in: Testimony of Joseph M. Weiss Control Sys- tems Cybersecurity Expert before the House Government Reform Committee’s Subcommittee on Technology, Information Policy, Intergovernmental Relations, and the Census U.S. House of Representatives, Mar. 30, 2004. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

81. W.L. McGill, B.M. Ayyub, The meaning of vulnerability in the context of critical infrastructure protection, in: Critical Infrastructure Protection: Elements of Risk, School of Laws, George Mason Univ., Arlington, VA, Dec. 2007. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

82. S. Abraham, I.S. Chengalur-Smith, An overview of social engineering malware: Trends, tactics, and implications, Technol. Soc. 32 (2010) 183–196. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

83. M. Feily, A. Shaherestani, S. Ramadass, A survey of botnet and botnet detection, in: SECURWARE 2009, pp. 268–273. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

84. M. Bailey, E. Cooke, F. Jahanian, et al., A survey of botnet technology and defense, in: CATCH 2009, pp. 299–304. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

85. Z. Zhu, G. Lu, Y. Chen, et al., Botnet research survey, in: COMPSAC 2008, pp. 967–972. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

86. C. LI, W. Jiang, X. Zou, Botnet: survey and case study, in: ICICIC 2009, pp. 1184–1187. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

87. S. Nepal, J. Zic, D. Liu, J. Jang, Trusted computing platform in your pocket, in: ECU 2010, pp. 812–817,. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

88. R. Sailer, X. Zhang, T. Jaeger, L. van Doorn, Design and implementation of a TCG-based integrity measurement architecture, SSYM 2004,. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

89. M. Johnson, S. Egelman, S. Bellovin, Facebook and privacy: it’s complicated, in: Proc. SOUPS 2012, ACM, 2012. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

90. C. Dwyer, S. Hiltz, K. Passerini, Trust and privacy concern within social networking sites: A comparison of Facebook and MySpace, in: Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS), Keystone, Colorado, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

91. R. Gross, A. Acquisti, Information revelation and privacy in online social networks (the Facebook case), in: Proceedings of the 2005 ACM Workshop on Privacy in the Electronic Society, 2005, pp. 71– 80. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

92. G. Hogben, Security issues and recommendations for online social networks, in: Position Paper. ENISA, European Network and Information Security Agency, 2007. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

93. R.C. Clark, Cyber War, Ecco, 2010. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

94. D. Weitzner, et al., Information accountability, Commun. ACM 51 (6) (2008) 82–87. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

95. J. Yao, S. Chen, C. Wang, Accountability as a service for the cloud, in: SCC 2010, pp. 81–88. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

96. S. Egelman, J. King, R.C. Miller, N. Ragouzis, E. Shehan, Security user studies: methodologies and best practices, in: CHI 2007, http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/ 1240866.1241089. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

97. J. Wang, J.N. Whitley, R.C.W. Phan, Unified parametrizable attack tree, J. Inform. Security Res. (IJISR) 1 (1) (2011) 20–26. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

98. A. John, T. Sivakumar, Ddos: Survey of traceback methods, in: IJRTE, 2009. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

99. B. Kordy, M. Pouly, P. Shweitzer, Computational aspects of attack- defense trees, in: SIIS 2011, in: Lect. Notes Comput. Sci., vol. 7053, 2012, pp. 103–116. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

100. L.F. Cranor, S. Garfinkel (Eds.), Security and Usability: Designing Secure Systems that People Can Use, O’Reilly Media, 2005. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

101. L.F. Cranor, S. Garfinkel, Secure or usable?, IEEE Secur. Priv. 2 (2004) 16–18. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

102. global -e-commerce-sales-asia-factors-big/, last accessed: June 2013. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

103. S.M. Bellovin, D.D. Clark, A. Perrig, D. Song, A clean-slate design for the next-generation secure internet, National Science Foundation, Tech. Rep., Mar. 2005. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

104. A. Feldmann, Internet clean-slate design: What and why?, Comput. Commun. Rev. 37 (3) (2007) 59–64. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

105. M. Conti, S. Chong, S. Fdida, W. Jia, H. Karl, Y.-D. Lin, P. Mahonen, M. Maier, R. Molva, S. Uhlig, M. Zukerman, Research challenges towards the Future Internet, Comput. Commun. 34 (18) (2011) 2115–2134. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

106. S. Paul, J. Pan, R. Jain, Architectures for the future networks and the next generation Internet: A survey, Comput. Commun. 34 (1) (2011) 2–42. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

107. S. Furnell, Making security usable: Are things improving?, Comput. Secur. 26 (6) (2007) 434–443. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

108. B.D. Payne, W.K. Edwards, A brief introduction to usable security, IEEE Internet Comput. 12 (2008) 13–21. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

109. E.E. Schultz, Where have the worms and viruses gone? New trends in malware, Comput. Fraud Secur. 2006 (7) (2006) 4–8. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

110. U. Bayer, I. Habibi, D. Balzarotti, E. Kirda, C. Kruegel, A view on current malware behaviours, in: USENIX Workshop on Large-Scale Exploits and Emergent Threats (LEET), April 2009. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

111. G. Cluley, Sizing up the malware threat-key malware trends for 2010, Netw. Secur. (2010), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1353-4858(10)70045-3. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

112. http://gocsi.com/sites/default/files/uploads/2007_CSI_Survey_full- color_no marks.indd_.pdf, last accessed: June 2013. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

113. P. García-Teodoroa, J. Díaz-Verdejoa, G. Maciá-Fernándeza, E. Vázquez, Anomaly-based network intrusion detection: Techniques, systems and chal- lenges, Comput. Secur. 28 (1–2) (2009) 18–28. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

114. W. Hasselbring, R. Reussner, Toward trustworthy software systems, Computer 39 (4) (2006) 91–92, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MC.2006.142. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

115. L.M.R. Gadelha Jr., B. Clifford, M. Mattoso, M. Wilde, Provenance management in Swift, Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 27 (6) (2011) 775–780. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

116. L. Moreau, J. Freire, J. Futrelle, R.E. McGrath, J. Myers, P. Poulson, The open provenance model, http://openprovenance.org/, last accessed: June 2013. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

117. K.-K. Muniswamy-Reddy, D.A. Holland, U.B.M.I. Seltzer, Provenance-aware storage systems, in: Proc. USENIX Conf., Usenix, 2006, pp. 43–56. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

118. N.R. Mathiasen, S. Bodker, Experiencing security in interaction design, in: Proc. CHI 2011, 2011, pp. 2325–2334. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

119. L. Barkhuus, The mismeasurement of privacy: using contextual integrity to reconsider privacy in HCI, in: Proc. CHI 2012, 2012, pp. 367–376. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

120. M.Y. Ivory, M.A. Hearst, The state of the art in automating usability evaluation of user interfaces, ACM Comput. Surv. 33 (2001) 470–516. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

121. M. Madden, Privacy management on social media sites, http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2012/Privacy-management-on-social-media.aspx, February 2012. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

122. J. Pan, S. Paul, R. Jain, A survey of the research on future Internet architectures, IEEE Commun. Mag. 49 (7) (2011) 26–36. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

123. H.P. Bui, J. Cox, S. Theobald, S. Wiegand, Trustworthy IT systems, trustworthy.googlecode.com/svn-history/r27/trunk/tex/doc.pdf, 2012. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

124. S. Ding, X.J. Ma, S.L. Yang, A software trustworthiness evaluation model using objective weight based evidential reasoning approach, Knowl. Inf. Syst. 33 (2012) 171–189. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

125. T. Eze, R. Anthony, C. Walshaw, A. Soper, A new architecture for trustworthy autonomic systems, in: EMERGING 2012, 2012, pp. 62–68. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

126. A. Casimiro, P. Verissimo, D. Kreutz, TRONE: Trustworthy and resilient operations in a network environment, in: Proc. Dependable Sys. and Networks Workshops, 2012, pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

127. R. Maas, E. Maehle, Applying the organic robot control architecture ORCA to cyber-physical systems, in: Proc. SEAA, 2012, pp. 250–257. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

128. H.S. Lim, G. Ghinita, E. Bertino, A game theoretic approach for high-assurance of data trustworthiness in sensor networks, in: Proc. ICDE, 2012, pp. 1192–1203. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

129. M.A.P. Leandro, T.J. Nascimento, Multi-tenancy authorization system with federated identity for cloud-based environments using shibboleth, in: Proc. ICN, 2012, pp. 88–93. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

130. J. Jensen, Federated identity management challenges, in: Proc. ARES, 2012, pp. 230–235. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

131. D.W. Chadwick, M. Hibbert, Towards automated trust establishment in federated identity management, in: C. Fernandez- Gago, et al. (Eds.), IFIPTM 2013, in: IFIP AICT, vol. 401, 2013, pp. 33–48. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

132. S. Mathew, M. Petropoulos, H.Q. Ngo, A data-centric approach to insider attack detection in database systems, in: RAID 2010, in: Lect. Notes Comput. Sci., vol. 6307, 2010, pp. 382–401. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Advanced Digital Communication Strategies: A Comprehensive Analysis
• Developing an Explainable AI System for Digital Forensics: Enhancing Trust and Transparency in Flagging Events for Legal Evidence
• The Global Impact of Government Censorship on Women’s Access to Information: A Literature Review
• "Reimagining Higher Education Workspaces: A Review on The Transformative Role of Digital Technology Adoption"
• Improved CSP Efficiency: Innovations and Challenges in Thermal Energy Storage Systems