Towards a Standard for a Reliable Execution Environment for Security Protocols

Mahalingam Ramkumar

doi:10.31130/jst.2016.31

Mahalingam Ramkumar Department of Computer Science and Engineering Mississippi State University, USA

DOI: https://doi.org/10.31130/jst.2016.31

Abstract

Approaches for securing digital assets of information systems can be classified as active approaches based on attack models, and passive approaches based on system-models. Passive approaches are inherently superior to active ones. However, taking full advantage of passive approaches calls for a rigorous standard for a low-complexity-high-integrity execution environment for security protocols. We sketch broad outlines of mirror network (MN) modules, as a candidate for such a standard. Their utility in assuring real-world information systems is illustrated with examples.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

[1] Shannon, Claude (4 October 1949), “Communication Theory of Secrecy Systems,” Bell System Technical Journal 28: 662.
[2] D .D. Clark, and D. R.Wilson, “A Comparison of Commercial and Military Computer Security Policies,” in Proceedings of the 1987 IEEE Symposium on Research in Security and Privacy (SP’87), May 1987, Oakland, CA; IEEE Press, pp. 184–193.
[3] M. Ramkumar, Symmetric Cryptographic Protocols, Springer, 2014.
[4] M.Ramkumar, Mirror Network: A Holistic Approach for Assuring Information Systems, SAM 2015, Las Vegas, NV, Jul 2015.
[5] M.Ramkumar, S. Mohanty, Reliable Assurance Protocols for Information Systems, INTERNET 2015, St. Julians, Malta, Oct 2015.
[6] B.K. Atchinson, D.M. Fox, “The Politics Of The Health Insurance Portability And Accountability Act”. Health Affairs 16 (3): 146150, May 1997.
[7] http://www.consumer.ftc.gov/. 15 USC x1681, Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), September 2012.
[8] https://it.ojp.gov/privacyliberty/authorities/statutes/1285, 18 U.S.C. x2510–22, Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 (ECPA).
[9] I. Damgrd, “A Design Principle for Hash Functions,” Advances in Cryptology, CRYPTO ’89, Lecture Notes in Computer Science Vol. 435, Springer-Verlag, 1989, pp. 416-427.
[10] R. C. Merkle, “A Digital Signature Based on a Conventional Encryption Function,” Advances in Cryptology, CRYPTO ’87. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 293. 1987.
[11] V. Thotakura, and M. Ramkumar, “Minimal TCB For MANET Nodes,” 6th IEEE International Conference on Wireless and Mobile Computing, Networking and Communications (WiMob 2010), Niagara Falls, ON, Canada, September 2010.
[12] S. D. Mohanty, and M. Ramkumar, “Securing File Storage in an Untrusted Server Using a Minimal Trusted Computing Base,” First International Conference on Cloud Computing and Services Science, Noordwijkerhout, The Netherlands, May 2011.
[13] T. Leighton, S. Micali, “Secret-key AgreementWithout Public-Key Cryptography,”Advances in Cryptology - CRYPTO 1993, pp 456-479, 1994.
[14] M. Ramkumar, “On the Scalability of a “Nonscalable” Key Distribution Scheme,” IEEE SPAWN 2008, Newport Beach, CA, June 2008.
[15] P. V. Mockapetris, “Domain names - concepts and facilities,”RFC Editor, 1987.
[16] R. Arends, R. Austein, M. Larson, D. Massey, S. Rose “RFC 4033: DNS Security Introduction and Requirements,” March 2005.
[17] S. Weiler, J. Ihren, “RFC 4470: Minimally Covering NSEC Records and DNSSEC On-line Signing,” April 2006.
[18] B. Laurie, G. Sisson, R. Arends, Nominet, D. Blacka, “DNS Security (DNSSEC) Hashed Authenticated Denial of Existence,” RFC 5155, March 2008.
[19] Z. Durumeric et. al., “The Matter of Heartbleed,” IMC 2014, Vancouver, Canada, Nov 2014.
[20] J. Rushby, “Design and Verification of Secure Systems,” 8th ACM Symposium on Operating System Principles, Pacific Grove, California, US. pp. 1221, 1981.
[21] W. Stallings, L. Brown, Computer Security: Principles and Practice (3rd Edition), Pearson Inc.