Inte Integrating Subjectiv grating Subjective T Trust into ust into Netw Network orked Infrastructures d Infrastructures Mark D. Heileman, Ph.D., Modus Operandi, Inc. Gregory L. Heileman, Ph.D., AHS Engineering Services Jong S. Hwang, Air Force Research Laboratory P Prepared for SSTC 2009 – 22 April 2009 d f SSTC 2009 22 A il 2009 SSTC 2009 Slide 1 of 32
Acknowledgements The information presented is the result of work on a Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Phase I project. This work was funded in whole or in part by Department of the Air Force C Contract FA8650-08-M-1441. FA8650 08 M 1441 The Air Force Research Laboratory’s Distributed Collaborative Sensor System Technology Branch (AFRL/RYTC) personnel provided guidance and support for the project support for the project. SSTC 2009 Slide 2 of 32
Presentation Agenda Objectives Progress Requirements Demonstrations Recommendations Discussion What we were trying to solve (Objectives). What we did (Progress). What the results were (Requirements). How we did it (Demonstrations). What we learned from the project What we learned from the project (Recommendations). Questions and comments (Discussion). SSTC 2009 Slide 3 of 32
OSD08-IA4: Assuring Trust between the Edges Objectives Progress Requirements Demonstrations Recommendations Discussion Phase I Vision: Investigate and propose an architecture to determine/measure and convey the trust level of the various elements in a th t t l l f th i l t i distributed or federated network. Provide architectural and design documents of a system architectural and design documents of a system concept that demonstrates the feasibility of the concept. p SSTC 2009 Slide 4 of 32
Phase I Research Objectives Objectives Progress Requirements Demonstrations Recommendations Discussion 1. Investigate and propose an architecture for determining and conveying trust to the various determining and conveying trust to the various elements in a GIG-like architecture. (from call) 2. Provide architectural and design documents of a 2. Provide architectural and design documents of a system that demonstrate feasibility. (from call) 3. Further validate our approach through a pp g prototype that exhibits some initial functionality. SSTC 2009 Slide 5 of 32
Progress Review Objectives Progress Requirements Demonstrations Recommendations Discussion Task 1: Ontology Creation Task 2: Decision Support Task 3: HW/SW Technologies Support Task 4: Trust Services Task 5: Prototype Development Task 6: Final Technical Report Task 6: Final Technical Report SSTC 2009 Slide 6 of 32
Proposed Solution Objectives Progress Requirements Demonstrations Recommendations Discussion Green Wave – an open architectural framework for determining and conveying trust to the various elements in a GIG-like network. l t i GIG lik t k Features: • Flexible distributed architectural framework for experimenting with trust. h • Use of semantic technologies incorporated into a hybrid-based trust management system. h b id b d t t t t SSTC 2009 Slide 7 of 32
Proposed Solution Objectives Progress Requirements Demonstrations Recommendations Discussion E Environment for trust i f SSTC 2009 Slide 8 of 32
Architectural Requirements Review Objectives Progress Requirements Demonstrations Recommendations Discussion Driving requirement: Reasoning about trust computationally means we need a machine conveyable & actionable measure for conveyable & actionable measure for trust . This implies: A (formal) model for trust (what p ( ) ( computers need). This requires: A method for expressing the trust model (a policy language). d l ( li l ) This allows: the calculation of a trust measure. This supports: the use of trust in decision Thi t th f t t i d i i making (beyond the scope of this proposal). SSTC 2009 Slide 9 of 32
Architectural Requirements Review Objectives Progress Requirements Demonstrations Recommendations Discussion Requirement 1. Trust Measure. The trust measure must be quantifiable, allowing for different levels of trust. trust. Requirement 2. Method for Expressing and Calculating Trust. Trust policies must be expressible in a form that can be used by a network ibl i f th t b d b t k entity to calculate a trust measure. Requirement 3 Use of Trust in Decision- Requirement 3. Use of Trust in Decision Making. Ultimately, we want to have some policy for detailing how trust measures should be used in decision-making. decision making � Beyond the scope of the current research. � Important to recognize this requirement, as it provides the moti ation fo the calc lation of t the motivation for the calculation of trust to begin with. st to begin ith SSTC 2009 Slide 10 of 32
Architectural Design – Trust Model Objectives Progress Requirements Demonstrations Recommendations Discussion Trust Sources – all trust in a system emanates from identifiable trust sources � certification authorities � certification authorities � peer assessments Dynamic – trust evolves over time y � as new information is obtained � as resources change their behavior Evidence-based – observable actions (or lack E id b d b bl ti ( l k thereof) are the basis for direct trust measures Composable Composable – ability to combine trust ability to combine trust measures from different network elements allows for indirect trust measures SSTC 2009 Slide 11 of 32
Prototype Demonstrations Objectives Progress Requirements Demonstrations Recommendations Discussion 1. Demonstration of how semantic technologies, trust policies, trust calculations, and decision making can be integrated in Trust Evaluation ki b i t t d i T t E l ti Architecture 2. Demonstration of how these technologies can be implemented in a next generation be implemented in a next-generation networking infrastructure. SSTC 2009 Slide 12 of 32
Demonstration Scenario Objectives Progress Requirements Demonstrations Recommendations Discussion Use Case 5 (from kickoff briefing): Proximate sensors in a sensor network are providing disparate information. Which sensors do you believe? A information. Which sensors do you believe? A functioning sensor can provide spurious values. Are there really chemical weapons on the battlefield? More importantly can we account for battlefield? More importantly, can we account for the trust (and provenance) of information within the decision-making framework? Can we show that a “downstream” decision relies on a few facts that “d t ” d i i li f f t th t have low trust? Elaboration of Use Case 5 – Perimeter monitoring Elaboration of Use Case 5 Perimeter monitoring system with two sensor networks using semantic technology in trust management. SSTC 2009 Slide 13 of 32
Use Case 5 – UML Objectives Progress Requirements Demonstrations Recommendations Discussion SSTC 2009 Slide 14 of 32
Use Case 5: Sensor Networks Objectives Progress Requirements Demonstrations Recommendations Discussion Perimeter Monitoring System Trust Calculation Trust Polic Policy Trust Calculation Trust Calculation Trust Trust Policy Policy NW NE Chemical Sensors Ch i l S M ti Motion Sensors S Sensor Network Sensor Network SSTC 2009 Slide 15 of 32
Semantic Technology & Trust Objectives Progress Requirements Demonstrations Recommendations Discussion Harmonization Chemical Sensor Motion Sensor Sensor Sensor Capability Capability � Event Capture � Event Capture � Chemical Detection Chemical Detection � Motion Detection Motion Detection Common Vocabulary y SSTC 2009 Slide 16 of 32
Semantic Technology & Trust Objectives Progress Requirements Demonstrations Recommendations Discussion Semantic Assistance in Policies Trust Calculation T Trust t Policy Concepts Concepts • Sensor • Sensor S S • Capability • Capability • Event Capture • Event Capture • Chemical Chemical • Motion Motion NW NE Chemical Sensors Chemical Sensors Motion Sensors Motion Sensors Sensor Network Sensor Network SSTC 2009 Slide 17 of 32
Use Case 5: Activity Diagram Objectives Progress Requirements Demonstrations Recommendations Discussion SSTC 2009 Slide 18 of 32
Demonstration 1 Objectives Progress Requirements Demonstrations Recommendations Discussion Fuel Depot at Cape Canaveral AFS � Sensor Network A – chemical sensors � Sensor Network B – satellite data S N t k B t llit d t Front-end involves integration with geospatial data to incorporate proximity into trust policies data to incorporate proximity into trust policies. Makes use of Web Information Quality Assessment (WIQA) Framework for the policy Assessment (WIQA) Framework for the policy language. Represents the trust ontology using the TriG Represents the trust ontology using the TriG syntax. SSTC 2009 Slide 19 of 32
Recommend
More recommend
