Read-Write Abortion (RWA) Based Synchronization Protocols to Prevent Illegal Information Flow
Read-Write Abortion (RWA) Based Synchronization Protocols to Prevent Illegal Information Flow
复制标题
基于读写中止 (RWA) 的同步协议，防止非法信息流
DOI：
10.1109/nbis.2014.48
复制
发表时间：
2014
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
M. Takizawa
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Shigenari Nakamura;Dilewaer Doulikun;A. Aikebaier;T. Enokido;M. Takizawa
在信息系统中，如果事务读写对象，对象中的数据可能非法流入另一个对象。如果不允许事务读取的对象中的数据存储在对象中，则事务非法读取对象。此外，它是允许对象流向其他对象的指定数据。可疑对象是不允许流向某个对象的对象。如果对象是可疑的，则事务可疑地读取对象。如果事务T在可疑地阅读对象oi之后写入对象oj，则对象oi中的数据可能流向对象oj。这里，如果不允许从对象oi到对象oj的信息流，则事务T不可能写入对象oi。在我们以前的研究中，读中止（RA）的基于角色的同步（RA-RBS）和基于对象的同步（RA-OBS）协议进行了讨论，如果一个事务是非法读取一个对象中止。在此基础上，我们提出了基于写中止协议的WA-RBS和WA-OBS。在本文中，我们新提出了RWA-RBS和RWA-OBS协议，如果事务非法读取对象或不可能写入对象，则事务中止。我们评估的RWA-RBS和RWA-OBS协议的交易中止的数量。我们发现，在WA类型的协议中，最小数量的事务被中止。
In information systems, data in an object may illegally flow into another object if transactions read and write the objects. A transaction illegally reads an object if data in objects which the transaction is not allowed to read are stored in the object. In addition, it is specified data in which object is allowed to flow to other objects. A suspicious object is an object which is not allowed to flow to some object. A transaction suspiciously reads an object if the object is suspicious. If a transaction T writes an object oj after suspiciously reading an object oi, data in the object oi might flow to the object oj. Here, if information flow from the object oi to the object oj is not allowed, the transaction T impossibly writes the object oi. In our previous studies, the read-abortion (RA) role-based synchronization (RA-RBS) and object-based synchronization (RA-OBS) protocols are discussed where a transaction is aborted if the transaction illegally reads an object. Write-abortion (WA) based protocols WA-RBS and WA-OBS are also proposed based on abortion of transactions illegally and impossibly writing objects in our previous studies. In this paper, we newly propose RWA-RBS and RWA-OBS protocols where a transaction is aborted if the transaction illegally reads an object or impossibly writes an object. We evaluate the RWA-RBS and RWA-OBS protocols in terms of number of transactions aborted. We show the smallest number of transactions are aborted in the WA types of protocols.
DOI：
10.1109/tnsm.2013.122313.130423
发表时间：
2014-01
影响因子：
5.3
作者：
J. Bacon;D. Eyers;Thomas Pasquier;Jatinder Singh;I. Papagiannis;P. Pietzuch
通讯作者：
J. Bacon;D. Eyers;Thomas Pasquier;Jatinder Singh;I. Papagiannis;P. Pietzuch