Upload
altessa
View
23
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Articulating Subjective Trust-Based Decision Strategies Utilizing the Reputation-Policy Trust Management Service. Y. Zetuny, G. Terstyanszky, S. Winter, P. Kacsuk Centre for Parallel Computing Cavendish School of Informatics University of Westminster. Trust Management. OVERVIEW - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
University of Westminster – www.cpc.wmin.ac.uk
Y. Zetuny, G. Terstyanszky, S. Winter, P. Kacsuk
Centre for Parallel ComputingCavendish School of Informatics
University of Westminster
Articulating Subjective Trust-Based Decision Strategies Utilizing the Reputation-Policy Trust Management Service
OVERVIEW Research Background Reputation-Policy Based Trust in Grid computing Reputation-Policy Trust Model Grid Reputation-Policy Trust Management Service
Architecture Test bed deployment, simulation & tests Summary
Trust Management
Approaches for trust management:– Static -> policy-based: Web services,
E-Commerce– Dynamic -> Reputation based: P2P, Ad-hoc
networks
Requirements for trust management:– Establishing dynamic trust evaluation of
resources to minimise risk of execution failure– Autonomic trust decision making based on
reputation evaluation strategy– Expressing reputation using policy assertions in
order to promote semantic interoperability.
Trust Management
Challenges of Trust Management Challenge No. 1:Traditional trust management in Grid computing
addresses trust through security policies.Solution:Reputation provides trust evaluation measurements in
dynamic scenarios between Grid actors and resources.Challenge No. 2:Grid actors are not able to calculate the trust value of a
Grid resource by specifying their own trust evaluation criteria and they are obliged to rely on a community reputation algorithm to compute trust values.
Solution:Combining policy framework with a reputation algorithm
and allowing Grid actors to be involved in the trust and reputation evaluation process
Distributed data model: trust data is divided between Grid client and reputation
algorithm.Trust Model contains three artefacts:
◦Trust Decision Strategy (TDS) > Heuristics Trust Evaluation Model > Subjective view Trust Decision Model > Opportunistic view
◦Opinion Matrices (OM) Store and make available historical execution data
◦Correlation Process (CP) Correlates each opinion element in the TDS with its
historical ratings in the OM. Computes trust values using an Opinion Summary
Table (OST).
Reputation-Based Trust Management
Trust Decision Strategy is represented by Fuzzy Tree Model (FTM) expressing reputation-policy statements which are defined by trusting agents.
It has two branches:– Trust Evaluation Model (TEM)
• Permutation of opinions representing subjective trust building blocks (e.g. availability, reliability, cost, etc).
– Trust Decision Model (TDM)• Potential trust value calculation outcomes and
opportunistic correspondent courses of actions.
Trust Decision Strategy
TDS = {TEM; (TDR1;TDR2; … ;TDRn)}
Trust Decision Strategy
Opinion Matrice
values are based on time series distribution, trust decay function, cut off time and weighted mean
When an execution is completed, a trusting agent evaluates the quality of the transaction on the resource and the opinion matrice stores these historical evaluation feedback values.
computed trust (fuzzy) value
MS - opinion matrice set
M(O) - opinion matrice (application or job-level)
Correlation Process (CP) It matches each opinion defined in TDS with its
historical references in the Opinion Matrices and calculating the trust value for that opinion.
Each TDS opinion type is routed via the Metrics Pool (MP) in order to return a correspondent OM.
The CP examines the opinion’s source nodes (experience, reputation) and their weight factors.
The CP generates two vectors: experience vector and reputation vector and calculates the opinion value using a standard mean:
GREPTrust’s domains:•Client Domain – Grid Client, TDS Data Store•Service Domain – Querying Manager, Feedback Manager
and Admin Manager•Data Domain – Reputation-Policy Data Store
Architecture of Reputation-Based Trust Management
Step No. 1– Grid client submits a Reputation-Policy Query (RPQ)
to the GREPTrust resource.
Step No. 2
- GREPTrust resource processes the RPQ, generates Reputation-Policy Report (RPR) and delivers it to the Grid client.
Step No. 3– The Grid client utilises the RPR in order to make a
decision on which resource(s) to submit the job to.
Steps of Reputation-Based Trust Management
STEP1: Process TDS Evaluation Model
STEP2: Process TDS Decision Model
STEP3: Generate Reputation-Policy Report
Processing a Trust Query
Trust value Trust level
INPUT OUTPUT
IF trust_value IS poor THEN trust_level IS noneIF trust_value IS good THEN trust_level IS limitedIF trust_value IS excellent THEN trust_level IS full
RULES
Trust valueIs interpreted as
{poor, good, excellent}
INPUT TERM
Trust levelIs assigned to be
{none, limited, full}
OUTPUT TERM
TDS – Fuzzy Interference Engine
<TrustEvaluationModel> <Opinions> <Opinion Type="1" Weight="0.1"> <Sources> <Source Type="Experience" Weight="0.9"/> <Source Type="Reputation" Weight="0.1"/> </Sources> </Opinion> <Opinion Type="2" Weight="0.9"> <Sources> <Source Type="Experience" Weight="0.9"/> <Source Type="Reputation" Weight="0.1"/> </Sources> </Opinion> </Opinions></TrustEvaluationModel>
Permutation of opinions
Permutation of opinions
Permutation of Sources
Permutation of Sources
Trust Evaluation Model – Opinions
Trust Decision Model – Trust Values <Fuzzifier Name="trust_value">
<Terms> <Term Name="poor">
<Points><Point X="0.0" Y="1.0" /><Point X="0.5" Y="0.0" />
</Points> </Term> <Term Name="good">
<Points><Point X="0.0" Y="0.0" /><Point X="0.5" Y="1.0" /><Point X="1.0" Y="0.0" />
</Points> </Term> <Term Name="excellent">
<Points><Point X="0.5" Y="0.0" /><Point X="1.0" Y="1.0" />
</Points> </Term>
</Terms></Fuzzifier>
Term namesTerm names
The value of the trust_value variable has to be converted into degrees of membership for themembership functions defined on the variable.
Input variableInput variable
Membership functions
Membership functions
<Defuzzifier Name="trust_level" AccumulationMethod="MAX" DefuzzificationMethod="COG" DefaultValue="0"><Terms>
<Term Name="none"><Points>
<Point X="0.0" Y="0.0" /><Point X="0.1" Y="1.0" /><Point X="0.2" Y="0.0" />
</Points> </Term> <Term Name="limited">
<Points><Point X="0.2" Y="0.0" /><Point X="0.5" Y="1.0" /><Point X="0.8" Y="0.0" />
</Points> </Term> <Term Name="full">
<Points><Point X="0.8" Y="0.0" /><Point X="0.9" Y="1.0" /><Point X="1.0" Y="0.0" />
</Points> </Term>
</Terms></Defuzzifier>
Membership functions
Membership functions
Output variableOutput variable
Trust Decision Model – Trust Levels
Trust Decision Model – Fuzzy Interference
17
IF trust_value IS poor THEN trust_level IS noneIF trust_value IS good THEN trust_level IS limitedIF trust_value IS excellent THEN trust_level IS full
trust level: 0.32
Accumulation Method: MAX
Defuziffication Method: COG
Implication Method: MINtrust value: 0.11
<GREPTrust:Report> <Resources> <Resource Id=“1" Value="0.11" Level="0.32"> <Rules> <Rule Id="3" Degree="0.0"/> <Rule Id="2" Degree="0.22"/> <Rule Id="1" Degree="0.78"/> </Rules> </Resource> <Resource Id=“2" Value="0.41" Level="0.46"> <Rules> <Rule Id="3" Degree="0.0"/> <Rule Id="2" Degree="0.82"/> <Rule Id="1" Degree="0.18"/> </Rules> </Resource> </Resources></GREPTrust:Report>
TDM: Trust Level
TDM: Trust Level
TDM: Degree membershipTDM: Degree membership
Trust Decision Model – Output
Questions