2005
DOI: 10.1007/11429760_9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Representation Model of Trust Relationships with Delegation Extensions

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
16
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2009
2009

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

2
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
0
16
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We define the type of credential to include all the properties that are not essential, but which are helpful, to define Authorization and Delegation. This separation of concepts was previously proposed in [1], but we extend it here to include more general information, in particular, information regarding the context.…”
Section: Typementioning
confidence: 97%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…We define the type of credential to include all the properties that are not essential, but which are helpful, to define Authorization and Delegation. This separation of concepts was previously proposed in [1], but we extend it here to include more general information, in particular, information regarding the context.…”
Section: Typementioning
confidence: 97%
“…Suppose we have a credential with type [0, 5], then we could derive new credentials with a lower type, e.g. [1,4].…”
Section: Typementioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is a number in the interval [0,1]. A credential with weight zero is equivalent to a null credential.…”
Section: Weighted Trust Graphmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Those metrics help us to measure the relative authorization power of different paths. It only uses monotone metrics (for motivation, see [1]). Some examples of metrics are:…”
Section: Weighted Trust Graphmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation