GridAdmin: Decentralising Grid Administration Using Trust Management

Quillinan, Thomas B.; Clayton, Brian C.; Foley, Simon N.

doi:10.1109/ispdc.2004.28

Cited by 9 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, more automated approaches are desired in large-scale environments. GridAdmin [119] replaces Globus X.509 security certificate with Trust Management using KeyNote ( [63], [64], [65]) to support automation of repetitive administrative functions. Trust Management credentials are developed to hold associated abilities based on application specific.…”

Section: A Policy-and Credential-based Trustmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…CAT 1 (GSI, 1998) [106] (CAS, 2002) [108] (PRIMA, 2003) [109] (VOMS, 2003) [110] ( Moodahi et al, 2004) [57] (GTS, 2007) [111] ( Pan et al, 2006) [112] (Warner et al, 2007) [113] (Koshutanski, and Mana, 2010) [114] ISO 7498-2 (Ahmed and Tripathi, 2002) [115] (Naqvi, 2006) [116] [117], [118] (GridAdmin, 2004) [119] (iAccess, 2009) [120] ( [121] ( Uddin et al, 2009) [125] (PowerTrust, 2006) [129] (TRMS, 2002) [131], [132] ( Dyson et al, 2004) [133] (PeerTrust, 2004) [139] ( Constandache et al, 2005) [140] (TrustBuilder, 2003(TrustBuilder, , 2009 [141], [ [49] (PathTrust, 2007) [152] (TVDs, 2005) [153] ( Gaeta et al, 2004) [155] (TrustCom, 2004) [156] (Svirskas et al, 2005) [157] ( Koshutanski, 2009) …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Survey of Trust in Workflows and Relevant Contexts

Viriyasitavat

Martin

2011

IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutorials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With the fast-growing Internet technology, several service-based interactions are prevalent and appear in several forms such as e-commerce, content provider, Virtual Organizations, Peer-to-Peer, Web Service, Grids, Cloud Computing, and individual interactions. This demands for an effective mechanism to establish trust among participants in a highlevel abstract way, capturing relevant factors ranging on Service Level Agreement, security policies, requirements, regulations, constraints, Quality of Service, reputation, and recommendation. Trust is platform-independent and flexible to be seamlessly integrated into heterogeneous domains and interoperate with different security solutions in distributed environments. Establishing trust in a service workflow leads to the willingness of services to participate. Coordinating service workflows without trust consideration may pose higher risks, possibly results in poor performance, additional vulnerabilities, or failures. Although trust in service workflows and relevant contexts has been studied for a past decade, the standard development is still immature. Nowadays, trust approaches to service workflows comprise a large area of research where one can hardly classify into a comprehensive survey. This survey examines and explores the role of trust in service workflows and their contexts from a wide variety of literatures. Various mechanisms, architecture, techniques, standards, and frameworks are explained along the way with discussions. Working trust definition and classification are newly provided and supported with examples.

show abstract

Section: A Policy-and Credential-based Trustmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Survey of Trust in Workflows and Relevant Contexts

Viriyasitavat

Martin

2011

IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutorials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Penalties can be as simple as terminating the current agreement and finding a different provider, or more complex reputation or monetary based penalties [12]. These penalties are commonly used for service provisioning [13].…”

Section: Penalising Violationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Secure Monitoring of Service Level Agreements

Clark

Warnier

Brazier

et al. 2010

2010 International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-Service Level Agreements (SLA) are commonly used to define terms and conditions of service provisioning. WS-Agreement1 is an SLA specification that addresses the need of both producers and consumers of services to specify and negotiate terms and conditions of access to these services. This specification has gained wide acceptance in both the Grid computing and Web Services communities. WS-Agreement includes support for both negotiating and specifying penalties that arise from violation of these terms and conditions. It does not, however, include support for monitoring these agreements to determine if any such violations have occurred and, if so, determining which parties are responsible. This paper proposes a framework and design for secure and reliable monitoring of WS-Agreement specified SLAs. Modifications to WS-Agreement are necessary for effective monitoring. These modifications are outlined, along with an implementation of the framework in the AgentScape middleware system.

show abstract

“…Penalties can be as simple as terminating the current agreement and finding a different provider, or more complex reputation or monetary based penalties [11]. These penalties are commonly used for service provisioning [6].…”

Section: Violations and Penaltiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Negotiation and Monitoring of Service Level Agreements

Quillinan

Clark

Warnier

et al. 2010

Grids and Service-Oriented Architectures for Service Level Agreements

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Service level agreements (SLAs) provide a means to define specific Quality of Service (QoS) guarantees between providers and consumers of services. Negotiation and definition of these QoS characteristics is an area of significant research. However, defining the actions that take place when an agreement is violated is a topic of more recent focus. This paper discusses recent advances in this field and propose some additional features that can help both consumers and producers during the enactment of services. These features include the ability to (re)negotiate penalties in an agreement, and specifically focuses on the renegotiation of penalties during enactment to reflect ongoing violations.

show abstract

GridAdmin: Decentralising Grid Administration Using Trust Management

Cited by 9 publications

References 24 publications

A Survey of Trust in Workflows and Relevant Contexts

A Survey of Trust in Workflows and Relevant Contexts

Secure Monitoring of Service Level Agreements

Negotiation and Monitoring of Service Level Agreements

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About