The right type of trust for distributed systems

Abstract

Abstract.Research in information security has traditionally focused on where to place or how to propagate trust. In that sense, a cyptographic algorithm or protocol is simply a mechanism to transfer trust from where it exists to where it is needed. This paper puts the focus on trust itself and shows that it is a very complex concept with many interesting and important implications. We do not attempt to define a formal trust model, but rather examine the types of trust and trust relationships which are relevant for information security. It is shown that the existence of trust as a phenomenon depends on the existence of malicious behaviour. This observation leads to the distinction between passionate entities with human-like capabilities, and rational entities which basically are systems. Dust can then be defined as the belief that a rational entity will resist malicious manipulation or that a passionate entity will behave without malicious intent. It is also shown that trust relationships exhibit a great diversity, that they are based on knowledge and that they contain aspects in common with stmtegy games.

Research on Trust Model in Distributed Network environment

“…The subjective logic opinion proposed by Jsang [2] and others introduces the concept of evidence space and opinion space to describe and measure the trust relationship, and provides a set of subjective logic for the derivation of trust and comprehensive calculation [3][4][9][10].…”

Location-Based Social Networking: Impact on Trust in Relationships

“…The domain of trust has been studied from a variety of disciplines. Some of the landmark works in the field of computer science and related areas of study have been contributed by Marsh [ 4 ] in general computer science, Jøsang [5] in computer security, Braynov and Sandholm [6] in electronic commerce, Resnick [7] in reputation systems, Castelfranchi and Falcone [8], [9] in multi-agent systems, Snijders and Keren [10] in game theory, and Slovic [11] in risk management. Outside areas of computing, economists such as Dasgupta [12], psychologists such as Erikson [13], and sociologists such as Coleman [14] and McKnight [15] have studied trust.…”

Trust Management Survey

“…Jøsang draws our attention to being clear about the target of trust [39]. He points out that a machine or a program (a rational entity) does not trust; it only implements the trust policy given by a human (a passionate entity).…”

“…He points out that a machine or a program (a rational entity) does not trust; it only implements the trust policy given by a human (a passionate entity). On the other hand, while trusting another passionate entity concerns speculation on things such as their motives and intentions, trusting a rational entity, who only acts according to lists of commands and rules, is based on trusting its ability to withstand manipulation by a passionate entity [39]. This also implies that when placing trust in an agent, which is a rational representation of a passionate entity, i.e.…”