Difference between revisions of "Abera2016"

From ACES

m (Default pdf)
 
(2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{publication
{{publication
|entry=inproceedings
|author=Tigist Abera and N. Asokan and Lucas Davi and Farinaz Koushanfar and Andrew Paverd and Ahmad-Reza Sadeghi and Gene Tsudik
|author=Tigist Abera and N. Asokan and Lucas Davi and Farinaz Koushanfar and Andrew Paverd and Ahmad-Reza Sadeghi and Gene Tsudik
|keywords=Internet of Thing, Remote Attestation, Trust Establishment
|abstract=<p>The emerging and much-touted Internet of Things (IoT) presents a variety of security and privacy challenges. Prominent among them is the establishment of trust in remote IoT devices, which is typically attained via remote attestation, a distinct security service that aims to ascertain the current state of a potentially compromised remote device. Remote attestation ranges from relatively heavy-weight secure hardware-based techniques, to light-weight software-based ones, and also includes approaches that blend software (e.g., control-flow integrity) and hardware features (e.g., PUFs). In this paper, we survey the landscape of state-of-the-art attestation techniques from the IoT device perspective and argue that most of them have a role to play in IoT trust establishment.</p>
|month=6
|year=2016
|booktitle=Design Automation Conference (DAC)
|booktitle=Design Automation Conference (DAC)
|title=Things, Trouble, Trust: On Building Trust in IoT Systems
|title=Things, Trouble, Trust: On Building Trust in IoT Systems
|keywords=Internet of Thing, Remote Attestation, Trust Establishment
|entry=inproceedings
|abstract=<p>The emerging and much-touted Internet of Things (IoT) presents a variety of security and privacy challenges. Prominent among them is the establishment of trust in remote IoT devices, which is typically attained via remote attestation, a distinct security service that aims to ascertain the current state of a potentially compromised remote device. Remote attestation ranges from relatively heavy-weight secure hardware-based techniques, to light-weight software-based ones, and also includes approaches that blend software (e.g., control-flow integrity) and hardware features (e.g., PUFs). In this paper, we survey the landscape of state-of-the-art attestation techniques from the IoT device perspective and argue that most of them have a role to play in IoT trust establishment.</p>
|pdf=Abera2016.pdf
}}
}}

Latest revision as of 17:28, 9 November 2021

Abera2016
entryinproceedings
address
annote
authorTigist Abera and N. Asokan and Lucas Davi and Farinaz Koushanfar and Andrew Paverd and Ahmad-Reza Sadeghi and Gene Tsudik
booktitleDesign Automation Conference (DAC)
chapter
edition
editor
howpublished
institution
journal
month6
note
number
organization
pages
publisher
school
series
titleThings, Trouble, Trust: On Building Trust in IoT Systems
type
volume
year2016
doi
issn
isbn
url
pdfAbera2016.pdf

File:Abera2016.pdf

Icon-email.png
Email:
farinaz@ucsd.edu
Icon-addr.png
Address:
Electrical & Computer Engineering
University of California, San Diego
9500 Gilman Drive, MC 0407
Jacobs Hall, Room 6401
La Jolla, CA 92093-0407
Icon-addr.png
Lab Location: EBU1-2514
University of California San Diego
9500 Gilman Dr, La Jolla, CA 92093