1 / 19

Secure Proactive Recovery – a Hardware Based Mission Assurance Scheme

Secure Proactive Recovery – a Hardware Based Mission Assurance Scheme. 6 th  International Conference on Information Warfare and Security, 2011. Outline. Structure. Motivation. Threat model. System design. Performance analysis. Conclusion. Motivation. Mission assurance Goals

beck
Download Presentation

Secure Proactive Recovery – a Hardware Based Mission Assurance Scheme

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Secure Proactive Recovery – a Hardware Based Mission Assurance Scheme 6th International Conference on Information Warfare and Security, 2011

  2. Outline Structure Motivation Threat model System design Performance analysis Conclusion

  3. Motivation • Mission assurance • Goals • Survivability • Security • Fault tolerance • Low cost (Time overhead) • Adaptation and evolution • Feasibility study • Long running applications • Prevention  Detection  Recovery • Hardware-based • Smart defender

  4. Outline Structure Motivation Threat model System design Performance analysis Conclusion

  5. Threat Model

  6. The Quiet Invader • Smart attacker • Make decisions to maximize the potential of achieving their objectives based on dynamic information • Quiet invader • Camouflages to buy more time • Plan to attack mission during critical stage (Why?) • Example: • Long running countdown for a space shuttle launch that runs for several hours

  7. Outline Structure Motivation Threat model System design Performance analysis Conclusion

  8. Replica 3 Coordinator Workload Workload Workload Workload Workload Replica 1 Replica 2 Replica 3 Replica n R R R R Hardware Signature Hardware Signature Hardware Signature Hardware Signature Hardware Signature C C C C Periodic checkpoint Periodic checkpoint H H H H Periodic checkpoint Periodic checkpoint Periodic checkpoint

  9. Hardware Signature Generation IDS System reg

  10. Outline Structure Motivation Threat model System design Performance analysis Conclusion

  11. Performance Analysis • Cases • Case 1: Systems with no checkpointing • Case 2: Systems with checkpointing, no failures/attacks • Case 3: Systems with checkpointing, failures/attacks • Workload • Java SciMark 2.0 benchmark workloads: FFT, SOR, Sparse, LU • Multi-step simulation based evaluation approach[Reference: Mehresh, R., Upadhyaya, S. and Kwiat, K. (2010) “A Multi-Step Simulation Approach Toward Fault Tolerant system Evaluation”, ThirdInternational Workshop on Dependable Network Computing and Mobile Systems, October]

  12. Results

  13. Table 1: Execution Times (in hours) for the Scimark workloads across three cases Results Table : Execution times (in hours) for the Scimark workloads for the three cases

  14. Results

  15. Results

  16. Results Table : Approximate optimal checkpoint interval values and their corresponding workload execution times for LU (Case 3) at different values of M

  17. Outline Structure Motivation Threat model System design Performance analysis Conclusion

  18. Conclusion • Low cost solution to secure proactive recovery • Mission survivability • Utilized redundant hardware • Small overhead in absence of failures • Effective preventive measure • Future work • To evaluate this scheme for a distributed system

  19. Thank You !!

More Related