Skip to main content
Log in

Context-aware trust negotiation in peer-to-peer service collaborations

  • Published:
Peer-to-Peer Networking and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Service-oriented architecture (SOA) and Software as a Service (SaaS) are the latest hot topics to software manufacturing and delivering, and attempt to provide a dynamic cross-organisational business integration solution. In a dynamic cross-organisational collaboration environment, services involved in a business process are generally provided by different organisations, and lack supports of common security mechanisms and centralized management middleware. On such occasions, services may have to achieve middleware functionalities and achieve business objectives in a pure peer-to-peer fashion. As the participating services involved in a business process may be selected and combined at run time, a participating service may have to collaborate with multiple participating services which it has no pre-existing knowledge in prior. This introduces some new challenges to traditional trust management mechanisms. Automated Trust Negotiation (ATN) is a practical approach which helps to generate mutual trust relationship for collaborating principals which may have no pre-existing knowledge about each other without in a peer-to-peer way. Because credentials often contain sensitive attributes, ATN defines an iterative and bilateral negotiation process for credentials exchange and specifies security policies that regulate the disclosure of sensitive credentials. Credentials disclosure in the iterative process may follow different orders and combinations, each of which forms a credential chain. It is practically desirable to identify the optimal credential chain that satisfies certain objectives such as minimum release of sensitive information and minimum performance penalty. In this paper we present a heuristic and context-aware algorithm for identifying the optimal chain that uses context-related knowledge to minimize 1) the release of sensitive information including both credentials and policies and 2) the cost of credentials retrieving. Moreover, our solution offers a hierarchical method for protecting sensitive policies and provides a risk-based strategy for handling credential circular dependency. We have implemented the ATN mechanisms based on our algorithm and incorporated them into the CROWN Grid middleware. Experimental results demonstrate their performance-related advantages over other existing solutions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bonatti P, Olmedilla D (2005) Driving and monitoring provisional trust negotiation with metapolicies. In: Sixth IEEE International Workshop on Policies for Distributed Systems and Networks (POLICY’05). Stockholm, Sweden, pp 14–23

  2. Skogsrud H, Benatallah B et al (2004) Trust-Serv: model-driven lifecycle management of trust negotiation policies for web services. In: Proceeding of 13th World Wide Web Conference (WWW2004). New York, NY, pp. 53–62

  3. Shinghal R (1992) Formal concepts in artificial intelligence. Chapman & Hall, Ltd., London, UK

    Google Scholar 

  4. Huai J, Hu C et al (2007) CROWN: a service grid middleware with trust management mechanism. Sci China Ser F: Inf Sci 49(6):731–758

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Schuldt H, Alonso G et al (2002) Atomicity and isolation for transactional processes. ACM Trans Database Syst 27(1):63–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bonatti PA, Samarati P (2003) A uniform famework for regulating access and information release on the web. J Comput Secur 10(3):241–271

    Google Scholar 

  7. Seamons KE, Winslett M et al (2001) Limiting the disclosure of access control policies during automated trust negotiation. In: Network and Distributed System Security Symposium (NDSS 2001). San Diego, California

  8. Chen W, Clarke L et al (2005) Optimizing cost-sensitive trust-negotiation protocols. In: Proceedings of the 24th Conference of the IEEE Communications Society (Infocom 2005). Miami, FL

  9. Winsborough WH, Seamons KE et al (1999) Negotiating disclosure of sensitive credentials. In: Second Conference on Security in Communication Networks (SCN 99). Amalfi Italy

  10. Yao D, Frikken KB et al (2006) Point-based trust: define how much privacy is worth. In: 8th International Conference of Information and Communications Security (ICICS 2006). Raleigh, NC, USA, pp 190–209

  11. Li J, Li N (2005) OACerts: oblivious attribute certificates. IEEE Trans Dependable Sec Comput 3(4):340–352

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Li J, Li N (2006) A construction for general and efficient oblivious commitment based envelope protocols. In: Information and Communications Security. Raleigh, NC, USA, pp 122–138

  13. Cornelli F, Damiani E et al (2002) Choosing reputable servents in a P2P network. In: the 11th international conference on World Wide Web. Honolulu, Hawaii, USA, pp 376–386

  14. Damiani E, Vimercati S et al (2002) A reputation-based approach for choosing reliable resources in peer-to-peer networks. In: the 9th ACM Conference on Computer & Communication Security. Washington, DC, USA, pp 207–216

  15. Kamvar SD, Schlosser MT et al (2003) The Eigentrust algorithm for reputation management in P2P networks In: Proceedings of the 12th international conference on World Wide Web. Budapest, Hungary, pp 640–651

  16. Nejdl W, Olmedilla D et al (2004) PeerTrust: supporting reputation-based trust for peer-to-peer electronic communities. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 16(7):843–857

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Dejene E, Scuturici V-M et al (2008) Hybrid approach to collaborative context-aware service platform for pervasive computing. J Comput 3(1):40–50

    Google Scholar 

  18. Nils N (1971) Problem solving methods in artificial intelligence. McGraw-Hill Book Co, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  19. Bertino E, Ferrari E et al (2004) Trust-X: a peer to peer framework for trust negotiations. IEEE Trans on Knowl Data Eng 16(7):827–841

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Yu T, Winslett XMM (2000) PRUNES: an efficient and complete strategy for automated trust negotiation over the internet. In: Conference on Computer and Communications Security(CCS00). Athens, Greece, pp 210–219

  21. Yu T (2003) Automated trust establishment in open systems. University of Illinois at. Urbana-Champaign. PhD Thesis, Isllinois

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

This work is partially supported by grants from China 863 High-tech Program (No. 2007AA01Z426, 2007AA01Z120, 2007AA010301), China 973 Fundamental R&D Program (No. 2005CB321803) and National Natural Science Funds for Distinguished Young Scholar (No. 60525209), and National Natural Science Foundation of China and the Research Grants Council of Hong Kong Joint Research Scheme (No.60731160632).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jianxin Li.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Li, J., Zhang, D., Huai, J. et al. Context-aware trust negotiation in peer-to-peer service collaborations. Peer-to-Peer Netw. Appl. 2, 164–177 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12083-009-0029-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12083-009-0029-7

Keywords

Navigation