Personal and Ubiquitous Computing

, Volume 16, Issue 5, pp 485–506 | Cite as

TruBeRepec: a trust-behavior-based reputation and recommender system for mobile applications

Original Article


Mobile applications are software packages that can be installed and executed in a mobile device. Which mobile application is trustworthy for a user to purchase, download, install, execute or recommend becomes a crucial issue that impacts its final success. This paper proposes TruBeRepec, a trust-behavior-based reputation and recommender system for mobile applications. We explore a model of trust behavior for mobile applications based on the result of a large-scale user survey. We further develop a number of algorithms that are used to evaluate individual user’s trust in a mobile application through trust behavior observation, generate the application’s reputation by aggregating individual trust and provide application recommendations based on the correlation of trust behaviors. We show the practical significance of TruBeRepec through simulations and analysis with regard to effectiveness, robustness, and usability, as well as privacy.


Reputation systems Recommendation Trust Trust behavior Mobile applications 


  1. 1.
    Yan Z (2007) Trust management for mobile computing platforms. Dissertation, Helsinki University of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Avizienis A, Laprie JC, Randell B, Landwehr C (2004) Basic concepts and taxonomy of dependable and secure computing. IEEE Trans Dependable Secur Comput 1(1):11–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Yan Z, Dong Y, Niemi V, Yu G (2009) Exploring trust of mobile applications based on user behaviors. InTrust 2009, LNCS, pp 212–226Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    McKnight DH, Choudhury V, Kacmar C (2002) Developing and validating trust measures for e-commerce: an integrative typology. Inf Syst Res 13(3):334–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Marsh S (1994) Formalising trust as a computational concept. Dissertation, University of StirlingGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yan Z, Holtmanns S (2008) Trust modeling and management: from social trust to digital trust. In: Subramanian R (ed) Computer security, privacy and politics: current issues, challenges and solutions. Idea Group Inc, USA, pp 290–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Yan Z, Prehofer C (2010) Autonomic trust management for a component based software system. IEEE Trans Dependable Secur Comput.doi:10.1109/TDSC.2010.47
  8. 8.
    Xiong L, Liu L (2004) PeerTrust: supporting reputation-based trust for peer-to-peer electronic communities. IEEE Tran Knowl Data Eng 16(7):843–857CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Song S, Hwang K, Zhou R, Kwok YK (2005) Trusted P2P transactions with fuzzy reputation aggregation. IEEE Intern Comput 9(6):24–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Theodorakopoulos G, Baras JS (2006) On trust models and trust evaluation metrics for ad hoc networks. IEEE J Sel Areas Commun 24(2):318–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sun Y, Yu W, Han Z, Liu KJR (2006) Information theoretic tramework of trust modeling and evaluation for ad hoc networks. IEEE J Sel Area Commun 24(2):305–317MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Li X, Valacich JS, Hess TJ (2004) Predicting user trust in information systems: a comparison of competing trust models. In: Proceedings of 37th annual Hawaii international conference on system sciences, 10 ppGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bigley GA, Pearce JL (1998) Straining for shared meaning in organization science: problems of trust and distrust. Acad Manag Rev 23(3):405–421Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fishbein M, Ajzen I (1975) Beliefs, attitude, intention and behavior: an introduction to theory and research. Addison-Wesley, ReadingGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Anderson JC, Narus JA (1990) A model of distributor firm and manufacturer firm working partnerships. Marketing 54(1):42–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fox A (1974) Beyond contract: work, power, and trust relations. Faber, LondonGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Deutsch M (1973) The resolution of conflict: constructive and destructive processes. Yale University Press, New HavenGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sheppard BH, Hartwick J, Warshaw PR (1988) The theory of reasoned action: a meta analysis of past research with recommendations for modifications in future research. Consumer Res 15(3):325–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Venkatesh V, Davis FD (2000) A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Manag Sci 46(2):186–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Grabner-Kräuter S, Kaluscha EA (2003) Empirical research in on-line trust: a review and critical assessment. Int J Hum Comput Stud 58(6):783–812CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Muir BM (1994) Trust in automation part I: theoretical issues in the study of trust and human intervention in automated systems. Ergonomics 37(11):1905–1922CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Muir BM (1996) Trust in automation part II: experimental studies of trust and human intervention in a process control simulation. Ergonomics 39(3):429–469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lee J, Moray N (1992) Trust, control strategies and allocation of function in human-machine systems. Ergonomics 35(10):1243–1270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Grandison T, Sloman M (2000) A survey of trust in internet applications. IEEE Commun Surv 3(4):2–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Yan Z (2010) Trust modeling and management in digital environments: from social concept to system development. In: IGI Global, pp 20–57Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Yan Z, Niemi V (2009) A methodology towards usable trust management. In: ATC09, LNCS, vol 5586, pp 179–193Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Yan Z, Chen Y (2010) AdContRep: a privacy enhanced reputation system for MANET content services. UIC 2010, LNCS, vol 6406, pp 414–429Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Aberer K, Despotovic Z (2001) Managing trust in a peer-to-peer information system. In: Proceedings of the ACM conference on information and knowledge management (CIKM), pp 310–317Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Resnick P, Varian HR (1997) Recommender systems. Commun ACM 40(3):56–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hancock JT, Toma C, Ellison N (2007) The truth about lying in online dating profiles. In: Proceedings of the ACM conference on human factors in computing systems (CHI 2007), ACM, pp 449–452Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Su X, Khoshgoftaar TM (2009) A survey of collaborative filtering techniques. Adv Artif Intell. doi:10.1155/2009/421425
  32. 32.
    O’Donovan J, Smyth B (2005) Trust in recommender systems, IUI’05, pp 167–174Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Jøsang A, Ismail R, Boyd C (2007) A survey of trust and reputation systems for online service provision. Decis Support Syst 43(2):618–644CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Resnick P, Zeckhauser R (2002) Trust among strangers in Internet transactions: empirical analysis of eBay’s reputation system. In: Baye M (ed) Advances in applied microeconomics: the economics of the internet and e-commerce, vol 11. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 127–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Resnick P, Kuwabara K, Zeckhauser R, Friedman E (2000) Reputation systems. Commun ACM 43(12):45–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Corritore CL, Kracher B, Wiedenbeck S (2003) On-line trust: concepts, evolving themes, a model. Int J Hum Comput Stud Trust Technol 58(6):737–758CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Yang Y, Sun Y, Kay S, Yang Q (2009) Defending online reputation systems against collaborative unfair raters through signal modeling and trust. In: SAC’09, pp 1308–1315Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Douceur JR (2002) The sybil attack. In: IPTPS’02, LNCS, vol 2429, pp 251–260Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Sun Y, Han Z, Liu KJR (2008) Defense of trust management vulnerabilities in distributed networks. IEEE Commun Mag 46(2):112–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Sun Y, Han Z, Yu W, Liu KJR (2006) A trust evaluation framework in distributed networks: vulnerability analysis and defense against attacks. In: IEEE INFOCOM, pp 1–13Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Fogg BJ, Tseng H (1999) The elements of computer credibility. In: Proceedings of the CHI’99, ACM Press, New York, pp 80–87Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Crocker L, Algina J (1986) Introduction to classical and modern test theory. Thomson Leaning, BelmontGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    TCG TPM Specification v1.2, Accessed 8 Sep 2010
  44. 44.
    Yan Z, Liu C, Niemi V, Yu G (2010) Effects of displaying trust information on mobile application usage. In: ATC’10, LNCS, vol 6407, pp 107–121Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Yan Z, Liu C, Niemi V, Yu G (2010) Trust information indication: effects of displaying trust information on mobile application usage. Technical Report NRC-TR-2009-004, Nokia Research Center. Accessed 8 Sep 2010
  46. 46.
    Yan Z, Yan R (2009) Formalizing trust based on usage behaviours for mobile applications. ATC09, LNCS 5586:194–208Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Schiffman J, Moyer T, Jaeger T, McDaniel P (2011) Network-based root of trust for installation. IEEE Secur Priv 9(1):40–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Wu J, Fang M, Yu P, Zhang X (2009) A secure software download framework based on mobile trusted computing. WCSE '09, pp 171–176Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Ahtiainen A, Kalliojarvi K, Kasslin M, Leppanen K, Richter A, Ruuska P, Wijting C (2009) Awareness networking in wireless environments: means of exchanging information. IEEE Veh Technol Mag 4(3):48–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Nokia SmartPhone 360 panel survey results: Accessed 31 Jan 2009

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Communications and Networking, School of Electrical EngineeringAalto UniversityEspooFinland
  2. 2.School of Telecommunications EngineeringXiDian UniversityXi’anChina
  3. 3.Research Institute of Mobile InternetXi’an University of Posts and TelecommunicationsXi’anChina
  4. 4.School of Information SystemsSingapore Management UniversitySingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations