Advertisement

Secure isolation of cloud consumers legitimacy using fuzzy analytical hierarchy process (AHP)

  • M. Jaiganesh
  • R. Sivakami
  • A. Vincent Antony Kumar
Original Research Paper
  • 6 Downloads

Abstract

Cloud computing refers to a variety of services available over the internet that deliver computing functionalities from the service providers infrastructure. Their capabilities are deliberated as software and hardware components in the large repository. However, employing secure services is an indispensable issue in cloud computing. Notably, estimating the legitimacy of consumers is a vital hurdle in delivering services to genuine consumers. Hence, an approach for assessing the legitimacy of cloud consumers is suggested in this paper using Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP). This model regularly monitors the legitimacy of cloud consumers and ranks them using different scales. Then it constructs a judgment matrix based on which the legitimacy indices of cloud consumers are estimated. Experiments have been conducted to prove the appropriateness of our approach and the results are shown.

Keywords

Cloud computing Consumers legitimacy Fuzzy analytical hierarchy process Judgement matrix 

Mathematics Subject Classification

03E72 60A86 

References

  1. 1.
    Jaiganesh, M., Aarthi, M., Vincent Antony Kumar, A. 2015. Fuzzy ART-based user behavior trust in cloud computing. In Artificial intelligence and evolutionary algorithms in engineering systems. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, eds. Suresh, L., Dash, S., Panigrahi, B., vol. 324. 341–348, New Delhi: Springer.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wang, Shouxin, Li Zhang, Na Ma, and Shuai Wang. 2008. An Evaluation Approach of Subjective Trust Based on Cloud Model. Journal of Software Engineering and Applications 1 (1): 44–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ries S., S.M. Habib, M. Muhlhauser, V. Varadharajan. 2011. Certain logic: A logic for modeling trust and uncertainty. Technical Report TUD-CS-2011-0104, Technische University at Darmstadt.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    van Laarhoven, P.J.M., and W. Pedrycz. 1983. A fuzzy extension of Saatys priority theory. Journal of Fuzzy Sets and Systems 11 (1-3): 199–227.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kahraman, C., D. Ruan, and I. Dogan. 2003. Fuzzy group decision making for facility location selection. Information Sciences 157 (14): 135–153.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chang, D. 1996. Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP. European Journal of Operational Research 95 (3): 649–655.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zhou, Qian, Yu. Jiong, and Yu. Feiran. 2011. A Trust Based Defensive System Model for Cloud Computing. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 6985: 146–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tan, WenAn, Yong Sun, Guang Zhen Lu, Tong Wang, and Ling Xia Li. 2014. IEEE Systems Journal. A Trust Service Oriented Scheduling Model for Workflow Applications in Cloud Computing 8 (3): 868–878.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Xiaonian, Wu, Runlian Zhang, Bing Zeng, and Shengyuan Zhou. 2013. A trust evaluation model for cloud computing. Procedia Computer Science 17: 1170–1177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kim, Hyukho, Hana Lee, Woongsup Kim, and Yangwoo Kim. 2010. A Trust Evaluation Model for QoS Guarantee in Cloud Systems. International Journal of Grid and Distributed Computing 3 (1): 1–10.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pawar, P.S., M. Rajarajan, S. Nair, T. Dimitriakos, and A. Zisman. 2012. Trust Model for Optimized Cloud Services. Proceeding of the IFIP 374: 97–112.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fahad, F., T. Alruwaili, and Aaron Gulliver. 2014. Trusted CCIPS: A Trust Security Model for Cloud Services Based on a Collaborative Intrusion Detection and Prevention Framework. International Journal of Latest Trends in Computing 5 (1): 162–171.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sole-Pareta, J., S. Subramaniam, D. Careglio, and S. Spadaro. 2012. Cross-layer approaches for planning and operating impairment-aware optical networks. Proceedings of the IEEE 100 (5): 1118–1129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lombardi, F., and R.D. Pietro. 2011. Secure virtualization for Cloud computing. Journal of Network and Computer Applications 34 (4): 1113–1122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Noon, T.H., Q.Z. Sheng, S. Zeadally, and Y. Jian. 2013. Trust management of services in cloud environments: Obstacles and solutions. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 46 (1): 1–58.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Butkiene, R., G. Vilutis, I. Lagzdinyte-Budnike, D. Sandonavicius, and K. Paulikas. 2013. The QoGS Method Application for Selection of Computing Resources in Intercloud. Elektronika IR Elektrotechnika 19 (7): 98–103.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hung, Pham Phuoc, Tuan-Anh Bui, Kwon Soonil, and Eui-Nam Huh. 2016. A New Technique for Optimizing Resource Allocation and Data Distribution in Mobile Cloud Computing. Elektronika IR Elektrotechnika 22 (1): 73–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Raja, S., M. Jaiganesh, and S. Ramaiah. 2017. An efficient fuzzy self-classifying clustering based framework for cloud security. International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems 10: 495–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Saaty, T.L. 1980. The Analytic Hierarchy Process. Consumers legitimacy and rating. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wang, L, Zhan, J, Shi, W, Liang, Y, Yuan, L. 2009. In Cloud, do MTC or HTC Service Providers Benefit from the Economies of Scale? Proceedings of MTAGS, pp. 7–11.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kuo, R.J., S.C. Chi, and S.S. Kao. 1999. Decision support system for locating convenience store through fuzzy AHP. Computers and Industrial Engineering 37 (1): 323–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Forum D'Analystes, Chennai 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringCVR College of EngineeringHyderabadIndia
  2. 2.Department of Information TechnologyPSNA College of Engineering and TechnologyDindigulIndia

Personalised recommendations