Managing Trust and Reputation in the XenoServer Open Platform

  • Boris Dragovic
  • Steven Hand
  • Tim Harris
  • Evangelos Kotsovinos
  • Andrew Twigg
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2692)


Participants in public distributed computing do not find it easy to trust each other. The massive number of parties involved, their heterogeneous backgrounds, disparate goals and independent nature are not a good basis for the development of relationships through purely social mechanisms. This paper discusses the trust management issues that arise in the context of the XenoServer Open Platform: a public infrastructure for wide-area computing, capable of hosting tasks that span the full spectrum of distributed paradigms. We examine the meaning and necessity of trust in our platform, and present our trust management architecture, named XenoTrust. Our system allows participants of our platform to express their beliefs and advertise them, by submitting them to the system. It provides aggregate information about other participants’ beliefs, by supporting the deployment of rule-sets, defining how beliefs can be combined. XenoTrust follows the same design principles that we are using throughout the XenoServer project: it provides a flexible platform over which many of the interesting distributed trust management algorithms presented in the literature can be evaluated in a large-scale wide-area setting.


Trust Management Reputation System Resource Discovery Reputation Management Sybil Attack 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Abdul-Rahman, A., and Hailes, S. Supporting Trust in Virtual Communities. In Proceedings of the Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences 33, Maui, Hawaii (HICSS) (January 2000).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aberer, K., and Despotovic, Z. Managing Trust in a Peer-2-Peer Information System. In CIKM (2001), pp. 310–317.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Barham, P. R., Dragovic, B., Fraser, K. A., Hand, S. M., Harris, T. L., Ho, A. C., Kotsovinos, E., Madhavapeddy, A. V., Neugebauer, R., Pratt, I. A., and Warfield, A. K. Xen 2002. Tech. Rep. UCAM-CL-TR-553, University of Cambridge, Computer Laboratory, Jan. 2003.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Beth, T., Borcherding, M., and Klein, B. Valuation of Trust in Open Networks. In Proceedings of the 3rd European Symposium on Research in Computer Security — ESORICS’ 94 (1994), pp. 3–18.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Blaze, M., Feigenbaum, J., and Keromytis, A. D. KeyNote: Trust Management for Public-Key Infrastructures (Position Paper). Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1550 (1999), 59–63.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Blaze, M., Feigenbaum, J., and Lacy, J. Decentralized Trust Management. In Proceedings of the 1996 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (May 1996), pp. 164–173.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chavez, A., and Maes, P. Kasbah: An agent marketplace for buying and selling goods. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on the Practical Application of Intelligent Agents and Multi-Agent Technology (PAAM’96) (London, UK, 1996), Practical Application Company, pp. 75–90.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Douceur, J. R. The Sybil Attack. In Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Peer-to-Peer Systems, Boston, MA (March 2002).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fraser, K. A., Hand, S. M., Harris, T. L., Leslie, I. M., and Pratt, I. A. The Xenoserver computing infrastructure. Tech. Rep. UCAM-CL-TR-552, University of Cambridge, Computer Laboratory, Jan. 2003.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fu, K., Kaashoek, M. F., and Mazieres, D. Fast and secure distributed read-only file system. Computer Systems 20,1 (2000), 1–24.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hand, S., Harris, T., Kotsovinos, E., and Pratt, I. Controlling the XenoServer Open Platform, November 2002. To appear in the Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Open Architectures and Network Programming (OPENARCH), April, 2003.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Josang, A. The right type of trust for distributed systems. In Proceedings of the 1996 New Security Paradigms Workshop. (1996), C. Meadows, Ed., ACM.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Marsh, S.Formalising Trust as a Computational Concept. PhD thesis, Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Stirling, 1994.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Maurer, U. Modelling a Public-Key Infrastructure. In ESORICS: European Symposium on Research in Computer Security (1996), LNCS, Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Trusted Computing Platform Alliance (TCPA): Main Specification, Version 1.1b, 2002. TCPA Specifciation, available at\%20v1_1b.pdf.
  16. 16.
  17. 17.
    Yu, B., and Singh, M. P. A Social Mechanism of Reputation Management in Electronic Communities. In Cooperative Information Agents (2000), pp. 154–165.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Boris Dragovic
    • 1
  • Steven Hand
    • 1
  • Tim Harris
    • 1
  • Evangelos Kotsovinos
    • 1
  • Andrew Twigg
    • 1
  1. 1.University of Cambridge Computer LaboratoryCambridgeUK

Personalised recommendations