Experience Report: Trading Dependability, Performance, and Security through Temporal Decoupling

  • Lorenz Froihofer
  • Guenther Starnberger
  • Karl M. Goeschka
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6723)

Abstract

While it is widely recognized that security can be traded for performance and dependability, this trade-off lacks concrete and quantitative evidence. In this experience report we discuss (i) a concrete approach (temporal decoupling) to control the trade-off between those properties, and a quantitative and qualitative evaluation of the benefits based on an online auction system. Our results show that trading only a small amount of security does not pay off in terms of performance or dependability. Trading security even more first improves performance and later improves dependability.

Keywords

Temporal decoupling Dependability Security Performance 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Agi, I., Gong, L.: An empirical study of secure mpeg video transmissions. In: Proceedings of the 1996 Symposium on Network and Distributed System Security (SNDSS 1996), pp. 137–144. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA (1996)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Andersen, D.G.: Mayday: Distributed filtering for internet services. In: 4th USENIX Symposium on Internet Technologies and Systems (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Avižienis, A., Laprie, J.C., Randell, B., Landwehr, C.E.: Basic concepts and taxon- omy of dependable and secure computing. IEEE Trans. Dependable Sec. Comput. 1(1), 11–33 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Barka, E., Boulmalf, M.: On the impact of security on the performance of wlans. JCM 2(4), 10–17 (2007)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bauer, K., McCoy, D., Grunwald, D., Kohno, T., Sicker, D.: Low-resource routing attacks against tor. In: WPES 2007: Proceedings of the 2007 ACM Workshop on Privacy in Electronic Society, pp. 11–20. ACM, New York (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chen, Y., He, Z.: Simulating highly dependable applications in a distributed computing environment. In: ANSS 2003: Proceedings of the 36th Annual Symposium on Simulation, p. 101. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cho, B., Youn, H., Lee, E.: Performability analysis method from reliability and availability. In: Lee, G., Howard, D., Kang, J.J., Slezak, D., Ahn, T.N., Yang, C.H. (eds.) ICHIT. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, vol. 321, pp. 401–407. ACM, New York (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cortellessa, V., Trubiani, C., Mostarda, L., Dulay, N.: An architectural framework for analyzing tradeoffs between software security and performance. In: Giese, H. (ed.) ISARCS 2010. LNCS, vol. 6150, pp. 1–18. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cowan, C., Pu, C., Maier, D., Hintony, H., Walpole, J., Bakke, P., Beattie, S., Grier, A., Wagle, P., Zhang, Q.: Stackguard: automatic adaptive detection and prevention of buffer-overow attacks. In: SSYM 1998: Proceedings of the 7th USENIX Security Symposium, p. 5. USENIX Association, Berkeley (1998)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Deswarte, Y., Blain, L., Fabre, J.C.: Intrusion tolerance in distributed computing systems. In: IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, pp. 110–121 (1991)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fraga, J., Powell, D.: A fault- and intrusion-tolerant file system. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Intl. Conf. on Computer Security, pp. 203–218 (1985)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Haleem, M.A., Mathur, C.N., Chandramouli, R., Subbalakshmi, K.P.: Opportunis- tic encryption: A trade-off between security and throughput in wireless networks. IEEE Trans. Dependable Secur. Comput. 4(4), 313–324 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hariri, S., Mutlu, H.: Hierarchical modeling of availability in distributed systems. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 21(1), 50–58 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kaaniche, M., Kanoun, K., Rabah, M.: A framework for modeling availability of e- business systems. In: Proceedings of Tenth Intl. Conf. on Computer Communications and Networks, 2001, pp. 40–45 (2001)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Komari, I.E., Kharchenko, V., Lysenko, I., Babeshko, E., Romanovsky, A.: Diversity and security of computing systems: Points of interconnection. part 2: Methodology and case study. MASAUM Journal of Open Problems in Science and Engineering 1(2), 33–41 (2009)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Komari, I.E., Kharchenko, V., Romanovsky, A., Babeshko, E.: Diversity and security of computing systems: Points of interconnection. part 1: Introduction to methodology. MASAUM Journal of Open Problems in Science and Engineering 1(2), 28–32 (2009)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Laprie, J. (ed.): Dependability: Basic Concepts and Terminology. Springer, Heidelberg (1992)MATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Littlewood, B., Strigini, L.: Redundancy and diversity in security. In: Samarati, P., Ryan, P.Y.A., Gollmann, D., Molva, R. (eds.) ESORICS 2004. LNCS, vol. 3193, pp. 423–438. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mainkar, V.: Availability analysis of transaction processing systems based on user-perceived performance. In: SRDS 1997: Proceedings of the 16th Symposium on Reliable Distributed Systems, p. 10. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Meyer, J.F.: On evaluating the performability of degradable computing systems. IEEE Transactions on Computers 29(8), 720–731 (1980)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Meyer, J.F.: Performability: a retrospective and some pointers to the future. Performance Evaluation 14(3-4), 139–156 (1992); performability Modelling of Computer and Communication SystemsCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Powell, D., Stroud, R. (eds.): Conceptual model and architecture of MAFTIA. Tech. Rep. D21, MAFTIA EU Project (2003)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Shao, L., Zhao, J., Xie, T., Zhang, L., Xie, B., Mei, H.: User-perceived service availability: A metric and an estimation approach. In: ICWS, pp. 647–654. IEEE, Los Alamitos (2009)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Snader, R., Borisov, N.: A tune-up for tor: Improving security and performance in the tor network. In: NDSS. The Internet Society, San Diego (2008)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Starnberger, G., Froihofer, L., Goeschka, K.M.: Distributed timestamping with smart cards using effcient overlay routing. In: Fifth Intl. Conf. for Internet Technology and Secured Transactions (ICITST 2010) (November 2010) Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Starnberger, G., Froihofer, L., Goeschka, K.M.: Adaptive run-time performance optimization through scalable client request rate control. In: Proc. 2nd Joint WOSP/SIPEW Intl. Conf. on Performance Engineering (WOSP/SIPEW 2011). ACM, New York (March 2011) (to appear) Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Starnberger, G., Froihofer, L., Goeschka, K.M.: A generic proxy for secure smart card-enabled web applications. In: Benatallah, B., Casati, F., Kappel, G., Rossi, G. (eds.) ICWE 2010. LNCS, vol. 6189, pp. 370–384. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Starnberger, G., Froihofer, L., Goeschka, K.M.: Using smart cards for tamper-proof timestamps on untrusted clients. In: ARES 2010, Fifth Intl. Conf. on Availability,Reliability and Security, Kraków, Poland, February 15-18, pp. 96–103. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Timmerman, B.: A security model for dynamic adaptive traffic masking. In: NSPW 1997: Proceedings of the 1997 Workshop on New Security Paradigms, pp. 107–116. ACM, New York (1997)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Veríssimo, P., Neves, N.F., Cachin, C., Poritz, J.A., Powell, D., Deswarte, Y., Stroud, R.J., Welch, I.: Intrusion-tolerant middleware: the road to automatic security. IEEE Security & Privacy 4(4), 54–62 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Veríssimo, P., Neves, N.F., Correia, M.: Intrusion-tolerant architectures: Concepts and design. In: de Lemos, R., Gacek, C., Romanovsky, A.B. (eds.) Architecting Dependable Systems. LNCS, vol. 2677, pp. 3–36. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wang, D., Trivedi, K.S.: Modeling user-perceived service availability. In: Malek, M., Nett, E., Suri, N. (eds.) ISAS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3694, pp. 107–122. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Wolter, K., Reinecke, P.: Performance and security tradeoff. In: Aldini, A., Bernardo, M., Pierro, A.D., Wiklicky, H. (eds.) SFM 2010. LNCS, vol. 6154, pp. 135–167. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Xie, W., Sun, H., Cao, Y., Trivedi, K.: Modeling of user perceived webserver availability. In: IEEE Intl. Conf. on Communications, ICC 2003, vol. 3, pp. 1796–1800 (May 2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lorenz Froihofer
    • 1
  • Guenther Starnberger
    • 1
  • Karl M. Goeschka
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Information Systems, Distributed Systems GroupVienna University of TechnologyViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations