WSTO: A Classification-Based Ontology for Managing Trust in Semantic Web Services

  • Stefania Galizia
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4011)


The aim of this paper is to provide a general ontology that allows the specification of trust requirements in the Semantic Web Services environment. Both client and Web Service can semantically describe their trust policies in two directions: first, each can expose their own guarantees to the environment, such as, security certification, execution parameters etc.; secondly, each can declare their trust preferences about other communication partners, by selecting (or creating) ‘trust match criteria’. A reasoning module can evaluate trust promises and chosen criteria, in order to select a set of Web Services that fit with all trust requirements. We see the trust-based selection problem of Semantic Web Services as a classification task. The class of selected Semantic Web Services (SWSs) will represent the set of all SWSs that fit both client and Web Service exposed trust requirements. We strongly believe that trust perception changes in different contexts, and strictly depends on the goal that the requester would like to achieve. For this reason, in our ontology we emphasize first class entities “goal”, “Web Service” and “user”, and the relations occurring among them. Our approach implies a centralized trust-based broker, i.e. an agent able to reason on trust requirements and to mediate between goal and Web Service semantic descriptions. We adopt IRS-III as our prototypical trust-based broker.


Certification Authority Trust Third Party Match Criterion Trust Policy Security Certification 
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.


  1. 1.
    Bilgin, A.S., Singh, M.P.: A DAML-based repository for QoS-aware Semantic Web Service selection. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Web Services (ICWS 2004), Washington, DC, USA (2004)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Domingue, J., Cabral, L., Hakimpour, F., Sell, D., Motta, E.: Irs-III: A platform and infrastructure for creating WSMO-based Semantic Web Services. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on WSMO Implementations (WIW 2004), Frankfurt, Germany (September 2004)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fensel, D., Benjamins, V.R., Motta, E., Wielinga, B.J.: A Framework for knowledge system reuse. In: Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 1999), Stockholm, Sweden, July 31-August 5 (1999a)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fensel, D., Bussler, C.: The Web Service Modeling Framework WSMF. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 1(2) (2002)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fensel, D., Motta, E., Benjamins, V.R., Decker, S., Gaspari, M., Groenboom, R., Grosso, W., Musen, M., Plaza, E., Schreiber, G., Studer, R., Wielinga, B.: The Unified Problem-solving Method Development Language UPML. IBROW3 Project Deliverable 1.1 (1999b)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    The Friend-Of-A-Friend (FOAF) Project (2004), Available at:
  7. 7.
    Golbeck, J., Hendler, J.: Inferring trust relationships in web-based social networks. ACM Transactions on Internet Technology (submitted, 2005)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kagal, L., Paoucci, M., Srinivasan, N., Denker, G., Finin, T., Sycara, K.: Authorization and privacy for Semantic Web Services. In: Proceeding of AAAI 2004 Spring Symposium on Semantic Web Services, Stanford University (March 2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kolovski, V., Parsia, B., Katz, Y., Hendler, J.: Representing Web Service Policies in OWL-DL. In: Gil, Y., Motta, E., Benjamins, V.R., Musen, M.A. (eds.) ISWC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3729, pp. 461–475. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mani, A., Nagarajan, A.: Understanding quality of service for Web Services: Improving the performance of your Web Services -IBM-report- 2002 (2002), Available at:
  11. 11.
    Maximilien, E.M., Singh, M.P.: Toward Autonomic Web Services Trust and Selection. In: Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Service Oriented Computing (ICSOC 2004), New York (November 2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Motta, E.: Reusable Components for Knowledge Models: Principles and Case Studies in Parametric Design Problem Solving. IOS Press, Amsterdam (1999)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Motta, E., Lu, W.: A Library of Components for Classification Problem Solving. In: Proceedings of PKAW 2000 - The 2000 Pacific Rim Knowledge Acquisition, Workshop, Sydney, Australia, December 11-13 (2000)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ngan, T.W.J., Wallach, D.S., Druschel, P.: Enforcing Fair Sharing of Peer-to-peer Resources. In: Kaashoek, M.F., Stoica, I. (eds.) IPTPS 2003. LNCS, vol. 2735. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Olmedilla, D., Lara, R., Polleres, A., Lausen, H.: Trust Negotiation for Semantic Web Services. In: 1st International Workshop on Semantic Web Services and Web Process Composition in conjunction with the 2004 IEEE International Conference on Web Services, San Diego, California, USA (July 2004)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Roman, D., Lausen, H., Keller, U. (eds.): The Web Service Modeling Ontology WSMO, final version 1.1. WSMO Final Draft D2 (2005)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sabata, B., Chatterjee, S., Davis, M., Sydir, J., Lawrence, T.: Taxonomy for QoS Specifications. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Object-Oriented Real-Time Dependable Systems (WORDS 1997) (February 1997)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kamvar, S.D., Schlosser, M.T., Garcia-Molina, H.: The EigenTrust Algorithm for Reputation Management in P2P Networks. In: Proceedings of the Twelfth International World Wide Web Conference, Budapest, Hungary, May 20-24 (2003)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Stefik, M.: Introduction to Knowledge Systems. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1995)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Vu, L.H., Hauswirth, M., Aberer, K.: QoS-based Service Selection and Ranking with Trust and Reputation Management. Technical Report IC2005029, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology at Lausanne (EPFL), Switzerland (June 2005)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    VeriSign: Intelligent Infrastructure Services At Work (2005), Information Available at:
  22. 22.
    W3C. Web Services Architecture. W3C Working Draft, February 11 (2004), Available at:

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stefania Galizia
    • 1
  1. 1.Knowledge Media Institute & Centre for Research in ComputingThe Open UniversityMilton KeynesUK

Personalised recommendations