In the Relation of Workflow and Trust Characteristics, and Requirements in Service Workflows

  • Wattana Viriyasitavat
  • Andrew Martin
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 251)

Abstract

Service-based interactions have become common over the past few years. Nowadays, their applications are visible in several forms including e-commerce, Virtual Organizations, Grid, and Cloud Computing. Proliferation of services leads to the creation of new value-added services composed of several sub-services in a pre-specified manner, known as service workflows. One important challenge is how to ensure security from the viewpoints of both workflow owners and participating services; each of which possesses its own requirements. Although there are a number of proposals regarding this, the comprehensive trust and security requirements are still immature. The intuition to develop a solution generic to service workflows is that workflow and trust characteristics must be incorporated. This article studies on the relationship of workflow characteristics with respect to trust, and then trust and security requirements for service collaborations are synthesized.

Keywords

Business Process Security Requirement Trust Relationship Trust Characteristic Composite Sense 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Altunay, M., Brown, D., Byrd, G., Dean, R.: Trust-based Secure Workflow Path Construction. In: Benatallah, B., Casati, F., Traverso, P. (eds.) ICSOC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3826, pp. 382–395. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Arenas, A.E.: Survey material on trust and security in grids. CoreGRID Project Deliverable D.IA.03 (2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Botha, R.A., Eloff, J.H.P.: A security interpretation of the workflow reference model. In: von Solms, R., Eloff, J.H.P. (eds.) Proceedings of WG 11.2 and WG 11.1 of IFIP TC11, Information Security – from Small Systems to Management of Infrastructures, Vienna, Austria, vol. 2, pp. 43–50 (September 2, 1998)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Das, S., Kochut, K., Miller, J., Sheth, A., Worah, D.: Orbwork: A reliable distributed corba-based workflow enactment system for meteor2 (1996)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dogac, A., Ozsu, T., Kalinichenko, L. (eds.): Workflow Management Systems and Interoperability, 1st edn. Springer-Verlag New York, Inc., Secaucus (2001)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ellis, C., Keddara, K., Rozenberg, G.: Dynamic change within workflow systems. In: Proceedings of Conference on Organizational Computing Systems, COCS 1995, pp. 10–21. ACM, New York (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fox, G., Gannon, D.: Workflow in grid systems. In: Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience, pp. 1009–1019 (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hang, C.-W., Singh, M.P.: Trustworthy service selection and composition. ACM Trans. Auton. Adapt. Syst. 6, 1–17 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hayes, J.G., Peyrovian, E., Sarin, S., Schmidt, M.-T., Swenson, K.D., Weber, R.: Workflow interoperability standards for the internet. IEEE Internet Computing 4, 37–45 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jøsang, A., Ismail, R., Boyd, C.: A survey of trust and reputation systems for online service provision (2006)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kagal, L., Finin, T., Peng, Y.: A delegation based model for distributed trust (2001)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kamvar, S.D., Schlosser, M.T., Garcia-Molina, H.: The eigentrust algorithm for reputation management in p2p networks. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on World Wide Web, WWW 2003, pp. 640–651. ACM, New York (2003)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kim, Y., Doh, K.-G.: Trust type based semantic web services assessment and selection. In: Proc. 10th Int. Conf. Advanced Communication Technology ICACT 2008, vol. 3, pp. 2048–2053 (2008)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Koshutanski, H.: A survey on distributed access control systems for web business processes. I. J. Network Security 9(1), 61–69 (2009)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kuntze, N., Schmidt, A.U., Velikova, Z., Rudolph, C.: Trust in business processes. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference for Young Computer Scientists, ICYCS 2008, pp. 1992–1997. IEEE Computer Society, Hunan (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kuntze, N., Schutte, J.: Securing decentralized workflows in ambient environments. In: Proc. IEEE/IFIP Int. Conf. Embedded and Ubiquitous Computing EUC 2008, vol. 2, pp. 361–366 (2008)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lorch, M., Adams, D.B., Kafura, D., Koneni, M.S.R., Rathi, A., Shah, S.: The prima system for privilege management, authorization and enforcement in grid environments. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Grid Computing, GRID 2003, p. 109. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA (2003)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lu, Y., Zhang, L., Sun, J.: Types for task-based access control in workflow systems. IET Software 2(5), 461–473 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lynch, C.A.: When documents deceive: trust and provenance as new factors for information retrieval in a tangled web. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 52, 12–17 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Marinescu, D.C.: A grid workflow management architecture. GGF White Paper (2002)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Moodahi, I., Gudes, E., Lavee, O., Meisels, A.: A Secure Workflow Model Based on Distributed Constrained Role and Task Assignment for the Internet. In: López, J., Qing, S., Okamoto, E. (eds.) ICICS 2004. LNCS, vol. 3269, pp. 171–186. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Moreau, L., Chapman, S., Schreiber, A., Hempel, R., Varga, L., Cortes, U., Willmott, S.: Provenance-based trust for grid computing position paper (2004)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Muth, P., Wodtke, D., Weinenfels, J., Dittrich, A.K., Weikum, G.: From centralized workflow specification to distributed workflow execution. Journal of Intelligent Information Systems 10, 159–184 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Naqvi, S., Coregrid, T.: A study of languages for the specification of grid security policies 1. Technical Report TR0037 (2006)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pagani, D.S., Pareschi, R.: Generalized process structure grammars gpsg for flexible representations of work. In: Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, pp. 180–189 (1996)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Page, L., Brin, S., Motwani, R., Winograd, T.: The pagerank citation ranking: Bringing order to the web (1998)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Pearlman, L., Welch, V., Foster, I., Kesselman, C., Tuecke, S.: A community authorization service for group collaboration. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Policies for Distributed Systems and Networks (POLICY 2002), p. 50. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Qiu, Z.M., Wong, Y.S.: Dynamic workflow change in pdm systems. Comput. Ind. 58, 453–463 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Rajbhandari, S., Rana, O.F., Wootten, I.: A fuzzy model for calculating workflow trust using provenance data. In: Proceedings of the 15th ACM Mardi Gras Conference: From Lightweight Mash-ups to Lambda Grids: Understanding the Spectrum of Distributed Computing Requirements, Applications, Tools, Infrastructures, Interoperability, and the Incremental Adoption of Key Capabilities, MG 2008, pp. 10:1–10:8. ACM, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ramchurn, S., Sierra, C., Godo, L., Jennings, N.R.: A computational trust model for multi-agent interactions based on confidence and reputation. In: 6th International Workshop of Deception, Fraud and Trust in Agent Societies, pp. 69–75 (2003)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ramchurn, S.D., Huynh, D., Jennings, N.R.: Trust in multi-agent systems. The Knowledge Engineering Review 19 (2004)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sabater, J., Sierra, C.: Regret: A reputation model for gregarious societies (2000)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sarin, S.K.: Object-oriented workflow technology in inconcert. In: COMPCON, pp. 446–450 (1996)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Simmhan, Y.L., Plale, B., Gannon, D.: A survey of data provenance in e-science. Sigmod Record 34, 31–36 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Stevens, R.D., Robinson, A.J., Goble, C.A.: myGrid: personalised bioinformatics on the information grid. Bioinformatics 19(suppl. 1) (2003)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Viriyasitavat, W.: Modeling delegation in requirements-driven trust framework. In: Proc. World Conf. Services - I, pp. 522–529 (2009)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Viriyasitavat, W., Martin, A.: Formal trust specification in service workflows. In: Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE/IFIP International Conference on Embedded and Ubiquitous Computing, EUC 2010, pp. 703–710. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Viriyasitavat, W., Martin, A.: Towards the relationship of trust properties and workflow characteristics. To be published in the 7th Asian Internet Engineering Conference (AINTEC) (2011)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Witkowski, M., Artikis, A., Pitt, J.: Experiments in building experiential trust in a society of objective-trust based agents. In: Autonomous Agents & Multiagent Systems/International Conference on Autonomous Agents, pp. 111–132 (2000)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Wodtke, D., Weikum, G.: A formal foundation for distributed workflow execution based on state charts. In: International Conference on Database Theory, pp. 230–246 (1997)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wattana Viriyasitavat
    • 1
    • 2
  • Andrew Martin
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK
  2. 2.Business Information Technology Division, Department of Statistics, Faculty of Commerce and AccountancyChulalongkorn UniversityThailand

Personalised recommendations