1 / 23

Collaborative vs. Mobile Agents

Collaborative vs. Mobile Agents. A security overview on both infrastructure and ad-hoc networks Carlisle House. Overview. General agent security risks Collaborative agents and their security risks Mobile agents and their security risks Security comparison

raziya
Download Presentation

Collaborative vs. Mobile Agents

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Collaborative vs. Mobile Agents A security overview on both infrastructure and ad-hoc networks Carlisle House

  2. Overview • General agent security risks • Collaborative agents and their security risks • Mobile agents and their security risks • Security comparison • Agent behavior in infrastructure and ad-hoc networks • Distributed downloading

  3. General Agent Security Risks • Four main security situations • Protecting host from agent • Protecting agent from other agents • Protecting agents from machines • Protecting a group of machines from an agent

  4. General Agent Security Risks • Authentication • Communication • Code tampering / modification

  5. Collaborative Agents • Emphasize autonomy and cooperation • Solve large problems with static distributed computing • Allow for interconnecting and interoperation of multiple existing legacy systems. • Inter-agent coordination still ongoing issue

  6. Security-based collaborative agent systems • Agent mechanisms distributed throughout network nodes • Usually have centralized agent server • Examples: • Cherubim • Seraphim

  7. Collaborative agent security issues • Authentication upon network entry • Encryption for communication system • Transfer of rule set and agent code

  8. Mobile Agents • Computational software processes capable of roaming networks • Also autonomous and cooperative • Reduced communication costs and limited resources • Easier coordination • Can be implemented for dynamic distributed computing

  9. Security-based mobile agent systems • Roaming agents assessing host computer security as well as network health • Can have multiple mobile agents within network • Examples: • MAST • Aglets

  10. Authentication How often? Associate and Disassociate issues Code integrity Communication issues Mobile agent security issues

  11. Collaborative Communication issues mainly deal with network protection and integrity Authentication only needed beginning of session Mobile Communication issues deal with code space and OS access Authentication needed more often Agents more exposed to a variety of threats Comparison between systems

  12. Agent system behavior • Looked at infrastructure and ad-hoc wireless network topologies • Network simulation implemented using Java • Observe system behavior on both systems • Performance • Security

  13. Collaborative System • 64 node systems with centralized server components • Modified Cherubim system • Components tested • Node scanning mechanism (viral and patch) • Firewall • Communication transfer • Dynamic rule sets and patches

  14. Mobile system • 64 node roaming network system with three agents • Firewall • Viral scanning • Patch management • Modified Aglets system

  15. Collaborative Less network strain System more “up to date” More tolerant to heterogeneous network system Mobile Higher network utilization System requires more time for security purposes Observed infrastructure behavior

  16. Collaborative Requires more complexity Central-based server system somewhat detrimental Mobile Better performance on ad-hoc network No need for complete server system Same amount of network utilization Ad-Hoc Observation

  17. Distributed downloading • Attempt to improve efficiency • Similar to p2p systems • Modify both mobile and collaborative viral definition and patch delivery systems • Hope to decrease set up time

  18. Collaborative Less complex to implement Performance increase Infrastrucure – 10% Ad-hoc – 3% Setup time Overall setup time decreased by 12% Mobile More complex Performance increase Infrastructure – 5% Ad-hoc – 4% Setup time Overall setup time decreased by 3% Distributed outcome

  19. Conclusions • Collaborative agents have less security risks when compared to mobile agents • Collaborative agents better suited for use with infrastructure networks • Collaborative agents utilized distributed downloading better than mobile agents • Mobile agents perfect for ad-hoc networks

  20. References • Abdalla, Michel. Cirne, Walfredo. Franklin, Leslie. Tabbara, Abdallah. “Security Issues in Agent Based Computing.” In 15th Brazilian Symposium on Computer Networks, Sao Carlos, Brazil, May 1997. • Domel, Peter. “Mobile Telescript Agents and the Web.” Proceedings of the 4th Annual Tcl/Tk Workshop, 1996. • Gray, Robert. Kotz, David. Nog, Saurab. Rus, Daniela. Cybenko, George. “Mobile Agents for Mobile Computing.” In Technical Report PCS-TR96-285, May 1996. • Gray, D. Kotz, G. Cybenko, and D. Rus, "D'Agents: Security in a Multiple Language Mobile-agent System ", Mobile Agents and Security, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, No. 1419, pages 154-187, Springer-Verlag, 1998. • Jansen, Wayne. “Countermeasures for Mobile Agent Security.” Computer Communications, Special Issue on Advances in Research and Application and Network Security, Summer 2000. • Kotz, David. Gray, Robert. Rue, Daniela.  “Future Directions for Mobile Agent Research.” DS Online, 2002. • Kramer, Kwindla Hultman. Minar, Nelson. Maes, Pattie. “Tutorial: Mobile Software Agents for Dynamic Routing.” Mobile Computing and Communications Review, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp 12-16, 1999.

  21. References • Liu, Zhaoyu. Prasad Naldurg, Seung Yi. Tin Qian. Roy H. Campbell. M. Dennis Mickunas. “An Agent Based Architecture for Supporting Application Level Security.” In the DARPA Information Survivability Conference and Exposition, Hilton Head Island, SC, January 2000. • Nwana, Hyacinth. “Software Agents: An Overview.” Knowledge Engineering Review, Vol. II, No 3, pp 1-40, September 1996. • Pashalidis, A. Fleury, M “Secure Network Management within an Open-source Mobile Agent Framework.” JNSM: Vol. 12, No. 1, 2004. • Rus, Daniela. Gray, Robert. Kotz, David. “Transportable Information Agents.” Technical Report: PCSTR96 -278, Department of Computer Science, Dartmouth College, 1996. • Sultanik E, Artz D, Anderson G, Kam M, Regli W, Peysakhov M, Sevy J, Belov N, Morizio N, and Mroczkowski A. "Secure mobile agents on ad hoc wireless networks." in The 15th Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence Conference, American Association for Artificial Intelligence, 2003. • Tripathi, Anand. Koka, Muralidhar. Karanth, Sandeep. Osipkov, Ivan. Talkad, Harsha. Ahmed, Tanvir. Johnson, David. Dier, Scott. “Robustness and Security in a Mobile-Agent based Network Monitoring System.” In Technical Report TR 04-003, January 2004.

  22. Questions Thanks for listening.

More Related