CSPM EDP Sciences logo
Submit your paper
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 3 (2024) Security and Safety, 3 (2024) 2024009 References
Issue
Security and Safety
Volume 3, 2024
Security and Safety in Network Simulation and Evaluation
Article Number 2024009
Number of page(s) 21
Section Information Network
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/sands/2024009
Published online 30 July 2024
  1. Zhan HM, Yang JW and Guo ZY et al. RiskLens: A novel way to quantify the risk for big data platform enhanced by machine learning. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Network Simulation and Evaluation, 2023, 228–242. [Google Scholar]
  2. Special Working Group-Big Data Standard (SWG-BDS). White paper on big data security standardization. Netinfo Secur 2018. [Google Scholar]
  3. Hu K, Liu D and Liu MH. Research on security connotation and response strategies for big data. Telecommun Sci 2014; 30: 112–117. [Google Scholar]
  4. Wu JY, Zhang YF and Xiong S. Construction of enterprise big data security evaluation index system based on SHEL model. Sci Technol Manag Res 2021; 41: 144–151. [Google Scholar]
  5. Zhu G, Feng M and Chen Y et al. Research on fuzzy evaluation of privacy risk for social network in big data environment. Inf Sci 2016; 34: 94–98. [Google Scholar]
  6. Key Laboratory of Big Data Strategy. Concept and development of big data. China Terminol 2017; 19: 43–50. [Google Scholar]
  7. Big data. Commun Technol 2015; 48: 361. [Google Scholar]
  8. Liu ZH and Zhang QL. Research overview of big data technology. J Zhejiang Univ (Eng Sci) 2014; 48: 957–972. [Google Scholar]
  9. Chen RM. Challenges, values and coping strategies in the era of big data. Proc China Int Inf Commun Exhib 2012; 17: 14–15. [Google Scholar]
  10. Zhang K. Four changes of modern universities from the perspective of “4V” of big data. Can Soc Sci 2015; 11: 292–297. [Google Scholar]
  11. Big Data Technology and Standard Committee. White Paper on Data Asset Management practices 2023. [Google Scholar]
  12. Li ZH. Big Data Technology Architecture: Core Principles and Application Practices 2021. [Google Scholar]
  13. Ghemawat S, Gobioff H and Leung ST. The Google file system. ACM Sigops Oper Syst Rev 2003; 37: 29–43. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  14. Shvachko K, Kuang H and Radia S et al. The hadoop distributed file system. In: IEEE Symposium on Mass Storage Systems and Technologies, 2010, 1–10. [Google Scholar]
  15. Dean J and Ghemawat S. MapReduce: Simplified data processing on large clusters. Commun ACM 2008; 51: 107–113. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  16. Peng YT, Song SY and Fang DY. Research on risk identification and evaluation indicators for big data dissemination process. Sci Technol Manag Res 2018; 38: 78–82. [Google Scholar]
  17. Zhu G, Feng MN and Chen Y et al. Research on fuzzy evaluation of privacy risk for social network in big data environment. Inf Sci 2016; 34: 94–98. [Google Scholar]
  18. Zhao DM, Zhang YQ and Ma JF. Fuzzy risk assessment of entorpy-weight coefficient method applied in network security. Comput Eng 2004; 30: 21–23. [Google Scholar]
  19. Lu HK, Chen DQ and Peng Y et al. Quantitative research on risk assessment for information security of industrial control system. Autom Instrum 2014; 35: 21–25. [Google Scholar]
  20. Cheng XY, Wang YM and Liu ZL. A quantitative risk assessment model for information security. J Air Force Eng Univ (Nat Sci Ed) 2005; 6: 56–59. [Google Scholar]
  21. Zhang Y, Fang B and Yun X. A quantitative risk assessment approach for host system security. Comput Eng 2005; 31: 147–149. [Google Scholar]
  22. Xie F, Lu T and Guo X et al. Security analysis on cyber-physical system using attack tree. In: Ninth International Conference on Intelligent Information Hiding and Multimedia Signal Processing, 2013, 429–432. [Google Scholar]
  23. Zhang JL. Network security risk dynamic evaluation method research. Comput Simul 2016; 33: 356–360. [Google Scholar]
  24. Feng N, Wang HJ and Li M. A security risk analysis model for information systems: Causal relationships of risk factors and vulnerability propagation analysis. Inf Sci 2014; 256: 57–73. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  25. Li Z, Xu W and Shi H et al. Security and privacy risk assessment of energy big data in cloud environment. Comput Intell Neurosci 2021; 2021: 1–11. [Google Scholar]
  26. Dacier M, Deswarte Y and Kaâniche M. Models and tools for quantitative assessment of operational security, Springer, US 1996. [Google Scholar]
  27. Patel SC, Graham JH and Ralston PAS. Quantitatively assessing the vulnerability of critical information systems: A new method for evaluating security enhancements. Int J Inf Manag 2008; 28: 483–491. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  28. National Institude of Standards and Technology, Forum of Incident Response and Security Teams. Common Vulnerability Scoring System Version 3.1, 2019, https://www.first.org/cvss/v3-1/ [Google Scholar]
  29. Wynn J, Whitmore J and Upton G et al. Threat assessment and remediation analysis (TARA) methodology description version 1.0, Bedford, MA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  30. MITRE Corporation. Common Weakness Scoring System (CWSS) v1.0.1, 2023, https://cwe.mitre.org/cwss/cwss_v1.0.1.html [Google Scholar]
  31. Eke CI, Norman AA and Shuib L et al. A survey of user profiling: State-of-the-art, challenges and solutions. IEEE Access 2019; 7: 144907–144924. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  32. Kanoje S, Girase S and Mukhopadhyay D. User profiling trends, techniques and applications. arXiv preprint https://arxiv.org/abs/1503.07474, 2015. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.