More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/

research-article

Argumentation logic to assist in security administration

Authors:

Elizabeth Sklar,

Andrew Applebaum,

Sharmin JalalAuthors Info & Claims

NSPW '12: Proceedings of the 2012 New Security Paradigms Workshop

Pages 43 - 52

https://doi.org/10.1145/2413296.2413301

Published: 18 September 2012 Publication History

Abstract

We present our preliminary work in using argumentation logics to reason about security administration tasks. Decisionsabout network security are increasingly complex, involvingtradeoffs between keeping systems secure, maintaining system operation, escalating costs, and compromising functionality. In this paper we suggest the use of argumentation to provide automated support for security decisions. Argumentation is a formal approach to decision making that has proved to be effective in a number of domains. In contrast to traditional first order logic, argumentation logic provides the basis for presenting arguments to a user for or against a position, along with well-founded methods for assessing the outcome of interactions among the arguments. We demonstrate the use of argumentation in a reconfiguration problem, to diagnose the root cause of cyber-attack, and to set policies.

References

[1]

Ehab Al-Shaer, Charles R. Kalmanek, and Felix Wu. Automated security configuration management. J. Network Syst. Manage., 16(3):231--233, 2008.

Digital Library

[2]

L. Amgoud and C. Cayrol. On the acceptability of arguments in preference-based argumentation framework. In Proceedings of the 14th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, pages 1--7, 1998.

Digital Library

[3]

L. Amgoud and C. Cayrol. A reasoning model based on the production of acceptable arguments. Annals of Mathematics and Artifical Intelligence, 34(3):197--215, 2002.

Digital Library

[4]

Ivan Balepin, Sergei Maltsev, Jeff Rowe, and Karl Levitt. Using Specification-Based Intrusion Detection for Automated Response. In Recent Advances in Intrusion Detection: 6th international symposium, RAID 2003, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, September 8-10, 2003: proceedings, page 136. Springer-Verlag New York Inc, 2003.

[5]

T. J. M. Bench-Capon, T. Geldard, and P. H. Leng. A method for the computational modelling of dialectical argument with dialogue games. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 8:233--254, 2000.

Digital Library

[6]

P. Besnard and A. Hunter. A logic-based theory of deductive arguments. Artificial Intelligence, 128:203--235, 2001.

Digital Library

[7]

Senthil G. Cheetancheri, John M. Agosta, Denver H. Dash, Karl N. Levitt, Jeff Rowe, and Eve M. Schooler. A distributed host-based worm detection system. In Proceedings of the 2006 SIGCOMM workshop on Large-scale attack defense, page 113. ACM, 2006.

Digital Library

[8]

Senthil G. Cheetancheri, John M. Agosta, Karl N. Levitt, S. Felix Wu, and Jeff Rowe. Optimal Cost, Collaborative, and Distributed Response to Zero-Day Worms-A Control Theoretic Approach. In Proceedings of the 11th international symposium on Recent Advances in Intrusion Detection, page 250. Springer, 2008.

Digital Library

[9]

A. S. Coulson, D. W. Glasspool, J. Fox, and J. Emery. Rags: A novel approach to computerized genetic risk assessment and decision support from pedigrees. Methods of Information in Medicine, 2001.

[10]

P. M. Dung. On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artificial Intelligence, 77:321--357, 1995.

Digital Library

[11]

P. E. Dunne, A. Hunter, P. McBurney, S. Parsons, and M. Wooldridge. Weighted argument systems: Basic definitions, algorithms, and complexity results. Artificial Intelligence, (in press).

Digital Library

[12]

J. Emery, R. Walton, A. Coulson, D. Glasspool, S. Ziebland, and J. Fox. Computer support for recording and interpreting family histories of breast and ovarian cancer in primary care (rags): Qualitative evaluation with simulated patients. British Medical Journal, 319(7201):32--36, 1999.

[13]

J. Emery, R. Walton, M. Murphy, J. Austoker, P. Yudkin, C. Chapman, A. Coulson, D. Glasspool, and J. Fox. Computer support for recording and interpreting family histories of breast and ovarian cancer in primary care: Comparative study with simulated cases. British Medical Journal, 321(7252):28--32, 2000.

[14]

J. Fox, V. Patkar, and R. Thomson. Decision support for health care: the PROforma evidence base. Informatics in Primary Care, 14(1):49--54, 2006.

[15]

T. F. Gordon. The Pleadings Game: An exercise in computational dialectics. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 2:239--292, 1994.

Digital Library

[16]

T. F. Gordon, H. Prakken, and D. Walton. The Carneades model of argument and burden of proof. Artificial Intelligence, 171(10--11):875--896, 2007.

Digital Library

[17]

K. Greenwood, T. Bench-Capon, and P. McBurney. Structuring dialogue between the People and their representatives. In R. Traunmüller, editor, Electronic Government: Proceedings of the Second International Conference (EGOV03), Prague, Czech Republic, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2739, pages 55--62, Berlin, Germany, 2003. Springer.

[18]

A. Kakas and P. Moraitis. Argumentation based decision making for autonomous agents. In J. S. Rosenschein, M. Wooldridge, T. Sandholm, and M. Yokoo, editors, 2nd International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, New York, NY, 2003. ACM Press.

Digital Library

[19]

M. Kaufmann and J S. Moore. A precise description of the ACL2 logic. In http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/moore/publications/km97a.ps.gz. Dept. of Computer Sciences, University of Texas at Austin, 1997.

[20]

H. Kim and B. Karp. Autograph: Toward automated, distributed worm signature detection. In Proceedings of the USENIX Security Symposium, 2004.

Digital Library

[21]

H. Kim, B. Karp, and D. Song. Polygraph: Automatically generating signatures for polymorphic worms. In Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy 2005, Oakland, CA, 2005.

Digital Library

[22]

J. Kohlas. Probabilistic argumentation systems: A new way to combine logic with probability. Journal of Applied Logic, 1(3--4):225--253, June 2003.

Digital Library

[23]

S. Kraus, K. Sycara, and A. Evenchik. Reaching agreements through argumentation: a logical model and implementation. Artificial Intelligence, 104(1-2):1--69, 1998.

Digital Library

[24]

P. Krause, S. Ambler, M. Elvang-Gørannson, and J. Fox. A logic of argumentation for reasoning under uncertainty. Computational Intelligence, 11 (1):113--131, 1995.

[25]

Douglas B. Lenat. Cyc: A large-scale investment in knowledge infrastructure. Commun. ACM, 38(11):32--38, 1995.

Digital Library

[26]

F. Lin. An argument-based approach to non-monotonic reasoning. Computational Intelligence, 9:254--267, 1993.

[27]

F. Lin and Y. Shoham. Argument systems: a uniform basis for nonmonotonic reasoning. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, pages 245--255, San Mateo, CA, 1989. Morgan Kaufmann.

Digital Library

[28]

R. P. Loui. Defeat among arguments: a system of defeasible inference. Computational Intelligence, 3(3):100--106, 1987.

[29]

N. Maudet and F. Evrard. A generic framework for dialogue game implementation. In Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Formal Semantics and Pragmatics of Dialogue, University of Twente, The Netherlands, May 1998.

[30]

P. McBurney and S. Parsons. Risk agoras: Dialectical argumentation for scientific reasoning. In C. Boutilier and M. Goldszmidt, editors, Proceedings of the 16th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, Stanford, CA, USA, 2000. UAI.

Digital Library

[31]

P. McBurney and S. Parsons. Games that agents play: A formal framework for dialogues between autonomous agents. Journal of Logic, Language, and Information, 11(3):315--334, 2002.

Digital Library

[32]

R. C. Moore. Semantical considerations on nonmonotonic logic. Artificial Intelligence, 25:75--94, 1985.

Digital Library

[33]

S. Nielsen and S. Parsons. An application of formal argumentation: Fusing Bayesian networks in multi-agent systems. Artificial Intelligence, 171(10-15):754--775, 2007.

Digital Library

[34]

Dai Nojiri, Jeff Rowe, and Karl Levitt. Cooperative Response Strategies for Large Sacle Attack Mitigation. In Proceedings of the DARPA Information Survivability Conference and Exposition. DISCEX, 2003.

[35]

S. Parsons and N. R. Jennings. Negotiation through argumentation -- a preliminary report. In Proceedings of Second International Conference on Multi-Agent Systems, pages 267--274, 1996.

[36]

S. Parsons and P. McBurney. Argumentation-based dialogues for agent coordination. Group Decision and Negotiation, 12(5):415--439, 2003.

[37]

S. Parsons, C. Sierra, and N. R. Jennings. Agents that reason and negotiate by arguing. Journal of Logic and Computation, 8(3):261--292, 1998.

[38]

S. Parsons, M. Wooldridge, and L. Amgoud. Properties and complexity of formal inter-agent dialogues. Journal of Logic and Computation, 13(3):347--376, 2003.

[39]

J. L. Pollock. Defeasible reasoning. Cognitive Science, 11:481--518, 1987.

[40]

J. L. Pollock. How to reason defeasibly. Artificial Intelligence, 57:1--42, 1992.

Digital Library

[41]

H. Prakken and G. Sartor. Argument-based logic programming with defeasible priorities. Journal of Applied Non-classical Logics, 1997.

[42]

H. Prakken and G. Sartor. Modelling reasoning with precedents in a formal dialogue game. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 6:231--287, 1998.

Digital Library

[43]

I. Rahwan, S. D. Ramchurn, N. R. Jennings, P. McBurney, S. Parsons, and L. Sonenberg. Argumentation-based negotiation. Knowledge Engineering Review, 18(4):343--375, 2003.

Digital Library

[44]

C. Reed and G. Rowe. Araucaria: Software for argument analysis, diagramming and representation. International Journal of AI Tools, 14(3--4):961--980, 2004.

[45]

C. Reed, D. Walton, and F. Macagno. Argument diagramming in logic, law and artificial intelligence. Knowledge Engineering Review, 22(1):87--109, 2007.

Digital Library

[46]

R. Reiter. A logic for default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence, 13:81--132, 1980.

Digital Library

[47]

Sumeet Singh, Cristian Estan, George Varghese, and Stefan Savage. Automated worm fingerprinting. In In OSDI, pages 45--60, 2004.

Digital Library

[48]

Tao Song, Calvin Ko, Jim Alves-Foss, Cui Zhang, and Karl N. Levitt. Formal reasoning about intrusion detection systems. In RAID, pages 278--295, 2004.

[49]

M. Spear, X. Lu, N. Matloff, and S. F. Wu. Davis Social Links or: How I Learned To Stop Worrying And Love The Net. In SCA '09: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Social Computing Applications, 2009.

Digital Library

[50]

M. Spear, X. Lu, N. Matloff, and S. F. Wu. KarmaNET: Leveraging Trusted Social Paths to Create Judicious Forwarders. In IFCIN '09: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Future Information Networks, 2009.

[51]

SRI International. Pvs specification and verification system. http://pvs.csl.sri.com/.

[52]

K. Sycara. Argumentation: Planning other agents' plans. In Proceedings of the Eleventh Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 517--523, 1989.

Digital Library

[53]

K. Sycara. Persuasive argumentation in negotiation. Theory and Decision, 28:203--242, 1990.

[54]

S. Toulmin. The Uses of Argument. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 1958.

[55]

UCDavis DSL Group. Dsl faith. http://http://apps.facebook.com/dsl_faith/.

[56]

T. van Gelder. The rationale for RationaleTM. Law, Probability and Risk, 6:23--42, 2007.

[57]

D Walton, C. Reed, and F. Macagno. Argumentation Schemes. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2008.

[58]

R. Walton, C. Gierl, H. Mistry, M. P. Vessey, and J. Fox. Evaluation of computer support for prescribing (CAPSULE) using simulated cases. British Medical Journal, 315:791--795, 1997.

[59]

Ke Wang and Salvatore J. Stolfo. Anomalous payload-based network intrusion detection. In Erland Jonsson, Alfonso Valdes, and Magnus Almgren,editors, Recent Advances in Intrusion Detection: 7th International Symposium, RAID 2004, Sophia Antipolis, France, September 15-17, 2004. Proceedings, volume 3224 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 203--222. Springer, 2004.

[60]

J. H. Wigmore. The problem of proof. Illinois Law Review, 8(2):77--103, 1913.

[61]

Yu-Sung Wu, Bingrui Foo, Yu-Chun Mao, Saurabh Bagchi, and Eugene H. Spafford. Automated adaptive intrusion containment in systems of interacting services. Computer Networks, 51(5):1334--1360, 2007.

Digital Library

[62]

S. A. Yemini, S. Kliger, E. Mozes, Y. Yemini, and D. Ohsie. High speed and robust event correlation. Communications Magazine, IEEE, 34(5):82--90, 1996.

Digital Library

[63]

T. Yuan, D. Moore, and A. Grierson. Educational human-computer debate: A computational dialectics approach. In G. Carenini, F. Grasso, and C. Reed, editors, Proceedings of the Workshop on Computational Models of Natural Argument, 2002.

Cited By

Vassiliades ABassiliades NPatkos T(2021)Argumentation and explainable artificial intelligence: a surveyThe Knowledge Engineering Review10.1017/S026988892100001136Online publication date: 5-Apr-2021
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0269888921000011
Ionita DFord MVasenev AWieringa R(2018)Graphical Modeling of Security Arguments: Current State and Future DirectionsGraphical Models for Security10.1007/978-3-319-74860-3_1(1-16)Online publication date: 19-Jan-2018
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74860-3_1
Applebaum ALi ZLevitt KParsons SRowe JSklar E(2016)Firewall configuration: An application of multiagent metalevel argumentationArgument & Computation10.3233/AAC-1600087:2-3(201-221)Online publication date: 3-Nov-2016
https://doi.org/10.3233/AAC-160008
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Argumentation logic to assist in security administration
1. Computing methodologies

Recommendations

Computing Arguments and Attacks in Assumption-Based Argumentation

CaSAPI (Credulous and Skeptical Argumentation: Prolog Implementation) 3.0 determines the acceptability of claims, using the general-purpose framework of assumption-based argumentation, under the semantics of admissible extensions. This framework reduces ...
A structured argumentation system with backing and undercutting

This work introduces Extended Defeasible Logic Programming (E-DeLP), a structured argumentation system enabling the expression of reasons for and against using defeasible rules. E-DeLPextends the formalism of Defeasible Logic Programming (DeLP) by ...
Reasoning about preferences in argumentation frameworks

The abstract nature of Dung's seminal theory of argumentation accounts for its widespread application as a general framework for various species of non-monotonic reasoning, and, more generally, reasoning in the presence of conflict. A Dung argumentation ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Other conferences

NSPW '12: Proceedings of the 2012 New Security Paradigms Workshop

September 2012

162 pages

ISBN:9781450317948

DOI:10.1145/2413296

General Chairs:
Richard Ford
Florida Institute of Technology, USA
,
Mary Ellen Zurko
Cisco, USA
,
Program Chairs:
Cormac Herley
Microsoft Corporation, USA
,
Tara Whalen
Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada

Copyright © 2012 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

ACSA: Applied Computing Security Assoc

In-Cooperation

ACM: Association for Computing Machinery
Microsoft: Microsoft
CA Labs: CA Labs

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 18 September 2012

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

NSPW '12

Sponsor:

ACSA

NSPW '12: The New Security Paradigms Workshop

September 18 - 21, 2012

Bertinoro, Italy

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 98 of 265 submissions, 37%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

12
Total Citations
View Citations
231
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)1
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 05 Mar 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Vassiliades ABassiliades NPatkos T(2021)Argumentation and explainable artificial intelligence: a surveyThe Knowledge Engineering Review10.1017/S026988892100001136Online publication date: 5-Apr-2021
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0269888921000011
Ionita DFord MVasenev AWieringa R(2018)Graphical Modeling of Security Arguments: Current State and Future DirectionsGraphical Models for Security10.1007/978-3-319-74860-3_1(1-16)Online publication date: 19-Jan-2018
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74860-3_1
Applebaum ALi ZLevitt KParsons SRowe JSklar E(2016)Firewall configuration: An application of multiagent metalevel argumentationArgument & Computation10.3233/AAC-1600087:2-3(201-221)Online publication date: 3-Nov-2016
https://doi.org/10.3233/AAC-160008
Bouyahia TAutrel FCuppens-Boulahia NCuppens F(2016)Context Aware Intrusion Response Based on Argumentation LogicRisks and Security of Internet and Systems10.1007/978-3-319-31811-0_6(91-106)Online publication date: 2-Apr-2016
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31811-0_6
Singh MWeiss GYolum PBordini RElkind E(2015)Cybersecurity as an Application Domain for Multiagent SystemsProceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems10.5555/2772879.2773304(1207-1212)Online publication date: 4-May-2015
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/2772879.2773304
Martinelli FSantini FYautsiukhin A(2015)Network security supported by arguments2015 13th Annual Conference on Privacy, Security and Trust (PST)10.1109/PST.2015.7232969(165-172)Online publication date: Jul-2015
https://doi.org/10.1109/PST.2015.7232969
Applebaum ALevitt KLi ZParsons SRowe JSklar E(2015)Cyber reasoning with argumentation: Abstracting from incomplete and contradictory evidenceMILCOM 2015 - 2015 IEEE Military Communications Conference10.1109/MILCOM.2015.7357513(623-628)Online publication date: Oct-2015
https://doi.org/10.1109/MILCOM.2015.7357513
Carrera ÁIglesias C(2015)A systematic review of argumentation techniques for multi-agent systems researchArtificial Intelligence Review10.1007/s10462-015-9435-944:4(509-535)Online publication date: 1-Dec-2015
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10462-015-9435-9
Santini FYautsiukhin A(2015)Quantitative Analysis of Network Security with Abstract ArgumentationRevised Selected Papers of the 10th International Workshop on Data Privacy Management, and Security Assurance - Volume 948110.1007/978-3-319-29883-2_3(30-46)Online publication date: 21-Sep-2015
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-319-29883-2_3
Martinelli FSantini F(2015)Debating Cybersecurity or Securing a Debate?Foundations and Practice of Security10.1007/978-3-319-17040-4_15(239-246)Online publication date: 5-Apr-2015
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17040-4_15
Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Figures

Tables

Media

View Table of Conten