Research on a Trustworthiness Measurement Method of Cloud Service Construction Processes Based on Information Entropy

Abstract

The popularity of cloud computing has made cloud services gradually become the leading computing model nowadays. The trustworthiness of cloud services depends mainly on construction processes. The trustworthiness measurement of cloud service construction processes (CSCPs) is crucial for cloud service developers. It can help to find out the causes of failures and to improve the development process, thereby ensuring the quality of cloud service. Herein, firstly, a trustworthiness hierarchy model of CSCP was proposed, and the influential factors of the processes were identified following the international standard ISO/IEC 12207 of the software development process.Further, a method was developed combined with the theory of information entropy and the concept of trustworthiness. It aimed to calculate the risk uncertainty and risk loss expectation affecting trustworthiness. Also, the trustworthiness of cloud service and its main construction processes were calculated. Finally, the feasibility of the measurement method were verified through a case study, and through comparing with AHP and CMM/CMMI methods, the advantages of this method were embodied. Carnegie-Mellon University and the National Defense Industry Association. The two models classified the development stages of software organizations in practice as defining, implementing, measuring, controlling and improving software products. However, only a framework was put forward, extracting no specific knowledge of each key process area and failing to quantify the quality of a specific process. Also, the two models are primarily used to evaluate the degree of process management practices of a development organization, involving many contents, and being time-consuming and costly. As a result, small and medium-sized software companies, even some large ones, face challenges to meet relevant requirements and standards. For most software development organizations, what they need is an objective, quantitative, real and easy-to-implement measurement method. The method should enable them to find the weak links in the cloud service construction process (CSCP), and then carry out subsequent improvement or reinforcement, thus reducing the probability of institutional failure and improving product quality. Other primary software process measurement methods include Goal-driven Software Measurement (GSM) [7], Practical software measurement (PSM) [8,9], and Statistical Process Control (SPC) [10]. Based on the characteristics of the CMM and GQM model [11], reference [12] established a software process framework supporting metrics and gave the metrics of software process improvement. However, it did not give the exact measurement steps for the software development process. Reference [13] discussed the significant problems in software process measurement and presented an active measurement model (AMM) to support software process improvement (SPI). It emphasized the measurement of quality, maintainability and stability of the software products, rather than the processes. To find the pro...

The Assessment of Cloud Service Trustworthiness State Based on D-S Theory and Markov Chain

“…Therefore, this paper compares the proposed methods with other common security assessment methods. These methods include risk uncertainty assessment method based on information entropy [28], [30]- [32], risk weight method based on FAHP [24], [25], [56], risk level assessment method based on risk matrix [40], [41], and trust assessment method based on trust chain [42]- [44].…”

“…Therefore, this paper compares the proposed methods with other common security assessment methods. These methods include risk uncertainty assessment method based on information entropy [28]- [30], risk weight method based on FAHP [22], [23], [51], risk level assessment method based on risk matrix [38], [39], and trust assessment method based on trust chain [40]- [42]. In order to reasonably compare the characteristics of different methods, this paper makes a comparative analysis from the following 5 aspects around input, output and assessment process of each method.…”

“…Yang et al [10] They defined trustworthiness as generalized reliability, generalized security, identity trustworthiness, basic standard trustworthiness and capability trustworthiness 2019 based on analytic hierarchy process(AHP) [21]- [27], uncertainty assessment method based on information entropy [28]- [32], assessment method based on fuzzy theory [33]- [35], assessment method based on D-S evidence theory [36]- [39], assessment method based on risk matrix [40], [41], etc. Although these single methods can effectively realize the quantitative assessment of trustworthiness, they lack the assessment of cloud service trustworthiness and its changes in long-time use process.…”

Research on Privacy Security Risk Assessment Method of Mobile Commerce Based on Information Entropy and Markov

“…At present, fruitful achievements have been made in the research of risk assessment, but only a few researches focus on privacy risk assessment, and researches on privacy assessment for m-commerce applications are rare. In references [23][24][25][26], the risks were evaluated based on the concept of information entropy; a feasible program was proposed for the assessment of security risk in cloud computing, but the privacy security was not analyzed. In reference [27], a privacy-considered information security assessment model was built with the risk recommendation system based on the identifiability, context of use, quantity, sensitivity, and freshness of the personal identity information data.…”

Construction and Analysis of Integral User-Oriented Trustworthiness Metrics

“…Another example is the integral metric for scoring the weaknesses' severity-CWSS score [18]. In [19,20], the weighted sum is used for the trustworthiness calculation. In [21], the weighted sum is considered for the trustworthiness calculation, but it is also mentioned that this approach can be misleading [22].…”