i Trust Survey Graham Klyne Nine by Nine
i. Trust Survey Graham Klyne Nine by Nine http: //www. ninebynine. net/ 8 October 2004 i. Trust survey
Goals of this talk • Reviewing i. Trust activity – exemplified by conference papers • Looking for multidisciplinary results – what are the contributions from non-computing disciplines? • Is there any overall “shape” of new understanding coming from i. Trust work? • System implementation perspective – what guidance is offered? 8 October 2004 i. Trust survey 2
i. Trust • “The aim of i. Trust is to provide a forum for cross-disciplinary investigation of the application of trust as a means of establishing security and confidence in the global computing infrastructure, recognizing trust as a crucial enabler for meaningful and mutually beneficial interactions. ” – http: //www. itrust. uoc. gr/ – (my emphasis) 8 October 2004 i. Trust survey 3
Method • Read through all main papers in LNCS proceedings of first two public i. Trust conferences – 48 papers – Not including short papers • Summarize content of each paper – attempt to reflect content, not evaluate • Pick out key themes in each paper – subjective, subject to differing views 8 October 2004 i. Trust survey 4
Method (continued) • Data collected using a variant of RDF (N 3) – http: //www. ninebynine. org/i. Trust-survey. n 3 About Notation 3: – http: //www. w 3. org/Design. Issues/Notation 3. html – http: //www. w 3. org/2000/10/swap/Primer. html • Auto-generated summary document – http: //www. ninebynine. org/i. Trust-survey. html • Processed using simple rules (using CWM) – http: //www. w 3. org/2000/10/swap/doc/cwm. html • Reviewed summaries looking for themes 8 October 2004 i. Trust survey 5
Raw data: Multidisciplinary themes • • Computing - 39 papers Economics - 8 papers Legal - 4 papers Philosophy - 1 paper Logic - 1 paper Psychology - 4 papers Sociology - 8 papers Statistics - 6 papers 8 October 2004 i. Trust survey 6
Raw data: Other recurring topics • Privacy - 4 papers • Reputation - 12 papers 8 October 2004 i. Trust survey 7
Raw data: Computing + topic • • Computing Computing 8 October 2004 + + + + Economics - 6 papers Legal - 2 papers Philosophy - 1 paper Psychology - 3 papers Sociology - 5 papers Statistics - 4 papers Privacy - 4 papers Reputation - 11 papers i. Trust survey 8
Raw data: Paper topics not spotted • Political science – Informing public policy formation? • Business/management 8 October 2004 i. Trust survey 9
Defining trust • 23 different definitions found – Two economics papers used the same definition! • Common themes: – – – Subjective Expectation or belief about another’s behaviour Related to specific context Risk of trusting behaviour Basis for decision with incomplete information Based on past evidence 8 October 2004 i. Trust survey 10
Observations • Very few papers without a strong computing element • Many papers about computing with input from some other discipline(s) • Reputation/recommendation systems lead use of trust in implemented systems • A strong strand of economic theory informing reputation systems 8 October 2004 i. Trust survey 11
More observations • Conference papers are not the whole story • Work in logic of trust is not yet connecting with systems using trust • Having existing computational models makes us better able to employ sociocognitive work? • Traditional computer security view of trust as an atomic proposition, rather than something to be analyzed 8 October 2004 i. Trust survey 12
Observations about trust • Computing with trust necessarily (? ) ignores many subtleties • The 1994 Ph. D thesis of S. Marsh seems to be seminal in computation of trust • “First transaction” trust is challenging • Reduced importance of specific identity • Recommendation/reputation systems – consensus to separate trust in some action from trust in recommendation 8 October 2004 i. Trust survey 13
Some specific observations (1) • The social aspect of trust is only lightly acknowledged by computing systems – cf. lncs 2995_266_276, lncs 2995_146_160 – Modelling goodwill, community vs individual benefit? • Different approaches to trust with and without 3 rd party participation – cf. lncs 2692_17_32, lncs 2692_46_58 8 October 2004 i. Trust survey 14
Some specific observations (2) • Trust may be at the cost of privacy – cf. lncs 2995_108_119, lncs 2995_108_119 • Empirical data concerning human trusting behaviour is patchy – cf. lncs 2692_165_178, lncs 2995_206_220 • Two clusters of trust definitions – rational (expected benefit) – social (moral duty, etc) – cf. lncs 2995_266_276 8 October 2004 i. Trust survey 15
On the Web • This presentation (PPT and PDF) – http: //www. ninebynine. org/i. Trust. Survey. ppt – http: //www. ninebynine. org/i. Trust. Survey. pdf • Raw survey data (Notation 3 and HTML) – http: //www. ninebynine. org/i. Trust-survey. n 3 – http: //www. ninebynine. org/i. Trust-survey. html • Survey processing rules (Notation 3) – http: //www. ninebynine. org/i. Trust/Trust. Rules. n 3 • Processed survey data (Notation 3) – http: //www. ninebynine. org/i. Trust/Trust. Results. n 3 8 October 2004 i. Trust survey 16
Further activity • Creating i. Trust resource page, links for: – – – Papers Tutorials Presentations Software Projects • Please send me your URLs! – gk-itrust@ninebynine. org – (or: i. Trust mailing list) 8 October 2004 i. Trust survey 17
Discussion • Are there other major themes? • Most results directed to computing professionals? • Is trust more than just another technique for achieving security? • Economic/sociological input seems focused on reputation/recommender systems? • Can/should computing with trust recognize its social subtleties? • Can trust sustenance be fully decentralized? • How do other fields influence technical designs? 8 October 2004 i. Trust survey 18
Notes • Simon: taking metaphors from human trust to inform system designs is useful. Richer models are useful for organizations coming to terms with trust. • Reno: trust is different from security. Security is source of Trust has to cope with a (novel? ) environment. Trust is needed when there are risks. Re. Subtleties “the devil is in the detail”. Difficult to reduce the complex model and ignore other parts. 8 October 2004 i. Trust survey 19
Third i. Trust conference • http: //wwwrocq. inria. fr/arles/events/i. Trust 2005 • Paper deadline: 25 November 2004 – Tutorials, demos later • Conference: 24 -26 May 2005 – Tutorials 23 May 2005 • This is the last conference of the present i. Trust series… please join in and get people excited! 8 October 2004 i. Trust survey 20
- Slides: 20