86 ¦~«×

1. Web System Performance Evaluation, ¥D«ù¤H, ¤u¬ã°|¹q³q©Ò, 86/7-87/6

2. Design of Name Service for Collaborative Web Proxy Servers, ¥D«ù¤H, °ê¬ì·|, 86/8-87/7

3. A Prototype System of Host-based Virtual Private Network, ¦@¦P¥D«ù¤H, ¤¤¬ì°|, 87/8-88/7

4. Towards the Building of a Web-Based Collaborative Computing Environment, ¨ó¦P¬ã¨s¤H­û, °ê¬ì·|¹q«H°ê®a«¬­pµe, 87/8-88/7

 

87 ¦~«×

5. Design of Name Service for Collaborative Web Proxy Servers, ¥D«ù¤H, °ê¬ì·|, 87/8-88/7¡C

6. A Prototype System of Host-based Virtual Private Network, ¦@¦P¥D«ù¤H, ¤¤¬ì°|, 87/8-88/7¡C§¹¦¨¤@­ÓÂI¹ïÂIªºµêÀÀ¥[±K³q¹D¨t²Î¡C

 

88 ¦~«×

7.¬F©²¾ÌÃÒºÞ²z¤¤¤ß¦w¥þ¨¾Å@»P¦w¥þ±j¤Æ¤ÀªR¬ã¨s, 88/10-89/09, ¤¤µØ¹q«H©Ò¡C

8. Digital library/museum content management: rights management

 

89 ¦~«×

9. °õ¦æ¤¤¬ã°|¸ê°T©Ò©Ò¤º­pµe¡y¸ê°Tºô»Ú¦X§@¹êÅç«Ç¤§¬ã¨s»P¶}µo-¦w¥þºÞ²z¾÷¨î¡z

10 ¦æ°ê¬ì·|­pµe¡u¦æ°ÊµêÀÀ±M½u¤§¦w¥þµ{¦¡¥N²z¨t²Î¡v,NSC89-2213-E-001-044¡A89/08¡ã90/07

11 °õ¦æ°ê»Ú¼Æ¦ì¹Ï®ÑÀ]¦X§@¬ã¨s­pµe--IDLP¡Ð´¼¼z°]²£Åv«OÅ@¾÷¨î¬ã¨s¡Ð¼Æ¦ì¹Ï®ÑÀ]¤º²[«OÅ@¤Î¹q¤lª©ÅvºÞ²z, NSC89-2750-P-001-022-5, 89/08¡ã90/07¡C

12. °õ¦æ¤¤¬ã°|¥DÃD­pµe¡y°ê®a¨åÂÃ¼Æ¦ì¤Æ±M®× ¡V rights management¡z

13. °õ¦æ TW-CERT ¬ã¨s­pµe (®ü­xÁ`³¡¡B°ê¨¾³¡¡B¬ã¦Ò·|µ¥³æ¦ì©e°U­pµe)

14. »P¤¤­ì¤j¾Ç¸ê¤u¨t¥ÐßNºa±Ð±Â¦@¦P°õ¦æ¬ã¨s­pµe¡]¤¤µØ¹q«H¬ã¨s©Ò¡B¤¤¬ì°|µ¥©e°U­pµe¡^

 

90 ¦~«×

15. °õ¦æ©Ò¤º­pµe»P°ê¬ì·|­pµe¡y¸ê°Tºô»Ú¦X§@¹êÅç«Ç¤§¬ã¨s»P¶}µo-¦w¥þºÞ²z¾÷¨î¡z

16°õ¦æ°ê»Ú¼Æ¦ì¹Ï®ÑÀ]¦X§@¬ã¨s­pµe--IDLP¡Ð´¼¼z°]²£Åv«OÅ@¾÷¨î¬ã¨s¡Ð¼Æ¦ì¹Ï®ÑÀ]¤º²[«OÅ@¤Î¹q¤lª©ÅvºÞ²z, 90/08¡ã91/07¡C

17°õ¦æ¤¤¬ã°|¥DÃD­pµe¡y°ê®a¨åÂÃ¼Æ¦ì¤Æ±M®× ¡V rights management¡z

18 °õ¦æ TW-CERT ¬ã¨s­pµe (®ü­xÁ`³¡¡B°ê¨¾³¡¡B¬ã¦Ò·|µ¥³æ¦ì©e°U­pµe)

19. »P¤¤­ì¤j¾Ç¸ê¤u¨t¥ÐßNºa±Ð±Â¦@¦P°õ¦æ¬ã¨s­pµe¡]¤¤µØ¹q«H¬ã¨s©Ò¡B¤¤¬ì°|µ¥©e°U­pµe¡^

¤¤µØ¹q«H¬ã¨s©Ò¡G¾ã¦X©Ê¸ê°T¨t²Î¤§¦w¥þ¨¾¿m¾÷¨î¬ã¨s(TL-90-8F01)

¤¤¬ì°|¡G®zÂI¸ê®Æ®w³]­p¬ã¨s(NSC 90-2623-7-033-006)

20 ¦æ¸gÀÙ³¡¤E¤Q¦~«×¬ì§Þ±M®×°ê®a¸ê³q¦w¥þ§Þ³NªA°È­pµe¤À¥]¬ã¨s­pµe¡y³W¹º§Ú°ê¸ê³q¦w¥þ§Þ³N¬ãµoµ¦²¤¡z, 90/9~90/12

 

91 ¦~«×

21. °õ¦æ¤¤¬ã°|¥DÃD­pµe¡y°ê®a¨åÂÃ¼Æ¦ì¤Æ±M®× ¡V rights management¡z¡A92/1¡ã92/12¡C

22. °õ¦æ TW-CERT ¬ã¨s­pµe DNS¦w¥þÀË´ú¾÷¨î (TWNIC©e°U­pµe), 92/1~92/12¡C

23. »P¤¤­ì¤j¾Ç¸ê¤u¨t¥ÐßNºa±Ð±Â¦@¦P°õ¦æ¤¤µØ¹q«H¬ã¨s©Ò­pµe¡C

24.  °õ¦æ¸gÀÙ³¡¤E¤Q¤@¦~«×¬ì§Þ±M®×°ê®a¸ê³q¦w¥þ§Þ³NªA°È­pµe¤À¥]¬ã¨s­pµe¡y³W¹º§Ú°ê¸ê³q¦w¥þ¹wĵ¾÷¨î¬ã¨s»P³W¹º¡z, 91/5~91/12

¦@¦P¥D«ù°õ¦æ Open Source Foundry ­pµe¡A92/1¡ã92/12¡C

 

l          ¥Ø«e¶i¦æ¤¤¤§­pµe

 

1. µ{¦¡°ÊºA¦æ¬°¦w¥þ¤ÀªR

¡@¡@µ{¦¡¦æ¬°»P³nÅé¦w¥þ©ÊÃö«Y±K¤Á¡A¥¢±±(crash)ªºµ{¦¡±N¦³¥i¯à³Q¹B¥Î¦Ó¦¨¬°¦w¥þ®zÂI©Ò¦b¡C§Ú­Ì«ÜÃø¦bµ{¦¡¥¢±±«á§ä¥X¯u¥¿­ì¦]¡A¦]¦¹¦h¼Æ¬ã¨sÂǧU©ó°ÊºAµ{¦¡¹êÅç¡AµÛ­«©ó°»´ú¿ù»~»P°Ï§O¥¢±±ªº®Ú·½¡C³nÅé¼t°Ó¬°¤F»°¤W¥«µo¦æªº®É¶¡¡A¥H­P¨t²Î±`¦ñÀHµÛ«D¦³·Nªº¹L¥¢¦Ó²£¥Í³nÅ饢±±ªºª¬ªp¡A¦³¨Ç¥u¼vÅT¨t²Îí©w©Ê¡A¦³¨Ç«h²£¥Í¦w¥þ®zÂI¡C§Ú­Ìªº¥Ø¼Ð¬O³]­p¤u¨ãµ{¦¡¡A¶i¦æ°ÊºA¦w¥þ¤ÀªR¡A»²§U§ä´M¿ù»~ÂI¡A§PÂ_¬O§_¥i¨Ñ¹B¥Î²£¥Í¨t²Î¦w¥þ¯Ê³´¡C

 

¡@¡@§Ú­Ì­º¥ý±N¶}µo°õ¦æºÊ±±¾Þ§@¨t²Î¡C¦¹¨t²Î·|©w®É¶i¦æ°õ¦æª¬ºAºÊ´ú¡A­Yµ{¦¡¥¢±±¡A¥i¥H­«½Æ­ì¥ý°õ¦æ¨BÆJ¡A¹Á¸ÕIJµo¥ý«eªº¿ù»~¡AÂǦ¹¥iÆ[¹î°õ¦æµ{¦¡ªº¤º³¡¦æ¬°¡A¨Ò¦p API ©I¥s§Ç¦C¶¶§Ç¡A©I¥s°Ñ¼Æ»Pªð¦^­ÈÃö«Y¡C³o¨Ç¥i¸g¥Ñ¥]ÂШt²Î API ©I¥sªº§Þ³N¹F¦¨¡A¨Ã§PÂ_¨äµ²ªG§_²§±`¡C¹w´Á±N§¹¦¨µ{¦¡ª¬ºAÆ[´ú¨t²Î¡A¥i§PÂ_©ÒÆ[´ú¤§¥¢±±ÂI¬O§_¦w¥þ¬Û¨Ì¡]¬O§_¦w¥þ¥i¹B¥Î©Ê¡^¡C

¡@¡@§Ú­Ì³°Äò±N«Ø¥ß³nÅéÀ³¥Îµ{¦¡»P§@·~¨t²Î¨ç¼Æ¤§¶¡ªº¤¬°Ê¤¶­±¡C

¡@¡@¸g¥Ñ¥]ÂЪº§Þ³N¡A¤£¦ý¯à°O¿ý¬ÛÃö­«­n°Ñ¼Æ¡A¤]¯à±µ¨ü´ú¸Õ«ü¥O¶i¦æ©I¥s°Ñ¼Æ»Pªð¦^¼Æ­Èªº¥ô·N´À´«¡C§Ú­Ì¥i¥HÀH·N¾Þ§@µ{¦¡¡A§ïÅÜ·Q­n¹B§@ªº©I¥s°Ñ¼Æ¡AÆ[¹î¨ä¦^À³ª¬ºA¨Ã§ä¥X¥iºÃªº¥¢±±ÂI¡C§Ú­Ì±N³]­p¤¬°Ê¤¶­±»P´ú¸ÕÅX°Ê¨t²Î¥H«K±±¨î¥]ÂÐÂI¡A¨Ã´£¨Ñ©I¥sÂI¬ÛÃö¸ê°T¥H²£¥Í¸û²Ó·Lªº´ú¸Õ²[»\²v¡C¹w´Á±N§¹¦¨µ{¦¡¿ù»~ª`¤J´ú¸Õ¨t²Î¡A¦³¨t²Î©Ê¦a¿Eµo¿ù»~ÂI¡A¨Ã²£¥Í¦³·Nªº¦w¥þ¹B¥Îµ{¦¡½X¡C

 

ÃöÁäµü¡G³nÅé¦w¥þ¡B°ÊºA¤ÀªR¡B³nÅé¥]Âо¹¡BCOTS ®zÂI´ú¸Õ¡B¦w¥þ¥i¹B¥Î©Ê

 

¡@¡@Program running behavior has much to do with software security. Crashed software may be exploited to be a potential vulnerability. It is difficult to reconstruct system failures after a program has crashed. There is much research effort on detecting program errors and identifying their root causes either by static analysis or observing their running behavior through dynamic program instrument. In order to meet the time to market, software releases with unintended flaws. Some of them cause software crash, while others may introduce security vulnerabilities. Our goal is to design a tool that helps analyze program running behavior and determine if it is an exploitable vulnerability.

¡@¡@We will develop an execution instrument and interception system. This system will periodically monitor software running behavior. If the software crashes, we can roll back to the latest checkpoint and trigger the fault. We will observe the internal behavior of running programs, such as API call sequence, call parameters and return values through wrapping system call API techniques, and determine whether these things are anomalous or not. We expect to develop a dynamic instrument tool able to determine if the crash site is security exploitable.

¡@¡@We investigate the design and implementation of such a tool to instrument the interfaces between the software application and the operating system functions with an interactive software wrapper. This wrapper cannot only intercept the functions to record the parameters and the return value but also receiving testing directives to replace calling parameters and the return value with any arbitrary value. We could use this tool to easily instrument the application, change the intended OS function call parameters with testing data and observe the response of the application to find out the suspicious crash sites. We devise a GUI and testing driver to control the wrapper and provide call site information with finer-grained test coverage. We expect to complete a fault injection tool systematically generating triggers for intended exploit code.

 

Keywords: Software Security, Dynamic Analysis, Software Wrapper, COTS Vulnerability Testing, Security Exploitability


 

2. ´O¤J¦¡·P´ú¾¹®Ö¤ß´c¦HÀô¹Ò´ú¸Õ»P«OÅ@

¡@¡@Sensor network ©Ò§G«ØªºÀô¹Ò³q±`¾D¹J¨ì­ì³]­pªÌ©Ò³]·Q¤£¨ìªºª¬ªp¡A¨Ò¦p°ª·Å¡B°ªÀã«×¡B¾_°Ê¡B¹q·½¤£¨¬¡B¹qºÏ¤zÂZµ¥¡A³o¬O°õ¦æÀô¹Ò¤£¦P©Ò¾É­P¡F¦Ó©Ò·f°tªº¤¶­±¹q¸ô©Î¿é¥X¤J¯S©Ê¤]¦³©Ò®t²§¡A³o¬O¤H¬°³]­pªº®t²§°ÝÃD¡C³o¨â¤è­±ªº²§°Ê¡G°õ¦æÀô¹Ò»P³]­pÀô¹Ò¡A¿é¥X¤J¤¶­±»P³]­p¤¶­±¡A³£·|¾É­PSensor network ªº¤£¥¿±`¤u§@¡C§Ú­Ì¬ã¨sªº¥Ø¼Ð¦b©ó¶i¦æ¿ù»~ª`¤J´ú¸Õ»P´c¦HÀô¹Ò¼ÒÀÀ¡A§Æ¾¬¦b§G«Ø¨t²Î«e¡A§ä¥X®Ö¤ß¨t²Î¥i¯àªº®zÂI¯Ê³´¡A¥H´£¦­­×¥¿¡C¦P®É³]­p¬ÛÃö«OÅ@µ{§Ç¡A¦b­±Á{¤£¥¿±`¥~¦b±ø¥ó¿Eµoªº±¡ªp¤U¡A¤´¯àºû«ù³Ì§C°ò¥»»Ý¨D¡B¦s¬¡¹B§@¡C¦]¬°¦¹Ãþ«¬®Ö¤ß¨t²Î¥²¶·ºë²¥\¯à¡A¹Bºâ¥\¯à¦³­­¡A¦p¦ó¦b¦³­­«×¸ê·½±¡ªp¤U¡A¶i¦æ®e¿ù¾Þ§@¡A¬O¦¹¬ã¨s¨ã¬D¾Ô©Êªº¤u§@¡A§Ú­Ì¹w­p¹Á¸Õ¦^´_¾É¦V­pºâ(Recovery-oriented Computing)¬ÛÃö³]­p¤èªk¡A¦b¤£¼W¥[¦h¾l¤¸¥ó±¡ªp¤U¡A¹F¦¨±j°·©Ê®Ö¤ß³]­pªº»Ý¨D¡C¨Æ«eªº´c¦HÀô¹Ò¼ÒÀÀ¤]¬O³]­pªº­«ÂI¡A¦p¦ó²£¥Í§¹¾ã¡B°ª²[»\²vªº´ú¸Õ¸ê®Æ¤]±N¬O¥»¬ã¨s¥²¶·­±Á{ªºÃøÃD¡C§Ú­Ì¹w´Á§ï¶i¥Ø«e¤wµo®iªºsensor network ®Ö¤ßµ{¦¡¡A¨ã¦³¦Û°Ê¦^´_¹B§@ªº®e¿ù¾÷¨î¡A¦P®É«Ø¥ß§¹¾ãªº´c¦HÀô¹Ò¼ÒÀÀ´ú¸Õ¸ê®Æ²£¥Í¨t²Î¡C

 

ÃöÁäµü¡G´O¤J¦¡®Ö¤ß¡B±´´ú¾¹ºô¸ô¡B¿ù»~ª`¤J´ú¸Õ¡B¦^´_¾É¦V­pºâ¡B¥²µM¥¢±±¼Ò²Õ¡C

 

¡@¡@The deployment of sensor network often encountered unexpected situations, such as high temperature, high humidity, vibration, insufficient power supply, and EM interference. They are introduced by the variation of execution environment; Furthermore, differences between interface circuit and input/output characteristic will also impact the design decisions, which are man-made variations. These two aspects of variations: execution and design environment, input/output and design interface, all attributed to malfunctions of sensor network systems. Our research objectives are to exploit fault injection tests and malicious environment simulation, wish to find potential vulnerabilities before the system deployment, and fix them in time. Similarly, we try to design related protection measures, when in front of external triggers abnormally rendered, the system can still maintain their minimum service requirement and survive to work properly. Since such micro-scale kernels must maintain their concise features, due to limited computation power, it¡¦s a challenging work to proceed fault-tolerance operations under restricted resource.

¡@¡@We expected to use recovery-oriented computing approach to attain robustness requirement under the assumption of no redundant components. It is also an important design decision to emulate the malicious environment. How to generate complete and high coverage benchmark data will be the major obstacle of our research. We expect to improve our current sensor network kernel, with automatic recovery capability, and build a benchmark generator for the environment.

Keywords: Embedded Kernel, Sensor Network, Fault Injection, Recovery-Oriented Computing, Game Semantics, Crash-only Modules, Dependability, Micro-reboot


 

3. ¶}©ñ¬[ºcªº¿Ã¹õ¦ê¬y¨t²Î

OpenScreen: An Open Architecture for Streaming Contents for E-learning Environment and Network (or OASEC: An Open Architecture for Streaming E-learning Contents)

¡@¡@§Ú­Ì±Nµo®i¤@®M¶}©ñ·½½Xªº¿Ã¹õ¦ê¬y¨t²Î(Screen Streaming System)¡C¾ã¦X´X­Ó¿Ã¹õ¦ê¬y´X­Ó¥D­n§Þ³N¡G¿Ã¹õµe­±Â^¨ú¡CÂ^¨ú¸ê®ÆÀ£ÁY¡C¶Ç°eµe­±»PÅã¥Ü(rendering)¡C¤ä´© MS-window »P X-window Åã¥Ü¡C»P¦hºØ´CÅé¸ê®Æ¦P¨B¡A¥]¬Aµø°T»P»y­µ¡C¤ä´©«á»s§@¡B¨Ã¯à¦Û°Ê¤Æ¡C¡]»s§@¥H²³ø¼ÐÃD¤§¼v­µÀ˯Á¥Ø¿ý¡^¡C

¤ä´© SMIL¡C¤ä´©§ó¦h´CÅé¸ê®Æ¡A¦p lecturer gesture data¡Bfacial expression¡Blaser pointer tracking¡Binstant message¡C¸Ñ¨M¨ä¦P¨B»P­«Å|Åã¥Ü°ÝÃD(°ÊºA overlay)¡C±N±Ä¥ÎApplication Sharing ¬ÛÃö¨ó©wÀ³¥Î¡B»PApplication Streaming ªºªx¥Î©ÊÀ³¥Î¤èªk¡C¥Ø«e¦b e-learning ¤è­±§Þ³N¤w¸g¬Û·í¦¨¼ô¡A¹B¥Îªº¤èªk¥i¤À¬°´XÃþ¡Gscreen capture, application preprocessing, »Papplication sharing (multi-point)¡C¥D­n»Ý¨D¦p¤U¡G

 

  • real-time application sharing (on-line with lecturer), sharing with multiple-users for interactions between audience and the lecturer. Most audiences are read-only sharing. We can optimize for such users. The challenge issues are how we record the interactions/sharing and automate the process for post-production. Since the interactions are in real-time, applications of the lecturer are shared by all audiences and audiences can raise any questions by sharing their actions on the screen to the lecturer and all the other audiences. (for example, type in chat room, draw the screen,¡K) Floor control is of concerns. Hope all interactions are recorded.
  • on-demand application sharing for pre-recorded media. Audiences can connect on their demand. Actually, teaching assistant(TA) can be of help with users interested in the pre-recorded media. TA will act like the lecturer and play with the audiences, including annotating in the streaming media.

 

4.³nÅ骩¥»¾ú¥v¸ê®Æµo±¸¥HÅçÃÒ¶}©ñ·½½X¥~³ò°Ñ»PªÌªº¾Ç²ß¹Lµ{

Mining Version Histories for Verifying Learning Process of Legitimate Peripheral Participants

 ¡@¡@Since code revisions will reflect the extent of human involvement in the development process, revision histories reveal and annotate the interaction and interface between developers and modules.

¡@¡@We therefore try to divide developers and modules into groups according to revision histories from the open source software repository, such as sourceforge.net. To describe the interactions between open source development process, Legitimate Peripheral Participation (LPP) is a representative model for partitioning developers into groups such as core term and peripheral by the evolution process of learning behavior. With the conventional module relationship, we divide modules into kernel and non-kernel (such as UI). Groups of developers and modules have been formerly partitioned in natural sense with informal criteria. In our work, we propose a developer-module link relation model to analyze these grouping structures between developers and modules. Our results discover some process cases with relative importance in the constructed graph related to project development. It reveals a certain subtle relationships of interactions between core and non-core team developers, and interfaces between kernel and non-kernel modules.

 

Keywords: Open Boundary, Open Source Software Development Process, Legitimate peripheral participants(LPP).