Cited by 85Privacy-Preserving Technologies in DataAccess Control and TrustIoT-based Smart Home Systems

Learning Context-Aware Policies from Multiple Smart Homes via Federated Multi-Task Learning

Yu, Tianlong, Li, Tian, Sun, Yuqiong, Nanda, Susanta, Smith, Virginia, Sekar, Vyas, Seshan, Srinivasan·2020·2020 IEEE/ACM Fifth International Conference on Internet-of-Things Design and Implementation (IoTDI)

Abstract

Internet-of-Things (IoT) devices deployed in smart homes expose users to cyber threats that can cause privacy leakage (e.g., smart TV eavesdropping) or physical hazards (e.g., smart stove causing fire). Prior work has argued that to effectively detect and prevent such threats, contextual policies are needed to decide if an access to an IoT device should be allowed. Today, however, such contextual access control policies need to be manually generated by IoT developers or users via preinstallation or runtime prompts. Both approaches suffer from potential misconfigurations and often fail to provide coverage over the space of policies. In this paper, our goal is to build a machine learning framework to automatically learn the contextual access control policies from the observed behavioral patterns of users in smart homes. Designing such a learning framework is challenging on two fronts. First, the accuracy is constrained by insufficient data in some smart homes and the diversity of IoT access patterns across different smart homes. Second, since we rely on usage patterns of IoT devices, users will have privacy concerns. We address these challenges in designing LoFTI, a federated multi-task learning framework that learns customized context-aware policies from multiple smart homes in a privacy-preserving manner. Based on prior user studies, we identify six general types of features to capture contextual access patterns. We build a simple machine learning model with temporal structure to achieve a good trade-off between accuracy and communication/computation cost. We design a custom data augmentation mechanism to address the issue of unbalanced data in learning (i.e., few negative vs. normal samples). We show that LoFTI can achieve low false positives/false negatives, reducing the false negative rate by 24.2% and false positive rate by 49.5%, comparing with the state-of-the-art single-home learning and all-home learning mechanism.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/iotdi49375.2020.00017

Cites

15 of 15 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 17 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Yu, T., Li, T., Sun, Y., Nanda, S., Smith, V., Sekar, V., & Seshan, S.
Affiliations
  • Carnegie Mellon University (US)
  • NortonLifeLock (United States) (US)
Venue
2020 IEEE/ACM Fifth International Conference on Internet-of-Things Design and Implementation (IoTDI)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2020-04
Pages
104-115
OpenAlex
W3027859434
Cited by
85
References
17
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 6
FWCI
5.15
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
IEEE/ACM International Conference on Internet-of-Things Design and Implementation (IoTDI) (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Privacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Access Control and Trust
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › IoT-based Smart Home Systems
Keywords
context-aware access control, home automation, Internet of Things security, federated learning, multi-task learning, privacy-preserving machine learning, user behavior patterns, data augmentation, class imbalance

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review