The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The right type of trust for distributed systems
Open accessAbstract
Research in information security has traditionally focused on where to place or how to propagate trust.In that sense, a cyptographic algorithm or protocol is simply a mechanism to transfer trust from where it exists to where it is needed.This paper puts the focus on trust itself and shows that it is a very complex concept with many interesting and important implications.We do not attempt to define a formal trust model, but rather examine the types of trust and trust relationships which are relevant for information security.It is shown that the existence of trust as a phenomenon depends on the existence of malicious behaviour.This observation leads to the distinction between passionate entities with human-like capabilities, and rational entities which basically are systems.Dust can then be defined as the belief that a rational entity will resist malicious manipulation or that a passionate entity will behave without malicious intent.It is also shown that trust relationships exhibit a great diversity, that they are based on knowledge and that they contain aspects in common with stmtegy games.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
A survey of trust in internet applications
Grandison, T., & Sloman, M. (2000) · IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials · doi:10.1109/comst.2000.5340804 · Cited by 1,157
Abdul-Rahman, A., & Hailes, S. (1997) · Proceedings of the 1997 workshop on New security paradigms - NSPW '97 · doi:10.1145/283699.283739 · Cited by 699
Jøsang, A. (2007) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-540-74810-6_8 · Cited by 140
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Jøsang, A.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 1996 workshop on New security paradigms - NSPW '96
- Publisher
- ACM Press
- Published
- 1996
- Pages
- 119-131
- OpenAlex
- W2172085742
- Cited by
- 314
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 14.53
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The right type of trust for distributed systems. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/304851.304877
- The paper
- Jøsang, A. (1996). The right type of trust for distributed systems. Proceedings of the 1996 workshop on New security paradigms - NSPW '96. https://doi.org/10.1145/304851.304877
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.