Dynamic Self-management of Autonomic Systems: The Reputation, Quality and Credibility (RQC) Scheme

  • Anurag Garg
  • Roberto Battiti
  • Gianni Costanzi
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3457)


In this paper, we present a feedback-based system for managing trust and detecting malicious behavior in autonomically behaving networks. Like other distributed trust management systems, nodes rate the interactions they have with other nodes and this information is stored in a distributed fashion.

Two crucial insights motivate our work. We recognize as separate entities the trust placed in a node, reputation, and the trust placed in the recommendations made by a node, credibility. We also introduce the concept of quality of a trust rating. Together, these two factors enhance the ability of each node to decide how much confidence it can place in a rating provided to it by a third party.

We implement our scheme on a structured P2P network, Pastry, though our results can be extended to generic autonomic communication systems. Experimental results considering different models for malicious behavior indicate the contexts in which the RQC scheme performs better than existing schemes.


Trust management reputation quality credibility autonomic systems peer-to-peer systems 


  1. 1.
    Lampe, C., Resnick, P.: Slash(dot) and burn: distributed moderation in a large online conversation space. In: Proceedings of the 2004 conference on Human factors in computing systems, pp. 543–550. ACM Press, New York (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Resnick, P., Zeckhauser, R., Swanson, J., Lockwood, K.: The value of reputation on ebay: A controlled experiment (2002)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dellarocas, C.: Immunizing online reputation reporting systems against unfair ratings and discriminatory behavior. In: Proceedings of the 2nd ACM conference on Electronic commerce, pp. 150–157. ACM Press, New York (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zacharia, G., Moukas, A., Maes, P.: Collaborative reputation mechanisms in electronic marketplaces. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-second Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, vol. 8, p. 8026. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (1999)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Aberer, K., Despotovic, Z.: Managing trust in a peer-2-peer information system. In: CIKM, pp. 310–317 (2001)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cornelli, F., Damiani, E., di Vimercati, S.D.C., Paraboschi, S., Samarati, P.: Choosing reputable servents in a p2p network. In: Eleventh International World Wide Web Conference, Honolulu, Hawaii (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Damiani, E., di Vimercati, S.D.C., Paraboschi, S., Samarati, P.: Managing and sharing servents’ reputations in p2p systems. IEEE Transactions on Data and Knowledge Engineering 15, 840–854 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kamvar, S.D., Schlosser, M.T., Garcia-Molina, H.: The eigentrust algorithm for reputation management in p2p networks. In: Proceedings of the twelfth international conference on World Wide Web, pp. 640–651. ACM Press, New York (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Buchegger, S., Boudec, J.Y.L.: A robust reputation system for p2p and mobile ad-hoc networks. In: Proceedings of the Second Workshop on the Economics of Peer-to-Peer Systems (2004)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rowstron, A., Druschel, P.: Pastry: Scalable, distributed object location and routing for large-scale peer-to-peer systems. In: Guerraoui, R. (ed.) Middleware 2001. LNCS, vol. 2218, pp. 329–350. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anurag Garg
    • 1
  • Roberto Battiti
    • 1
  • Gianni Costanzi
    • 1
  1. 1.Dipartimento di Informatica e TelecomunicazioniUniversità di TrentoPovoItaly

Personalised recommendations