Trustworthy is the Family Operating System®, an online service that helps modern families protect, organize and optimize their important information — ID’s, Money, Property, Passwords, Insurance, Taxes, Legal, Emergency Instructions, The Family Archive and more

Trustworthy

This paper is available on arxiv under CC 4.0 license. Authors: (1) Ayei E. Ibor, Trustworthy Digital Infrastructure for Identity Systems, The Alan Turing Institute, United Kingdom; (2) Mark Hooper, Trustworthy Digital Infrastructure for Identity Systems, The Alan Turing Institute, United Kingdom; (3) Carsten Maple, Trustworthy Digital Infrastructure for Identity Systems, The Alan Turing Institute, United Kingdom; (4) Gregory Epiphaniou, WMG, University of Warwick, United Kingdom. Table of Links Abstract & Introduction Background Review of Literature Methodology Discussion of Findings Conclusion and Future Work & References 6. Conclusion and Future Work Trustworthy interoperability is a key enabler for identity management and widens the dimensions of e-government in developing countries. This research provided insights into the challenges, opportunities, and requirements of interoperability and highlighted the limitations of current interoperability solutions such as the Estonian X-Road and the eIDAS of the European Union. We found that each existing interoperability solution has its benefits and drawbacks, although both are targeted at a common goal. To achieve seamless communication of identification data, we proposed an approach for scoping requirements by first identifying the key processes to identity management in an interoperability context. Furthermore, we addressed the limitations of the current solutions using an architecture that considers the flexibility of identity verification and validation through an interoperable layer that is based on four interacting layers of data representation, semantics, binding, and security and privacy. For future work, an analysis of country-specific use cases for achieving interoperability in the African identity ecosystem will be performed. References African Union, 2020. The Digital Transformation Strategy for Africa (2020-30), Available at https://openresearch-repository.anu.edu.au/bitstream/1885/278587/1/GhaEcon_24.pdf, Accessed 20 May 2023. Alamillo, I., Mouille, S., Rock, A., Soumelidis, N., Tabor, M., Gorniak, S., 2023. Digital identity standards: Analysis of standardisation requirements in support of cybersecurity policy, Available at file:///C:/Users/aIbor/Downloads/Digital_Identity_Standards%20(1).pdf, Accessed 30 July 2023. Aldosary, M. and Alqahtani, N., 2021. A Survey on Federated Identity Management Systems Limitation and Solutions. International Journal of Network Security & Its Applications (IJNSA) Vol, 13. ANSSI, 2023. The EIDAS Regulation, Available at https://www.ssi.gouv.fr/en/regulation/digital-confidence/the-eidas-regulation/, Accessed 09 April 2023. Atick, J., 2016. Digital identity: the essential guide. In ID4Africa Identity Forum (Vol. 2016, pp. 1-3). Backhouse, J. and Halperin, R., 2009. Approaching interoperability for identity management systems. In The Future of Identity in the Information Society (pp. 245-268). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. Bakhtina, M., Matulevičius, R., Awad, A. and Kivimäki, P., 2022. Rebooting Trust Management in X-Road, Public Report. Nordic Institute for Interoperability Solutions (NIIS). Bhattarai, R., Pappel, I., Vainsalu, H., Yahia, S.B. and Draheim, D., 2019. The impact of the single digital gateway regulation from the citizens’ perspective. Procedia Computer Science, 164, pp.159-167. Bandura, R. and Ramanujam, S.R., 2021. Developing inclusive digital payment systems. Center for Strategic and International Studies, 21. Benaddi, H., Laaz, N., Bouhlal, A. and El Kettani, E., 2023. Data storage architecture for egovernment interoperability: Morocco case. Indonesian Journal of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, 29(3), pp.1678-1686. Catuogno, L. and Galdi, C., 2014. Achieving interoperability between federated identity management systems: A case of study. Journal of High Speed Networks, 20(4), pp.209-221. Colbern, A. and Ramakrishnan, S.K., 2020. Citizenship reimagined: A new framework for state rights in the United States. Cambridge University Press. Cuijpers, C.M.K.C. and Schroers, J., 2014. eIDAS as guideline for the development of a pan European eID framework in FutureID. Domingo, E. and Teevan, C., 2022. Africa’s journey towards an integrated digital payments landscape and how the EU can support it. ECDPM brief, 23. European Commission, 2023a. X-Road Data Exchange Layer, Available at https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/collection/ict-security/solution/x-road-data-exchange-layer/about, Accessed 10 April 2023. European Commission, 2023b. Shaping Europe’s digital future, Available at https://digitalstrategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/discover-eidas, Accessed 20 April 2023. Fathalla, E.S., Azab, M., Xin, C. and Wu, H., 2023. PT-SSIM: A Proactive, Trustworthy SelfSovereign Identity Management System. IEEE Internet of Things Journal. Grassi, P.A., Garcia, M.E. and Fenton, J.L., 2017. Digital identity guidelines. NIST special publication, 800, pp.63-3. Gelb, A. and Metz, A.D., 2018. Identification revolution: Can digital ID be harnessed for development?. Brookings Institution Press. Halili, F. and Ramadani, E., 2018. Web services: a comparison of soap and rest services. Modern Applied Science, 12(3), p.175. Hoffmann, T. and Solarte-Vasquez, M.C., 2022. The estonian e-residency programme and its role beyond the country’s digital public sector ecosystem. Revista CES Derecho, 13(2), pp.184-204. Hölbl, M., Kežmah, B. and Kompara, M., 2023. eIDAS Interoperability and Cross-Border Compliance Issues. Mathematics, 11(2), p.430. Hummer, D. and Rebovich, D.J., 2023. Identity theft and financial loss. In Handbook on Crime and Technology (pp. 38-53). Edward Elgar Publishing. Irvin-Erickson, Y., 2023. How Does Immigration Status and Citizenship Affect Identity Theft Victimization Risk in the US? Insights from the 2018 National Crime Victimization Survey Identity Theft Supplement. Victims & Offenders, pp.1-24. Kaaniche, N., Laurent, M. and Belguith, S., 2020. Privacy enhancing technologies for solving the privacy-personalization paradox: Taxonomy and survey. Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 171, p.102807. Kanagwa, B., Nakatumba-Nabende, J., Mugwanya, R., Kigozi Kahiigi, E. and Ngabirano, S., 2018. Towards an interoperability e-government framework for Uganda. In e-Infrastructure and e-Services for Developing Countries: 9th International Conference, AFRICOMM 2017, Lagos, Nigeria, December 11-12, 2017, Proceedings 9 (pp. 16-28). Springer International Publishing. Kiourtis, A., Giannetsos, T., Menesidou, S.A., Mavrogiorgou, A., Symvoulidis, C., GRAZİANİ, A., KLEFTAKİS, S., MAVROGİORGOS, K., ZAFEİROPOULOS, N., GKOLİAS, C.A. and KYRİAZİS, D., 2023. Identity management standards: A literature review. Computers and Informatics, 3(1), pp.35-46. Krimmer, R., Dedovic, S., Schmidt, C. and Corici, A.A., 2021, August. Developing crossborder e-Governance: Exploring interoperability and cross-border integration. In International Conference on Electronic Participation (pp. 107-124). Cham: Springer International Publishing. Kotzé, P. and Alberts, R., 2017. Towards a Conceptual Model for an e-Government Interoperability Framework for South Africa. In ICEIS (3) (pp. 493-506). Lips, S., Bharosa, N. and Draheim, D., 2020. eIDAS implementation challenges: the case of Estonia and the Netherlands. In Electronic Governance and Open Society: Challenges in Eurasia: 7th International Conference, EGOSE 2020, St. Petersburg, Russia, November 18– 19, 2020, Proceedings 7 (pp. 75-89). Springer International Publishing. Luong, D.A. and Park, J.H., 2023. Privacy-Preserving Identity Management System on Blockchain Using Zk-SNARK. IEEE Access, 11, pp.1840-1853. Manda, M. I. and Backhouse, J., "Addressing trust, security and privacy concerns in egovernment integration, interoperability and information sharing through policy: a case of South Africa" (2016). CONF-IRM 2016 Proceedings. Paper 67. http://aisel.aisnet.org/confirm2016/6 Masiero, S., 2023. Digital identity as platform-mediated surveillance. Big Data & Society, 10(1), p.20539517221135176. McBride, K., Kütt, A., Ben Yahia, S. and Draheim, D., 2019, November. On positive feedback loops in digital government architecture. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Management of Digital EcoSystems (pp. 174-180). Mocanu, S., Chiriac, A.M., Popa, C., Dobrescu, R. and Saru, D., 2019. Identification and trust techniques compatible with eIDAS regulation. In Security and Privacy in New Computing Environments: Second EAI International Conference, SPNCE 2019, Tianjin, China, April 13– 14, 2019, Proceedings 2 (pp. 656-665). Springer International Publishing. Pöhn, D. and Hommel, W., 2023. Towards an Improved Taxonomy of Attacks Related to Digital Identities and Identity Management Systems. Security and Communication Networks, 2023. Priisalu, J. and Ottis, R., 2017. Personal control of privacy and data: Estonian experience. Health and technology, 7(4), pp.441-451. Saputro, R., Pappel, I., Vainsalu, H., Lips, S. and Draheim, D., 2020, April. Prerequisites for the adoption of the X-Road interoperability and data exchange framework: a comparative study. In 2020 Seventh International Conference on eDemocracy & eGovernment (ICEDEG) (pp. 216-222). IEEE. Schmidt, C. and Krimmer, R., 2022. How to implement the European digital single market: identifying the catalyst for digital transformation. Journal of European Integration, 44(1), pp.59-80. Sedlmeir, J., Smethurst, R., Rieger, A. and Fridgen, G., 2021. Digital identities and verifiable credentials. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 63(5), pp.603-613. Sharif, A., Ranzi, M., Carbone, R., Sciarretta, G. and Ranise, S., 2022, August. SoK: A Survey on Technological Trends for (pre) Notified eIDAS Electronic Identity Schemes. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security (pp. 1-10). Sharma, R. and Panigrahi, P.K., 2015. Developing a roadmap for planning and implementation of interoperability capability in e-government. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 9(4), pp.426-447. Solvak, M., Unt, T., Rozgonjuk, D., Võrk, A., Veskimäe, M. and Vassil, K., 2019. Egovernance diffusion: Population level e-service adoption rates and usage patterns. Telematics and Informatics, 36, pp.39-54. Spiliotopoulos, T., Sheik, A.T., Gottardello, D. and Dover, R., 2023. Onboarding Citizens to Digital Identity Systems. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.13511. Srinivas, J., Das, A.K. and Kumar, N., 2019. Government regulations in cyber security: Framework, standards and recommendations. Future generation computer systems, 92, pp.178-188. Tang, F., Ma, C. and Cheng, K., 2023. Privacy-preserving authentication scheme based on zero trust architecture. Digital Communications and Networks. The World Bank, 2023a. ID4D Global Dataset, Available at https://id4d.worldbank.org/global-dataset, Accessed: 17 July 2023. The World Bank, 2023b. Practitioner’s Guide: Interoperability, Available at https://id4d.worldbank.org/guide/interoperability, Accessed: 22 April 2023. Walters, R., 2023. Theft [Identity]. In Cybersecurity and Data Laws of the Commonwealth: International Trade, Investment and Arbitration (pp. 297-306). Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore. World Bank Group, 2016. ID4D Country Diagnostic: Nigeria, 2016, Available at https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/136541489666581589/pdf/113567-REPLNigeria-ID4D-Diagnostics-Web.pdf, Accessed 20 May 2023. W3C Recommendation, 2022. Verifiable credentials data model v1.1, Available at https://www.w3.org/TR/vc-data-model/#dfn-credential, Accessed 04 April 2023. World Bank Group, 2018. Guidelines for ID4D Diagnostics, Available at https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/370121518449921710/Guidelines-for-ID4DDiagnostics.pdf, Accessed: 22 April 2023. X-Road, 2020. X-Road: Message Transport Protocol, Available at https://www.xtee.ee/docs/live/xroad/pr-messtransp_x-road_message_transport_protocol.html, Accessed 12 April 2023. X-Road, 2023a. X-Road Security, Available at https://x-road.global/security, Accessed 03 April 2023. X-Road, 2023b. X-Road Technology Overview, Available at https://x-road.global/x-roadtechnology-overview, Accessed 10 March 2023. X-Road, 2023c. X-Road: Use Case Model for Member Communication, Available at https://docs.x-road.global/UseCases/uc-mess_x-road_member_communication_use_case_model.html#version-history, Accessed 12 April 2023. X-Road, 2023d. Technical Specification: X-Road Architecture, Available at https://docs.xroad.global/Architecture/arc-g_x-road_arhitecture.html#version-history, Accessed 12 April 2023. Yin, J., Xiao, Y., Pei, Q., Ju, Y., Liu, L., Xiao, M. and Wu, C., 2022. SmartDID: a novel privacy-preserving identity based on blockchain for IoT. IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 10(8), pp.6718-6732. This paper is available on under CC 4.0 license. Arxiv

Trustworthy Interoperability and Identity Management Systems: What Comes Next

This paper is available on arxiv under CC 4.0 license. Authors: (1) Ayei E. Ibor, Trustworthy Digital Infrastructure for Identity Systems, The Alan Turing Institute, United Kingdom; (2) Mark Hooper, Trustworthy Digital Infrastructure for Identity Systems, The Alan Turing Institute, United Kingdom; (3) Carsten Maple, Trustworthy Digital Infrastructure for Identity Systems, The Alan Turing Institute, United Kingdom; (4) Gregory Epiphaniou, WMG, University of Warwick, United Kingdom. Table of Links Abstract & Introduction Background Review of Literature Methodology Discussion of Findings Conclusion and Future Work & References 5. Discussion of Findings The limitations of the current interoperability solutions, that is, eIDAS and X-Road show that there is a plethora of issues and complexities, which are yet to be addressed to achieve interoperability at the foundational level of identity management. Country-specific legislation and vendor-locked systems in developing countries add to these complexities. From the findings, the main limitations of the current interoperability solutions can be summarised as follows: i. Each registry implements its interfaces independently based on the use of a proprietary protocol equivalent to the technology in use. This results in the implementation of new interfaces, sometimes from scratch for new or evolving services. ii. There are different trust levels based on the implemented security architecture for verifying the integrity and authenticity of the data. iii. Incompatible certification authorities arise from different trust levels and legal systems of the trust service providers. iv. Interoperability is based on the signing of bilateral agreements, which are non-trivial and can result in several discrepancies in regulations and policies. v. There is no provision that the network must be accessible to private entities and as such may build inter-government competition on trust services e.g., eIDAS. vi. There is differentiation in notified eID schemes and authentication mechanisms leading to re-identification for public services, healthcare, or financial transactions e.g., eIDAS. These limitations imply that the interoperability of identity systems requires open standards with strong legal, regulatory, and governance structures. Also, there must be mechanisms to mitigate risks to the security and privacy of identification data including consent considerations for data use or sharing by the ID holder as outlined in Alamillo et al. (2023) and Srinivas, Das and Kumar (2019). From the findings, developing countries must also make provisions for a single, consolidated, and standardized view of civil registrations and identification data that constitute a single source of truth. This will enhance the onboarding of citizens and create a robust verification and validation process that does not require several levels of authentication that may increase the overhead of the identity system. Additionally, findings showed that the standardization of the structure and attributes of identity data such as name, date of birth, email, and several other relevant attributes to conform with the W3C recommendation should be a key consideration for interoperability. Enforcing the unicity and singularity of identification data will also ensure that ID holders do not have multiple identities that can hamper interoperability. Similarly, to enable the secure exchange of data or identity assertions, it was also found that developing countries must establish trust relationships through federation protocols that can foster interoperability. Interoperability portrays tremendous benefits to e-Government. We found that interoperability widens the dimensions of e-Government in cross-border identity management and data services. It also helps to provide open and accessible digital public services including systems and processes that allow people to move freely within the developing countries while also utilising public services outside their country of origin. Interoperability also helps to create sustainability, and economies of scale as demonstrated by X-Road and eIDAS (Hoffmann and Solarte-Vasquez, 2022; McBride et al., 2019; Schmidt and Krimmer, 2022). We found that while X-Road provides trustworthy data exchange using security servers that allow its members to communicate directly, it does not perform the verification and validation of the identification data that is part of the data exchange. There are also concerns about the limited amount of notified eID schemes under eIDAS, which builds on the limited scope of the eID schemes and the lack of relevant public services. These concerns underpin the need for the review of these interoperability solutions to underscore the notion of cross-border verification and validation of identification data for seamless data exchange. Building on the evidence from various sources as discussed in the Literature, an architecture for trustworthy cross-border interoperability is proposed in this work. This architecture is represented in Figure 4. From Figure 4, each citizen or prospective ID holder undergoes identity enrolment, which can include civil registration through online or offline capture procedures. The enrolment of the citizen is based on regulations and standards of the foundational identity system of the issuing country represented in Figure 4 as 𝑁𝐼𝐷𝑆௫. At the issuance of the ID credential, the citizen or ID holder presents such a document for establishing and proofing his/her identity to a requesting service provider, identity provider or relying party. Authentication and authorisation services are then used to complete the identity proofing process to allow an ID holder access to a service or resource at the point of access. In a cross-border use case, where a foundational identity system 𝑁𝐼𝐷𝑆௫ communicates with another system, say, in a federated identity ecosystem 𝐹𝑒𝑑ூ஽, or where an ID holder 𝑈ூ஽ requests for a service from the latter, then the processes of verifying and validating the identity of 𝑈ூ஽ should be an integral component of an interoperable identity system unlike in X-Road where such processes are the functions of the service provider/consumer. Verification and validation ensure that the claimed identity is true and belongs to the claimant at the time of the request and throughout service delivery. To achieve this, there is the need to have a trustworthy link that considers the representation of the data, semantics, binding, and the security and privacy of the identification data of 𝑈ூ஽. The relevance of the trust link at the interoperable layer is to ensure that the identity data as well as the requested resource or service maintains its integrity, security, privacy, and confidentiality throughout data exchange. We propose that the representation of the identification data must be data format agnostic as obtainable in X-Road using simple object access protocol (SOAP) and representational state transfer (REST) (Halili and Ramadani, 2018; Krimmer et al., 2021; Priisalu and Ottis, 2017). Also, the representation of credentials on the Web should be in a way that is machineverifiable, private, and cryptographically secure. The semantic interpretation of ID credentials must be unambiguous. That is, verifying credentials and presentations and cryptographically securing them both require predictable, bi-directional, and lossless processes. To be processed in an interoperable manner, any verification of a credential or presentation must be deterministic. The resulting credential or presentation must be semantically and syntactically equivalent to the original construct (Sedlmeir et al., 2021; W3C Recommendation, 2022). Likewise, each verified credential of 𝑈ூ஽ must be bound to its identity to a given level of assurance. This establishes an unbreakable link between the subject (𝑈ூ஽) and the credential to enforce identity disambiguation. Binding is relevant for the verification and validation of the claimed identity at cross-border entry/exit points. Finally, the security and privacy of the identification data are significant as it forms the integral component of the required trustworthiness for interoperability. There are several approaches for implementing the security and privacy of identification data such as the use of Transport Layer Security (TLS), Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML), authentication keys, etc. (for security), secure computation mechanisms, trusted third party, differential privacy, etc. (for privacy) (Grassi, Garcia and Fenton, 2017; Kaaniche, Laurent and Belguith, 2020). We posit that the use of secure computation mechanisms, data minimisation, and differential privacy in a cross-border context can fulfil the required privacy requirements due to the multifaceted risks associated with the exchange of data between interoperating entities. This paper is available on under CC 4.0 license. Arxiv

A Trustworthy Cross-Border Interoperable Identity System: What Our Findings Mean

This paper is available on arxiv under CC 4.0 license. Authors: (1) Ayei E. Ibor, Trustworthy Digital Infrastructure for Identity Systems, The Alan Turing Institute, United Kingdom; (2) Mark Hooper, Trustworthy Digital Infrastructure for Identity Systems, The Alan Turing Institute, United Kingdom; (3) Carsten Maple, Trustworthy Digital Infrastructure for Identity Systems, The Alan Turing Institute, United Kingdom; (4) Gregory Epiphaniou, WMG, University of Warwick, United Kingdom. Table of Links Abstract & Introduction Background Review of Literature Methodology Discussion of Findings Conclusion and Future Work & References 3. Review of Literature Although interoperability has the potential to create a seamless identity ecosystem for data exchange, verification, and validation of digital identities, and expand the reach of national governments for effective service delivery, there are very few research-based approaches for cross-border interoperable identity systems. Backhouse and Halperin (2009) posited that the challenge of establishing interoperable systems is enormous, which does not only consider the technical linking of databases and systems. To this effect, they proposed a three-fold conception of interoperability for identity management systems viz-a-viz technical, legal, and regulatory components to enhance data sharing in the provision of e-government. The factors militating against the full interoperability of federated identity management systems are studied in Catuogno and Galdi (2014). They argued that the tendency for per-site authentication and authorization of ID holders culminates in huge overhead for both the identity/service providers and the ID holders as each site stores different credentials of the user. Therefore, the authors presented Shibboleth as the de facto standard for identity management and point of access to providers of information (PAPI) as a solution that leverages the joining of federations and translation of protocols during cross-federation authentication and authorization (AA) sessions. Sharma and Panigrahi (2015) proposed a roadmap useful to plan and implement the capabilities of interoperability in e-government solutions. The roadmap considered the notion of knowledge sharing among key stakeholders based on vital legal, regulatory, technical, and organisational components that can foster the interoperability of e-government services. One significant limitation of this research is its inability to explore cross-country differences in legislation and regulatory requirements, as it focused only on the inputs from stakeholders in India. Also, Kotzé and Alberts (2017) proposed a baseline conceptual model to achieve an egovernment interoperability framework. The model considered the technical, legislative, social, and political environments of South Africa to serve as a guideline for enterprises that are evolving towards e-governance. Similar studies were carried out by Kanagwa et al. (2018), who investigated the relevance of a national enterprise architecture to support several e-government systems including the systems for the registration of persons in Uganda through semantic interoperability that is achieved based on a set of related ontologies. Still, in both studies, country-specific technical, legislative, social, and political considerations were made, which indicate the absence of cross-border considerations to interoperability, Saputro et al. (2020) discussed the Estonian XRoad as an e-governance solution for secure data exchange and the interoperability of information systems across nine countries. This notwithstanding, this research did not categorise whether the countries investigated are developed or developing to ascertain the level of inclusion or exclusion required for facilitating e-governance. In Hölbl, Kežmah and Kompara (2023), the interoperability and compliance issues in eIDAS are discussed. The authors asserted that eIDAS has limited applicability in the public sector since the regulation does not address new market demands with the added complexity of private online providers connecting to the eIDAS network. Further, the issue of the isolation and inflexibility of notified eID solutions in member states makes it difficult for eIDAS to support a variety of use cases. Domingo and Teevan (2022) discussed the interoperability of cross-border payment solutions to expand trade in Africa. They argued that the success of the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) depends largely on the cross-border interoperability of low-value instant payment systems such as mobile money. Consequently, the authors posited that such a policy will enhance inclusion and long-lasting benefits to small-scale businesses. Additionally, Masiero (2023) argued that the effectiveness of digital identity schemes depends on platform features, which must be considered to comprehend the true extent of harm that digital identification might cause due to interoperability. Furthermore, Benaddi et al. (2023) identified the challenges in data sharing and the interoperability of e-government systems. Their focus was on the technical interoperability of e-government entities to enhance collaboration in the use of public data. However, their approach does not consider crossborder perspectives to data sharing including the identification of entities that consume these data. This paper is available on [Arxiv](https://This paper is available on arxiv under CC 4.0 license.) under CC 4.0 license.

A Trustworthy Cross-Border Interoperable Identity System: A Review of the Literature

This paper is available on arxiv under CC 4.0 license. Authors: (1) Ayei E. Ibor, Trustworthy Digital Infrastructure for Identity Systems, The Alan Turing Institute, United Kingdom; (2) Mark Hooper, Trustworthy Digital Infrastructure for Identity Systems, The Alan Turing Institute, United Kingdom; (3) Carsten Maple, Trustworthy Digital Infrastructure for Identity Systems, The Alan Turing Institute, United Kingdom; (4) Gregory Epiphaniou, WMG, University of Warwick, United Kingdom. Table of Links Abstract & Introduction Background Review of Literature Methodology Discussion of Findings Conclusion and Future Work & References Abstract Foundational identity systems (FIDS) have been used to optimise service delivery and inclusive economic growth in developing countries. As developing nations increasingly seek to use FIDS for the identification and authentication of identity (ID) holders, trustworthy interoperability will help to develop a cross-border dimension of e-Government. Despite this potential, there has not been any significant research on the interoperability of FIDS in the African identity ecosystem. There are several challenges to this; on one hand, complex internal political dynamics have resulted in weak institutions, implying that FIDS could be exploited for political gains. On the other hand, the trust in the government by the citizens or identity holders is habitually low, in which case, data security and privacy protection concerns become paramount. In the same sense, some FIDS are technology-locked, thus interoperability is primarily ambiguous. There are also issues of cross-system compatibility, legislation, vendor-locked system design principles and unclear regulatory provisions for data sharing. Fundamentally, interoperability is an essential prerequisite for e-Government services and underpins optimal service delivery in education, social security, and financial services including gender and equality as already demonstrated by the European Union. Furthermore, cohesive data exchange through an interoperable identity system will create an ecosystem of efficient data governance and the integration of cross-border FIDS. Consequently, this research will seek to identify the challenges, opportunities, and requirements for cross-border interoperability in an African context. Our findings show that interoperability in the African identity ecosystem is vital to strengthen the seamless authentication and verification of identity holders for inclusive economic growth and widen the dimensions of e-Government across the continent. Keywords: cross-border interoperability, digital identity, trustworthiness, e-Government 1. Introduction One of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of the United Nations is to provide legal identity for all citizens, which also includes birth registration by 2030 (World Bank Group, 2018). Primarily, identification allows individuals to exercise their rights to be identified and legally recognised while the government and private sector depend on it for effective service delivery. In this sense, a national identity system is crucial to the identification and authentication of natural or legal persons and provides a means for citizens to access critical services including participation in formal political, social, and economic life (Gelb and Metz, 2018). Achieving sustainable development is a key consideration of most national governments and forms the basis for inclusive and responsible identification schemes at the foundational level. Fundamentally, national identification schemes are the pivot for social security, immigration, financial and economic inclusion, healthcare, voting, gender equality, transportation, and education (Colbern and Ramakrishnan, 2018). Consequently, identity management plays a key role in promoting e-government by bringing services closer to the people. Modern identification systems are robust tools for the delivery of transparent administration, reduction in fraud and leakages for social benefits, providing adequate security for the citizens, extracting accurate biographic data for effective economic planning, and responding to natural disasters (Atick, 2016). These seeming benefits are yet to solve the identification crisis in most developing nations as about 850 million people across the globe are yet to have access to a valid identity credential, mostly in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia (The World Bank, 2023a). According to the World Bank Identification for Development (ID4D) dataset (The World Bank, 2023a), most people without official identification are residents of low-income countries. These sets of persons also include marginalised and vulnerable groups consisting of children, whose births were not documented in the civil registry of the affected country, women in rural areas with no access to digital services, and adults below the age of 25 years. Particularly, digital identification systems can improve how the public and commercial sectors provide services and lay the groundwork for new markets, services, and systems, such as egovernment, cashless transactions, and the digital economy. Identification systems must, however, have high levels of coverage and inclusion within the population, be resilient to fraud and error, operate within a governance framework that protects personal data, fosters trust and accountability, and facilitates end-user control to fulfil their potential for facilitating sustainable development and increasing public sector efficiency (African Union, 2020; Bandura and Ramanujam, 2021). There is a growing demand for digital identity to be mutually recognised and portable between countries in the modern digital age through an interoperability framework and in the context of regional and global integration and migration, which can be facilitated through trust and standards. Interoperability, in this context, refers to the ability of disparate foundational identity systems to exchange data through seamless communication of identification and authentication information. These exchanges must be trustworthy or inherently secure, available, and reliable. Although there are complex internal political dynamics in most developing countries that result in weak institutions, and the lack of trust in government by the citizens including the notion of security and privacy protection concerns, legislation, cross-system compatibility, vendor-locked system design principles and unclear regulatory provisions for data sharing, our findings show that interoperability is vital to widen the dimensions of e-Government. In this paper, the challenges, opportunities, and requirements for trustworthy cross-border interoperability are discussed. The rest of the paper is organised as follows; in Section 2, the background to the study is given while in Section 3, a review of literature is discussed. Section 4 presents the methodology of the research. In Section 5, the discussion of findings is presented, and the conclusion and future work is given in Section 6. This paper is available on under CC 4.0 license. Arxiv

A Trustworthy Cross-Border Interoperable Identity System for Developing Countries: The Beginning

This paper is available on arxiv under CC 4.0 license. Authors: (1) Samie Mostafavi, ssmos, KTH Royal Institute of Technology; (2) Vishnu Narayanan Moothedath, vnmo, KTH Royal Institute of Technology; (3) Stefan Ronngren, steron, KTH Royal Institute of Technology; (4) Neelabhro Roy, §nroy, KTH Royal Institute of Technology; (5) Gourav Prateek Sharma, gpsharma, KTH Royal Institute of Technology; (6) Sangwon Seo, sangwona, KTH Royal Institute of Technology; (7) Manuel Olgu´ın Munoz, manual@olguinmunoz.xyz, KTH Royal Institute of Technology; (8) James Gross, jamesgr, KTH Royal Institute of Technology. Table of Links Abstract & Introduction Testbed Design and Architecture Experimental Testbed Validation Supported Experimentation Acknowledgements & References IV. SUPPORTED EXPERIMENTATION This section delves into the features of the testbed that users can customize to meet their unique experimental goals. These features can be broadly categorized into two types: (1) configurations related to workload and (2) configurations related to the network. In terms of workload-related configurations, ExPECA offers researchers a range of options to tailor to their experiments. Users can select from various geographical locations for computational workloads using the cloud interface and by reserving public IPs. It is possible to integrate GPUs for tasks requiring accelerated processing, or choose a CPU with a certain number of cores, and allocate a specific amount of RAM to benchmark workload performance. The platform supports experiments involving both static (fixed-location) and mobile (varying-location, e.g., drone with a wireless connectivity dongle) wireless end nodes. For network-related configurations, ExPECA provides a diverse array of network types, such as SDR 5G, SDR LTE, SDR WiFi, and COTS 5G, among others. Researchers can also customize network topologies and control interference levels, thanks to the testbed’s isolated location. The platform supports a wide range of wireless protocols compatible with USRP e320 and allows users to configure channel conditions. Additionally, the use of Software Defined Radios (SDRs) offers further flexibility, including control over transmit power and the ability to implement a variety of wireless protocols. ExPECA offers the opportunity to explore various experimentation scenarios involving edge computing, wireless communication, and machine learning research. Here we explain various scenarios, each shedding light on some of the interesting aspects of wireless communication and/or edge computing offering unique insights into the dynamic landscape of edge computing. In Figure 6, we provide an illustration that helps a reader to visualize these scenarios. Below, we provide a few of such use cases in various research areas. While some of these aim at direct measurements for data-driven modeling and prediction, others target initial observations for forthcoming theoretical work or the verification and validation of existing theoretical models. A. Optimization of Closed-Loop Applications With the booming interest and applications surrounding cyber-physical systems, it is imperative to study Networked Control Systems (NCSs) [8]. NCSs form crucial control systems where the control loops are closed through a communication network. Due to the safety-critical nature of the applications these NCSs encompass, such as robots, UAVs etc., there is a need to benchmark and understand the bottlenecks/boundaries associated with these applications [9]. Namely, the latency and reliability boundaries of robotic control are crucial to understand before they can be deployed in real-world scenarios, where their potential failure might prove expensive [10]. Another such feedback system where latency is of importance are human-in-the-loop applications such as augmented reality, wearable cognitive assistants (WCA) [9], [11], and ambient safety. In the context of criticality, we have systems of automated fault detection, in which case the acoustic [12] or motion amplified visual [13], [14] data is processed for vibration analysis to potentially trigger some maintenance, safety or emergency procedures [12]. The ExPECA testbed provides developers with the opportunities to experiment with workloads corresponding to these types of applications in a containerized manner with various real network architectures. These experiments could either be for data collection or for verification of existing theoretical models. B. Time-sensitive Wireless Networking Supporting the above-mentioned CPS and HITL applications requires the network to offer a certain level of endto-end network latency, often combined with extremely high reliability, in order to operate correctly and safely. This has spurred various efforts to integrate wireless networking technologies (e.g., 5G URLLC) with wired technologies (e.g., TSN) as shown in Figure 7. However, an efficient wiredwireless integration realization to support time-critical applications necessitates accurate system characterization. In particular, latency characterization of wireless segments is crucial as they are subject to various stochastic and temporal influences, unlike wired links where latencies are immune to external influences. Furthermore, accurate predictions of wireless latency are also envisioned to be leveraged in 6G networks to support deterministic communications [15]. Lately, several data-driven methods for latency prediction have been proposed [16], [17]. Training and validating these approaches require a vast amount of datasets comprising latency measurements alongside network parameters (e.g., SINR and MCS). Precise time-synchronization of all nodes of the testbed ensures accurate latency measurements can be collected between any two nodes of the testbed. These experiments can employ diverse wireless communication technologies, including COTS 5G, software-defined 5G and IEEE 802.11g Wi-Fi integrated in ExPECA. Furthermore, the containerized workflow within ExPECA enables users to perform automated, reproducible and repetitive latency measurement experiments. C. Hierarchical Learning and Inference Another set of experiments researchers can use the ExPECA testbed for is the verification of theoretical results corresponding to Hierarchical Learning (HI) [18], [19]. In these works, authors develop the idea of Hierarchical Inference, where a compute constrained edge device chooses to perform local inference or classification of an image sample, or offloading via a wireless channel to get help of a high power edge server for classification. A small-sized ML model with limited accuracy is assumed to have been deployed at the edge device and offloading to the server incurs cost. In essence, these policies aim to make intelligent decisions regarding task offloading, prioritizing complex tasks or tasks where accuracy is paramount. Conversely, they process simpler tasks or tasks where reduced latency is of utmost importance locally. It is to be noted that in this specific work on Hierarchical Inference this decision is made in an online manner. Using the ExPECA testbed, researchers can plan to implement the various algorithms proposed and verify if the real-world results match simulations and models. D. Federated Learning Validation Federated learning (FL) is emerging as one of the key approaches for training machine learning models [20]. FL aims to improve over centralized learning in terms of privacy, total training time, computation overhead, etc. However, FL can cause large communication overhead because the machine learning model should be repeatedly exchanged between the central server and the participating nodes during the training process. In order to analyze and optimize communication overhead, many works have proposed models for FL systems operating in wireless environments [21], [22]. Validating these theoretical models in real systems is required to reveal otherwise unavailable insights. The ExPECA testbed supports experimentation involving both centralized learning (CL) and federated learning to evaluate them in terms of communication/computation overhead and accuracy with various wireless conditions. For example in case of communication overhead, CL and FL will consume communication resources when exchanging data (i.e., using uplink to send input data in CL and uplink/downlink to send machine learning model in FL). The ExPECA testbed is able to measure the communication resource usage, and training time (communication/computation time), and capture wireless parameters at that time. Thanks to improved reproducibility and repeatability, the ExPECA testbed supplies stable validation for machine learning architectures.

ExPECA: An Experimental Platform for Trustworthy: Supported Experimentatation

This paper is available on arxiv under CC 4.0 license. Authors: (1) Samie Mostafavi, ssmos, KTH Royal Institute of Technology; (2) Vishnu Narayanan Moothedath, vnmo, KTH Royal Institute of Technology; (3) Stefan Ronngren, steron, KTH Royal Institute of Technology; (4) Neelabhro Roy, §nroy, KTH Royal Institute of Technology; (5) Gourav Prateek Sharma, gpsharma, KTH Royal Institute of Technology; (6) Sangwon Seo, sangwona, KTH Royal Institute of Technology; (7) Manuel Olgu´ın Munoz, manual@olguinmunoz.xyz, KTH Royal Institute of Technology; (8) James Gross, jamesgr, KTH Royal Institute of Technology. Table of Links Abstract & Introduction Testbed Design and Architecture Experimental Testbed Validation Supported Experimentation Acknowledgements & References V. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This research has been partially funded by (1) the VINNOVA Competence Center for Trustworthy Edge Computing Systems and Applications (TECoSA) at KTH Royal Institute of Technology; and (2) the Swedish Foundation for Strategic Research (SSF), through grant number ITM17–0246. REFERENCES [1] D. Raychaudhuri, I. Seskar, G. Zussman, T. Korakis, D. Kilper, T. Chen, J. Kolodziejski, M. Sherman, Z. Kostic, X. Gu, H. Krishnaswamy, S. Maheshwari, P. Skrimponis, and C. Gutterman, Challenge: COSMOS: A City-Scale Programmable Testbed for Experimentation with Advanced Wireless. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2020. [2] J. Yu, T. Chen, C. Gutterman, S. Zhu, G. Zussman, I. Seskar, and D. Kilper, “Cosmos: Optical architecture and prototyping,” in 2019 Optical Fiber Communications Conference and Exhibition (OFC), pp. 1– 3, 2019. [3] J. Breen, A. Buffmire, J. Duerig, K. Dutt, E. Eide, M. Hibler, D. Johnson, S. K. Kasera, E. Lewis, D. Maas, A. Orange, N. Patwari, D. Reading, R. Ricci, D. Schurig, L. B. Stoller, J. Van der Merwe, K. Webb, and G. Wong, “POWDER: Platform for open wireless data-driven experimental research,” in Proceedings of the 14th International Workshop on Wireless Network Testbeds, Experimental Evaluation and Characterization (WiNTECH), Sept. 2020. [4] H. Zhang, Y. Guan, A. Kamal, D. Qiao, M. Zheng, A. Arora, O. Boyraz, B. Cox, T. Daniels, M. Darr, et al., “Ara: A wireless living lab vision for smart and connected rural communities,” in Proceedings of the 15th ACM Workshop on Wireless Network Testbeds, Experimental evaluation & CHaracterization, pp. 9–16, 2022. [5] K. Keahey, J. Anderson, Z. Zhen, P. Riteau, P. Ruth, D. Stanzione, M. Cevik, J. Colleran, H. S. Gunawi, C. Hammock, J. Mambretti, A. Barnes, F. Halbach, A. Rocha, and J. Stubbs, “Lessons learned from the Chameleon Testbed,” in Proceedings of the 2020 USENIX Annual Technical Conference (USENIX ATC ’20), USENIX Association, July 2020. [6] K. Keahey, J. Anderson, M. Sherman, C. Hammock, Z. Zhen, J. Tillotson, T. Bargo, L. Long, T. Ul Islam, S. Babu, H. Zhang, and F. Halbach, “Chi-in-a-box: Reducing operational costs of research testbeds,” in Practice and Experience in Advanced Research Computing, PEARC ’22, (New York, NY, USA), Association for Computing Machinery, 2022. [7] S. George, T. Eiszler, R. Iyengar, H. Turki, Z. Feng, J. Wang, P. Pillai, and M. Satyanarayanan, “Openrtist: End-to-end benchmarking for edge computing,” IEEE Pervasive Computing, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 10–18, 2020. [8] X.-M. Zhang, Q.-L. Han, X. Ge, D. Ding, L. Ding, D. Yue, and C. Peng, “Networked control systems: a survey of trends and techniques,” IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 1–17, 2020. [9] M. Olgu´ın Munoz, ˜ An Emulation-Based Performance Evaluation Methodology for Edge Computing and Latency Sensitive Applications. PhD thesis, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, 2023. [10] M. Olgu´ın Munoz, N. Roy, and J. Gross, “CLEAVE: Scalable and edge- ˜ native benchmarking of networked control systems,” in Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Edge Systems, Analytics and Networking, EdgeSys ’22, (New York, NY, USA), pp. 37–42, Association for Computing Machinery, 2022. [11] K. Ha, Z. Chen, W. Hu, W. Richter, P. Pillai, and M. Satyanarayanan, “Towards wearable cognitive assistance,” in Proc. of the 12th Annual International Conference on Mobile Systems, Applications, and Services, p. 68–81, Association for Computing Machinery, 2014. [12] B. Lu, Y. Li, X. Wu, and Z. Yang, “A review of recent advances in wind turbine condition monitoring and fault diagnosis,” in IEEE Power Electronics and Machines in Wind Applications, pp. 1–7, 2009. [13] T.-H. Oh, R. Jaroensri, C. Kim, M. Elgharib, F. Durand, W. T. Freeman, and W. Matusik, “Learning-based video motion magnification,” in Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV), pp. 633–648, 2018. [14] C. Liu, A. Torralba, W. T. Freeman, F. Durand, and E. H. Adelson, “Motion magnification,” ACM transactions on graphics (TOG), vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 519–526, 2005. [15] G. P. Sharma, D. Patel, J. Sachs, M. De Andrade, J. Farkas, J. Harmatos, B. Varga, H.-P. Bernhard, R. Muzaffar, M. K. Atiq, et al., “Towards Deterministic Communications in 6G Networks: State of the Art, Open Challenges and the Way Forward,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.01299, 2023. [16] S. Mostafavi, G. P. Sharma, and J. Gross, “Data-Driven Latency Probability Prediction for Wireless Networks: Focusing on Tail Probabilities,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.10648, 2023. [17] M. Skocaj, F. Conserva, N. S. Grande, A. Orsi, D. Micheli, G. Ghinamo, S. Bizzarri, and R. Verdone, “Data-driven predictive latency for 5g: A theoretical and experimental analysis using network measurements,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.02329, 2023. [18] V. N. Moothedath, J. P. Champati, and J. Gross, “Online algorithms for hierarchical inference in deep learning applications at the edge,” 2023. [19] G. Al-Atat, A. Fresa, A. P. Behera, V. N. Moothedath, J. Gross, and J. P. Champati, “The case for hierarchical deep learning inference at the network edge,” in Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Networked AI Systems, NetAISys ’23, (New York, NY, USA), Association for Computing Machinery, 2023. [20] B. McMahan, E. Moore, D. Ramage, S. Hampson, and B. A. y. Arcas, “Communication-Efficient Learning of Deep Networks from Decentralized Data,” in Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, vol. 54 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, pp. 1273–1282, PMLR, 20–22 Apr 2017. [21] H. Gao, A. Xu, and H. Huang, “On the Convergence of CommunicationEfficient Local SGD for Federated Learning,” Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, vol. 35, pp. 7510–7518, May 2021. [22] J. Perazzone, S. Wang, M. Ji, and K. S. Chan, “Communication-efficient device scheduling for federated learning using stochastic optimization,” in IEEE INFOCOM 2022 - IEEE Conference on Computer Communications, pp. 1449–1458, 2022.

ExPECA: An Experimental Platform for Trustworthy: Acknowledgements & References

This paper is available on arxiv under CC 4.0 license. Authors: (1) Samie Mostafavi, ssmos, KTH Royal Institute of Technology; (2) Vishnu Narayanan Moothedath, vnmo, KTH Royal Institute of Technology; (3) Stefan Ronngren, steron, KTH Royal Institute of Technology; (4) Neelabhro Roy, §nroy, KTH Royal Institute of Technology; (5) Gourav Prateek Sharma, gpsharma, KTH Royal Institute of Technology; (6) Sangwon Seo, sangwona, KTH Royal Institute of Technology; (7) Manuel Olgu´ın Munoz, manual@olguinmunoz.xyz, KTH Royal Institute of Technology; (8) James Gross, jamesgr, KTH Royal Institute of Technology. Table of Links Abstract & Introduction Testbed Design and Architecture Experimental Testbed Validation Supported Experimentation Acknowledgements & References III. EXPERIMENTAL TESTBED VALIDATION This section aims to substantiate two key assertions about ExPECA: its efficiency in facilitating end-to-end experiments and its ability to ensure experimental reproducibility[1]. To validate the first claim, we employ OpenRTiST [7], an open-source application that is computationally demanding, bandwidth-intensive, and latency-sensitive. OpenRTiST uses machine learning filtering to overlay various artistic styles onto video frames, creating an augmented reality experience. In this experiment, the OpenRTiST client connects to the server either at the edge, specifically the testbed servers, or in the cloud via a server located at Carnegie Mellon University (CMU), in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, through a COTS 5G system and the adv-03 node. In Figure 4, we depict the corresponding critical performance indicators such as frames per second (FPS) and round-trip time (RTT) measured using the testbed. In Figure 4a, we plot the Cumulative Distribution Function (CDF) of FPS, and in Figure 4a we plot the Complementary CDF (CCDF) of RTT. As we move from edge to cloud, RTT significantly increases which results in lower refresh rates and less responsive video stream. The performance is benchmarked against different video frame sizes to analyze network and compute capacity. For the second claim, we concentrate on wireless network latency, a metric inherently challenging to model due to its stochastic nature at the packet level. While latency can be influenced by factors like transmit power and channel interference, it also depends on wireless protocol settings such as modulation schemes, bandwidth, and antenna configurations. ExPECA’s isolated location minimizes variability in channel quality, mitigating potential interference. In Figure 5, we present latency measurements across different radio links over several days, demonstrating the reproducibility level in the case of COTS 5G wireless links. The close similarity between these CCDFs confirms the reproducibility of wireless latency measurements achieved through ExPECA. [1] Experiments available as Python Jupyter notebooks at https://github.com/KTH-EXPECA/examples

ExPECA: An Experimental Platform for Trustworthy: Experimental Testbed Validation

This paper is available on arxiv under CC 4.0 license. Authors: (1) Samie Mostafavi, ssmos, KTH Royal Institute of Technology; (2) Vishnu Narayanan Moothedath, vnmo, KTH Royal Institute of Technology; (3) Stefan Ronngren, steron, KTH Royal Institute of Technology; (4) Neelabhro Roy, §nroy, KTH Royal Institute of Technology; (4) Gourav Prateek Sharma, gpsharma, KTH Royal Institute of Technology; (4) Sangwon Seo, sangwona, KTH Royal Institute of Technology; (4) Manuel Olgu´ın Munoz, manual@olguinmunoz.xyz, KTH Royal Institute of Technology; (4) James Gross, jamesgr, KTH Royal Institute of Technology. Table of Links Abstract & Introduction Testbed Design and Architecture Experimental Testbed Validation Supported Experimentation Acknowledgements & References Abstract This paper presents ExPECA, an edge computing and wireless communication research testbed designed to tackle two pressing challenges: comprehensive end-to-end experimentation, and high levels of experimental reproducibility. Leveraging Openstack-based Chameleon Infrastructure (CHI) framework for its proven flexibility and ease of operation, ExPECA is located in a unique, isolated underground facility, providing a highly controlled setting for wireless experiments. The testbed is engineered to facilitate integrated studies of both communication and computation, offering a diverse array of Software-Defined Radios (SDR) and Commercial Off-The-Shelf (COTS) wireless and wired links, as well as containerized computational environments. We exemplify the experimental possibilities of the testbed using OpenRTiST, a latency-sensitive, bandwidth-intensive application, and analyze its performance. Lastly, we highlight an array of research domains and experimental setups that stand to gain from ExPECA’s features, including closed-loop applications and time-sensitive networking. Index Terms—Edge computing experimental platform, reproducibility, end-to-end experimentation, wireless testbed I. INTRODUCTION As we move onto the next decade, edge computing applications are poised for significant growth, fueled by advancements in wireless technologies such as 5G and Beyond 5G (B5G), as well as breakthroughs in compute-intensive tasks like model predictive control, multimedia processing, and machine learning algorithms. In order to achieve trustworthiness and dependability in these interdisciplinary, distributed systems, involving computer science and wireless research, it is imperative to develop sophisticated scientific tools. On one hand, research in areas like wireless networking methods necessitates close interaction with radio hardware and a high degree of adaptability, as facilitated by Software Defined Radios (SDRs). Conversely, the computational aspect requires performance workloads to be adaptable to fluctuating network conditions, necessitating the creation and efficient repeatable testing of innovative computing algorithms. End-to-end experimentation is essential for obtaining a comprehensive understanding of the system as a whole and for devising innovative approaches to overcome existing bottlenecks. Additionally, the ability to efficiently replicate these experiments is key to allowing other researchers to easily validate findings. In this realm of research, we find a diverse landscape of testbeds that have emerged in recent years, each distinguished by its size, applicability, and feature set. Notable ones include the 1) COSMOS, 2) POWDER, 3) ARA, and 4) Drexel Grid SDR testbeds. COSMOS (Cloud enhanced Open Software defined MObile wireless testbed for city-Scale deployment) is a testbed spanning over 1 square mile, equipped with an array of resources, including Software-Defined Radios (SDRs), millimeter-wave (mmWave) equipment, optical fibers, and various computational nodes for core functionality and application processing [1], [2]. COSMOS integrates with cloud infrastructure, with a primary focus on advancing cloud computing research. This testbed includes a diverse set of rooftop, intermediate, and mobile nodes, all centrally controlled. POWDER (Platform for Open Wireless Data-driven Experimental Research) serves as an even larger testbed, offering a platform for exploring wireless and mobile networks with a high level of programmability that extends down to the waveform level [3]. Covering an area of 15 km2 , POWDER comprises fixed, programmable radio nodes constructed using off-the-shelf SDR technology. The platform seamlessly integrates with cloud and edge-like compute capabilities, allowing mobile nodes to tap into the compute resources. The Drexel Grid SDR testbed features SDRs that connect over-the-air (OTA), channel emulator, or alternatively a combination of the two, to enable realistic and reproducible experimentation. Even though the testbed provides freedom in terms of experiment development, it is intended primarily for SDR-related research, and does not integrate any core, cloud or edge components. ARA (The Agricultural and ruRAl communities) represents a wireless research platform, spanning a rural expanse with a diameter of 60 km in Iowa [4]. ARA’s mission is to investigate wireless platforms and technologies within the realworld context of agricultural settings. The testbed incorporates a diverse array of wireless platforms, implemented through SDRs and programmable Commercial Off-The-Shelf (COTS) radios along with automated vehicles and various cameras and other sensors. ARA’s testbed software builds upon the Chameleon Infrastructure (CHI) software framework from the Chameleon testbed project [5]. Chameleon primarily serves as a bare-metal reconfigurable research testbed designed for edge-to-cloud experimentation, adapting the cloud paradigm for computer science research. Since its public unveiling in 2015, Chameleon has accommodated over 6,000 users across more than 800 projects, gaining valuable experience and refining methods for automating and managing research infrastructure sites. This accumulated knowledge has been encapsulated in the CHI-in-a-Box [6] testbed software distribution, which aims to simplify and optimize the deployment and operation of future associated or independent Chameleon sites. Existing wireless research-focused platforms like COSMOS, POWDER, and Drexel Grid employ their own specialized software solutions, which are not in line with prevailing cloud-native standards. These testbeds also utilize virtualization technology based on Virtual Machines (VMs), rather than opting for lighter and more edge-compatible solutions such as containers. Similar to the approach taken by the ARA testbed, we found that CHI-in-a-Box presents an excellent opportunity to develop experimental platforms at minimal cost, while offering significant flexibility in both cloud and edge-native technologies. However, when it comes to reproducibility in wireless edge-computing research, existing large-scale testbeds have limitations that we aim to address by introducing our testbed, ExPECA. By ‘reproducibility’, we mean the capacity for researchers to easily replicate experiments and validate results. Achieving this is particularly challenging for two main reasons: one, edge computing experiments involve a range of heterogeneous components like servers and radios, all interacting within a single experiment; and two, the existence of wireless links introduces variables such as interference and dynamic propagation conditions that must be controlled for consistent results. Owing to its unique design choices, ExPECA provides a highly reproducible environment for endto-end wireless and edge computing experimentation, making it one of the first platforms to effectively address this issue. In the following section, we delve into these design intricacies and their consequential impacts.

TRUSTWORTHY

trustworthy.com

-- employees

Since n.d.

COMPANY RANKING

TRUSTWORTHY

EVERGREEN INDEX #11627

Representing this company? Click here to claim and customize this page!

Trustworthy WIKI

Apply to get your Tech Company News Page live on HackerNoon.com today!

TRUSTWORTHY

trustworthy.com

-- employees

Since n.d.

COMPANY RANKING

TRUSTWORTHY

EVERGREEN INDEX #11627

RELATED COMPANIESRANK

STORIES ABOUT TRUSTWORTHY

Representing this company? Click here to claim and customize this page!

Trustworthy WIKI

Apply to get your Tech Company News Page live on HackerNoon.com today!