Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2022 Oct 7;17(10):e0271546. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0271546

Computer cyberspace security mechanism supported by cloud computing

ZeYuan Fu 1,*
Editor: Pandi Vijayakumar2
PMCID: PMC9543945  PMID: 36206264

Abstract

To improve the cybersecurity of Cloud Computing (CC) system. This paper proposes a Network Anomaly Detection (NAD) model based on the Fuzzy-C-Means (FCM) clustering algorithm. Secondly, the Cybersecurity Assessment Model (CAM) based on Grey Relational Grade (GRG) is creatively constructed. Finally, combined with Rivest Shamir Adleman (RSA) algorithm, this work proposes a CC network-oriented data encryption technology, selects different data sets for different models, and tests each model through design experiments. The results show that the average Correct Detection Rate (CDR) of the NAD model for different types of abnormal data is 93.33%. The average False Positive Rate (FPR) and the average Unreported Rate (UR) are 6.65% and 16.27%, respectively. Thus, the NAD model can ensure a high detection accuracy in the case of sufficient data. Meanwhile, the cybersecurity situation prediction by the CAM is in good agreement with the actual situation. The error between the average value of cybersecurity situation prediction and the actual value is only 0.82%, and the prediction accuracy is high. The RSA algorithm can control the average encryption time for very large text, about 12s. The decryption time is slightly longer but within a reasonable range. For different-size text, the encryption time is maintained within 0.5s. This work aims to provide important technical support for anomaly detection, overall security situation analysis, and data transmission security protection of CC systems to improve their cybersecurity.

Introduction

The purpose is to improve the security of Cloud Computing (CC). CC is the most popular research direction in the computer field [1]. It has received special attention as new network architecture and network computing pattern. There is an increasing need to improve CC service technology, implement multi-tenant technology, and develop customization functions [2]. For example, virtualization technology can deploy virtual machines on physical ones. It provides users with a virtualized application environment to meet various performance requirements and customize deployment [3, 4]. Generally speaking, the main means of CC is to integrate highly virtual resources on the network and provide services as a service center [5]. Network users can query their own resources on the public server on demand to obtain convenient and fast services [6]. This is the meaning of on-demand resource allocation in CC.

The Internet is the carrier for CC to realize resource sharing. However, the Internet is a heterogeneous and open platform [7] where CC tasks are under security risks. Cyber-attacks include information tampering, intercepting, or deleting, among others. Cybersecurity problems are urgent to promote CC development faster and better. Thus, cloud security is becoming increasingly prominent, showing a trend of diversification and complexity. Meanwhile, it is also imperative to choose proper security technology to protect the environment of tenants [8]. The cloud security alliance research shows that many hackers have attacked the Internet-based CC server. Hackers can use password cracking, secret accounts, dynamic attacks, rainbow tables, botnets, malicious code, and other means [9]. Thus, the CC system must be deployed with safe and effective network protection and monitoring mechanisms.

Based on the above problems, this work first proposes a Network Anomaly Detection (NAD) model based on a clustering algorithm and innovatively uses Fuzzy-C-Means (FCM) clustering algorithm to realize the classification and detection of abnormal data. Secondly, the Cybersecurity Assessment Model (CAM) based on Grey Relational Grade (GRG) is constructed. The Grey Relational Analysis (GRA) method assesses the overall security situation when the network is under attack. Finally, the widely used data encryption algorithm: Rivest Shamir Adleman (RSA) is applied to the CC system. A CC network-oriented data encryption technology based on the RSA algorithm is proposed. At the same time, different data sets are selected for different models, and experiments are designed to test each model. CC is the hot spot of computer development at present. So far, no attacks specifically targeted CC hosts have been found. Nevertheless, a series of virtualization attack threats have emerged in the CC network, such as virtual machine escape, system setup problems, and management program problems. The CC network connects many computer hosts, and these hosts are installed with the same operating system. Thus, Software as a Service (SaaS), Platform as a Service (PaaS), Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS), private cloud, public cloud, and hybrid cloud should be considered in analyzing the problems in the CC host layer. Once a complete problem occurs, these security risks will be quickly spread due to the strong elasticity of CC. This work aims to provide important technical support for anomaly detection, overall security situation analysis, and data transmission security protection of the CC system. Ultimately, it intends to improve CC cybersecurity. The security research under CC has important practical significance for the all-around development of computer networks.

Material and methods

NAD model based on clustering algorithm

(1) Overview of clustering algorithm

CC systems can facilitate network users by allowing them to share massive amounts of data and computing resources [10]. However, an open mechanism also brings security risks because of algorithm vulnerabilities [11]. In general, there is a certain correlation between similar data. Anomaly detection is a Data Mining process [12] that mines effective, novel, and useful information from big data and discovers underlying relationships and rules in the database [13]. Fig 1 shows ten classic Data Mining algorithms.

Fig 1. Classical data mining algorithms.

Fig 1

The clustering process divides the data in the same dataset into multiple categories (or clusters) under certain standards [14]. The data have a great similarity within a cluster and have great differences between different clusters [15]. K-Means Clustering (KCM) algorithm mainly evaluates the similarity between two samples by calculating their Euclidean Distance (ED) [16]. Fig 2 is the flow of the KMC algorithm.

Fig 2. Flowchart of KMC algorithm.

Fig 2

From the sample space of the dataset, k points are randomly selected as the cluster center. The EC is calculated from each data point to the cluster center. According to the calculation results, the data points are assigned to the cluster closest to the cluster center. Then, the iteration begins until each data point has been divided into corresponding clusters. Finally, the data points in each cluster are averaged as the new cluster center. The center is updated step by step until the optimal clustering result is obtained [17].

KMC algorithm strongly depends on the initial k value and the initial cluster center. Moreover, when the amount of data is large, the algorithm needs more iterations to update the cluster center, greatly increasing calculation and memory overhead [18]. Fuzzy C-Means (FCM) clustering improves the KMC in data partition rules. The traditional KMC strictly divides the data points into a cluster and has a high error rate. By comparison, the FCM algorithm adopts fuzzy rules, more flexible in allocating data points. The principle of FCM is to mark each cluster and its members with a Membership Function (MF) and then classify the samples according to the Membership Degree (MD) [19].

(2) Construction of NAD MODEL

If the MD of element Xi belonging to category K is μk, k∈[0, 1], the MD of Xi belonging to different categories are compared to determine the final category K. The sum of the MD of Xi belonging to K categories is 1, that is:

μ1+μ2+μk=1 (1)

FCM clustering algorithm mainly takes the minimum square sum in the cluster as the judgment standard. Suppose the i-th cluster center is set as ci, and the weighting index is m. In that case, the clustering Objective Function (OF) of dataset m is expressed as:

Jm=j=1Ni=1c[ui(Xj)]m(Xjci)2 (2)

N represents the number of samples; ui stands for cluster center.

First, the standard format of network data flow includes four basic attributes: source Internet protocol (IP) address, destination IP address, source port, and destination port. Before clustering, the matching degree of the above four attributes of the data is judged according to the matching operation, and the weight of each attribute is preset. Then, the weighting index m is set according to the matching quantity, and m is the sum of the weights of the matching items. The OF expresses the dispersion degree of clustering results. The smaller OF is, the better the clustering effect is.

When OF is the smallest, the FCM clustering algorithm stops iteration. At this time, the partial derivative of the clustering membership of the OF Jm to the i-th sample is calculated. The calculation of MF reads:

ui(xj)=[1/uk(xjkcik)2]1/(m1)j=1Ni=1c[1/uk(xjkcik)2]1/(m1) (3)

The partial derivative of the OF Jm to the clustering center of the i-th sample category K is calculated. The clustering center function is obtained as follows:

Ci=k=1Kcik/4=k=1Kj=1Ni=1c[ui(xj)]mxjj=1Ni=1c[ui(xj)]m (4)

The four basic attributes of network traffic are abstractly expressed as:

F={SIP(N),DIP(N),DP(N),SP(N)} (5)

SIP represents the weight of the source IP address. DIP is the destination IP address weight. SP denotes the source port weight. DP means the weight of the destination port. Against different types of cyberattacks, the relevant attribute will be weighted differently. Fig 3 gives the workflow of the NAD model based on the FCM clustering algorithm.

Fig 3. Workflow of NAD model based on FCM clustering algorithm.

Fig 3

In Fig 3, a hierarchical clustering tree is first established with training samples, including a root node and k subtrees. The clustering center is assigned to the subtree nodes, and then the MF is calculated. Next, the correlation analysis is performed on the four basic data flow attributes. The weighted index is calculated as m according to the correlation. Then, the cluster node with the smallest OF is calculated, and the new data are inserted into the cluster tree node. Finally, the MF and clustering center are updated to determine whether the clustering center has changed. If there is no change, the clustering ends. If there is a change, the iteration continues until the end requirements are met. Here, the communication model includes a physical layer, data link layer, network layer, transport layer, session layer, and application layer.

Cyberattack Assessment Model (CAM) based on Grey Relational Grade (GRG)

(1) Grey Relational Analysis (GRA)

Grey theory system has uncertainty. That is, some system information is known, and some are unknown. The research direction is to mine useful information from known information to describe systems with incomplete information. By analyzing the data at a certain level of the system, the grey theory can understand the changes of the system at a higher level, and predict, control, and manage the system. The grey system theory has been widely used because it has no special restrictions on the input data [20]. In simple terms, it analyzes the lower-level data to understand higher-level system changes to evaluate and manage the system [21].

GRA, a branch of grey theory, uses the GRG to express various factors’ relationship size, order, and strength [22]. GRG represents the similarity between various factors: the greater the GRG is, the higher the similarity is. Surely, a cyberattack will tamper with the basic attribute of the normal network data. For example, the size of the relationship determines the Cyber Security Index (CSI); that is, the greater the CSI is, the greater the attack will harm the system [23]. The calculation of GRC-based CSI reads:

FA(t)=1MAX(γ1(X,X1),γ2(X,X2),,γn(X,Xm)) (6)

FA(t) represents the CSI attacked by A t times. X is the characteristic sequence of attack data. X1, X2, X3,⋯Xm denotes the normal network data feature sequence.

(2) Construction of GRG-based CAM

Based on the GRA, a CAM is designed, as detailed in Fig 4.

Fig 4. Structure of GRG-based CAM.

Fig 4

1) Calculation of service layer CSI. The calculation of CSI of service layer in time period t reads:

FSj(t)=i=1n10PijFAj(t) (7)

Aj stands for the cyber-attack. Sj represents service. FAj denotes the attack situation index generated by Aj against Sj. n is the number of attack types Sj received in time t. Pij means the harmful degree of Aj to Sj, and its value is determined by the type of Aj.

2) Calculation of host layer CSI. The calculation of CSI of host layer in time period t reads:

FHj(t)=j=1mVjFSj(t) (8)

Hj indicates the host; m represents the number of services provided by Hj;Vj means the importance of service Sj in all the services provided by Hj.

3) Calculation of system layer CSI. The calculation of CSI of system layer in time period t reads:

FL(t)=l=1nWjFHj(t) (9)

n represents the number of hosts in the system; Wj is the importance of the host Hj in the system.

CC network-oriented RSA encryption algorithm

(1) Principle of network data encryption

Data encryption mainly refers to using a particular encryption algorithm to convert plaintext into ciphertext that cannot be read by non-professionals [24]. On the contrary, converting ciphertext into plaintext is the decryption process and involves certain decryption algorithms [25]. Fig 5 shows the principle of network data encryption.

Fig 5. Schematic diagram of network data encryption.

Fig 5

The sender encrypts the plaintext information into ciphertext and sends it to the recipient. The recipient restores the ciphertext to the original plaintext with the corresponding key. The ciphertext cannot be converted into meaningful information without the corresponding key. Thus, network data are secured [26]. Data encryption can be realized through symmetric or asymmetric encryptions [27]. Fig 6 describes their principle.

Fig 6.

Fig 6

Data encryption technology (a. symmetric encryption; b. asymmetric encryption).

Fig 6 implies that symmetric encryption uses the same key for encryption and decryption, whereas asymmetric encryption uses different keys. At present, the most widely used encryption algorithm is the RSA algorithm, asymmetric encryption using the number theory to construct an asymmetric key [28]. The unique encryption mechanism of the RSA makes it almost impossible to be deciphered by a third party and, thus, has high security. Applying the RSA algorithm to a CC system improves network data security substantially [29].

(2)RSA encryption algorithm

RSA is an asymmetric encryption algorithm. Thus, RSA must generate a public key for encryption and a private key for decryption. The private key is only known to the data publisher and receiver to safeguard data transmission. Fig 7 explains the flow of the RSA algorithm.

Fig 7. Flowchart of RSA algorithm.

Fig 7

  • Step 1: two different prime numbers p and q with long enough digits are selected, and their product is calculated;

  • Step 2: f(n) = (p−1)*(q−1) is calculated;

  • Step 3: an integer e, e>1 is specified. Moreover, it needs to be less than f(n) and mutual prime;

  • Step 4: if e and f(n) are known, d is obtained through equation d*e≡1modf(n), and mod represents the remainder operation;

  • Step 5: the calculation of encryption (C) and decryption (M) read:

CMemodn,MCdmodn (10)

Experimental design

(1) Testing of FCM-based NAD model

The knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD) Cup dataset provided by Lincoln Laboratory of Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) is selected to test the performance of the proposed NAD model. In KDD Cup, various user types, different network traffic, and attack means are simulated. It is a dataset dedicated to network anomaly detection. This work randomly selects three data types, including Normal, Denial-Of-Service (DOS), and Probe, from the KDD CUP 99 dataset to construct the model training set. The test set is also randomly selected on the KDD CUP 99 dataset. The evaluation of the proposed FCM model adopts three indexes: False Positive Rate (FPR), Correct Detection Rate (CDR), and Underreported Rate (UR). The data set download website is: http://kdd.ics.uci.edu/databases/kddcup99/kddcup99.html

(2) Testing GRG-based CAM

This work selects the Honeynet dataset collected by the famous Honeynet Project to test the proposed GRG-based CAM. The project team attracts various attacks by deliberately setting vulnerabilities in the network and records and analyzing cyberattacks. Overall, attack data over 11 months are collected to construct the Honeynet dataset. Then, it randomly selects data over one month in the dataset and divides them into 1~8 periods. The attack types include Ping, Domain Name System (DNS), and Disk Operating System (DOS).

(3) Testing of RSA encryption algorithm

First, the RSA algorithm generates encryptions with different lengths. The test is conducted in ten rounds, and the total and average time costs are recorded. Then, the time cost to encrypt and decrypt a 2M document with a 1,024bit key is recorded. Finally, the time cost of encrypting and decrypting texts of different sizes (1KB, 5KB, 10KB, 20KB, and 40KB) with 1,024-bit and 2,048-bit keys is recorded.

Results of model test

Test results of FCM-based NAD model

Fig 8 plots the proposed NAD model’s CDR, UR, and FPR on the test dataset.

Fig 8.

Fig 8

Test results of NAD model (a. CDR; b. UR; c. FPR).

Fig 8 shows that the CDRs for Normal, DOS, and Probe attacks are 94.27%, 99.93%, and 85.78%, respectively, averaging as high as 93.33%. The URs in the detection process are 5.73%, 0.01%, and 14.22%, respectively, averaging 6.65%. FPRs are 7.35%, 1.91%, and 39.55%, respectively, averaging 16.27%. Obviously, the detection accuracy of the model for the first two types of attack is higher than the Probe attack. Probably, it is due to the different sizes of the data volume. The data volume of Normal and DOS is large, and the model can be well trained, so the accuracy is high. By comparison, Probe type data are much fewer than the other two, so the detection accuracy is low. Therefore, with sufficient data, the proposed network NAD model can ensure high detection accuracy and is suitable for researching anomaly detection in CC systems.

Test results of GRG-based CAM

Fig 9 displays the number of cyberattacks, the number of hosts attacked, and the evaluation results of the proposed GRG-based CAM over eight time periods on the test dataset.

Fig 9.

Fig 9

Results of GRG-based CAM (a. number of cyberattacks; b. number of hosts attacked; c. CSI).

According to Fig 9A and 9B, the system has been under serious cyberattacks from the third period. Many hosts are attacked in the fifth, sixth, and seventh periods. Thereby, the CSI of these three time periods is relatively high. Fig 9C shows that the proposed GRG-based CAM’s predicted average CSI (0.491) is consistent with the actual value (0.487), a 0.82% deviation. Thus, the prediction accuracy is high, and the proposed CRG-based CAM model is suitable for the security evaluation of CC systems.

Test results of RSA encryption algorithm

(1) Comparison of results of key generation time

Fig 10 compares the key generation time under different encryption lengths using the RSA algorithm.

Fig 10. RSA key generation time.

Fig 10

According to Fig 10, the RSA algorithm has taken 23.5s to generate a 1024-bit key in ten rounds of tests, averaging 2.35s every round. By comparison, RSA takes 376.9s to generate a 4096-bit key in ten test rounds, averaging 37.69s every round. Thus, the RSA key generation time increases with the length of the key. Meanwhile, a 1024-bit key can hardly be cracked and only needs about 2s to generate by the RSA algorithm. Thus, the RSA algorithm is effective and secure enough for common applications.

(2) Comparison of encryption and decryption time

Fig 11 reveals the time required for encrypting 2M plaintext with 1024-bit key, encrypting and decrypting texts of different sizes with 1024-bit key, and encrypting and decrypting texts of various sizes with 2048-bit key.

Fig 11.

Fig 11

Comparison of encryption and decryption time (a. under fixed text size and key length; b. under different sizes of text with 1024-bit key; c. under different sizes of text with 2048-bit key).

Fig 11A suggests that the encryption time and decryption time for 2M text with 1024-bit key is 122.9s and 5611.7s in ten rounds, respectively, averaging 12.29s and 561.17s. Generally, the file reported by the system is less than 100KB, and the average encryption time of the RSA algorithm for 2M large text can also be controlled at about 12s. The decryption time is slightly longer than the encryption time. However, it is also within a reasonable range, so the overall RSA performance is good. Fig 11B and 11C imply that the RSA encrypts length-varying texts smaller than 40KB within 0.3s~0.4s using the 1024-bit key and within 0.5s using the 2048-bit key. Therefore, given a text size of 40KB or less, the encryption time difference between a shorter key and a longer key is small. On the other hand, the decryption time is more than three times that of encryption under a length-constant key. The larger the text is, the longer the decryption time is. The maximum decryption time of a 1024-bit and 2048-bit private key is 9.34s and 31.3s, respectively. In practice, the key length is less than 1024 bits, so the encryption and decryption time will only be much less than the experimental results. Therefore, the RSA algorithm can fully meet the CC system’s daily network data encryption requirements.

Conclusions

The maintenance and stable development of the CC system need to take certain technical measures to discover the cybersecurity risks timely. A NAD model based on a clustering algorithm is proposed here, and a CAM based on GRG is constructed. Finally, it is found that the average CDR of the NAD model for different types of abnormal data is 93.33%, the average UR is 6.65%, and the prediction accuracy is high. The deficiency is that only the widely used and mature algorithms are selected to build the model. Their security performance is not compared with other methods. Therefore, the result is relatively biased, and the threat model is not studied. The follow-up research will select more methods to compare and analyze the security of the proposed model and introduce the threat model to improve the model continuously. The purpose is to provide important technical support for anomaly detection, security situation analysis, data transmission protection of CC system, and improve its cybersecurity. The finding provides a reference for the development of CC security.

Supporting information

S1 Data

(XLSX)

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.

Funding Statement

The author received no specific funding for this work.

References

  • 1.Mani N, Moh M, Moh T S. Defending deep learning models against adversarial attacks. International Journal of Software Science and Computational Intelligence (IJSSCI), 2021; 13(1): 72–89. [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Xu Z, He D, Vijayakumar P, Choo K K R, Li L. Efficient NTRU lattice-based certificateless signature scheme for medical cyber-physical systems. Journal of medical systems, 2020; 44(5): 1–8. doi: 10.1007/s10916-020-1527-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Alam T. Cloud Computing and its role in Information Technology. IAIC Transactions on Sustainable Digital Innovation (ITSDI), 2020; 1(2): 108–115. [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Xu Z, He D, Wang H, Vijayakumar P, Choo K K R. A novel proxy-oriented public auditing scheme for cloud-based medical cyber physical systems. Journal of information security and applications, 2022; 51: 102453. [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Namasudra S. Data access control in the cloud computing environment for bioinformatics. International Journal of Applied Research in Bioinformatics (IJARB), 2021; 11(1): 40–50. [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Lu Y, Wang D, Obaidat M S, Vijayakumar P. Edge-assisted Intelligent Device Authentication in Cyber-Physical Systems. IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Nguyen G N, Le Viet N H, Elhoseny M, Shankar K, Gupta B B, Abd El-Latif A A. Secure blockchain enabled Cyber–physical systems in healthcare using deep belief network with ResNet model. Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing, 2021; 153: 150–160. [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Mao S, He S, Wu J. Joint UAV position optimization and resource scheduling in space-air-ground integrated networks with mixed cloud-edge computing. IEEE Systems Journal, 2020; 15(3): 3992–4002. [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Mishra A, Gupta N, Gupta B B. Defense mechanisms against DDoS attack based on entropy in SDN-cloud using POX controller. Telecommunication systems, 2021; 77(1): 47–62. [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Zhang Y, Lan X, Ren J, Cai L. Efficient computing resource sharing for mobile edge-cloud computing networks. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, 2020; 28(3): 1227–1240. [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Velliangiri S, Karthikeyan P, Vinoth Kumar V. Detection of distributed denial of service attack in cloud computing using the optimization-based deep networks. Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence, 2021; 33(3): 405–424. [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Mishra S, Sagban R, Yakoob A, Gandhi N. Swarm intelligence in anomaly detection systems: an overview. International Journal of Computers and Applications, 2021; 43(2): 109–118. [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Romero C, Ventura S. Educational data mining and learning analytics: An updated survey. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 2020; 10(3): e1355. [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Al-Qerem A, Alauthman M, Almomani A, Gupta B B. IoT transaction processing through cooperative concurrency control on fog–cloud computing environment. Soft Comput 24, 2020; 16: 5695–5711. [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Xie T, Liu R, Wei Z. Improvement of the Fast Clustering Algorithm Improved by-Means in the Big Data. Applied Mathematics and Nonlinear Sciences, 2020; 5(1): 1–10. [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Vijayakumar P, Chang V, Deborah L J, Kshatriya B S R. Key management and key distribution for secure group communication in mobile and cloud network. Future Generation Computer Systems, 2018; 84: 123–125. [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Xia D, Ning F, He W. Research on parallel adaptive Canopy-K-Means clustering algorithm for big data mining based on cloud platform. Journal of Grid Computing, 2020; 18(2): 263–273. [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Ahmed M, Seraj R, Islam S M S. The k-means algorithm: A comprehensive survey and performance evaluation. Electronics, 2020; 9(8): 1295. [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Gupta B B, Li K C, Leung V C, Psannis K E, Yamaguchi S. Blockchain-assisted secure fine-grained searchable encryption for a cloud-based healthcare cyber-physical system. IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica, 2021; 8(12): 1877–1890. [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Jalali M F M, Heidari H. Predicting changes in Bitcoin price using grey system theory. Financial Innovation, 2020; 6(1): 1–12. [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Li P, Ji Y, Wu Z, Qu S J. A new multi-attribute emergency decision-making algorithm based on intuitionistic fuzzy cross-entropy and comprehensive grey correlation analysis. Entropy, 2020; 22(7): 768. doi: 10.3390/e22070768 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Jiao Y, Qi P. Quality Evaluation Method for Settlement Data Matching Based on Grey Correlation Analysis. Journal of Physics: Conference Series. IOP Publishing, 2022; 2181(1): 012034. [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Dahiya A, Gupta B B. A reputation score policy and Bayesian game theory based incentivized mechanism for DDoS attacks mitigation and cyber defense. Future Generation Computer Systems, 2021; 117: 193–204. [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Yazdeen A A, Zeebaree S R M, Sadeeq M M, Kak S F, Ahmed O M, Zebari R R. FPGA implementations for data encryption and decryption via concurrent and parallel computation: A review. Qubahan Academic Journal, 2021; 1(2): 8–16. [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Saračević M H, Adamović S Z, Miškovic V A, Elhoseny M, Maček N D, Selim M M, et al. Data encryption for Internet of Things applications based on catalan objects and two combinatorial structures. IEEE Transactions on Reliability, 2020; 70(2): 819–830. [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Kaur M, Singh D, Kumar V, Gupta B B, Abd El-Latif A A. Secure and energy efficient-based E-health care framework for green Internet of things. IEEE Transactions on Green Communications and Networking, 2021; 5(3): 1223–1231. [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Rajesh S, Paul V, Menon V G, Khosravi M R. A secure and efficient lightweight symmetric encryption scheme for transfer of text files between embedded IoT devices. Symmetry, 2019; 11(2): 293. [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Xu Y, Wu S, Wang M, Zou Y. Design and implementation of distributed RSA algorithm based on Hadoop. Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing, 2020; 11(3): 1047–1053. [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Mirsadeghi F, Rafsanjani M K, Gupta B B. A trust infrastructure based authentication method for clustered vehicular ad hoc networks. Peer-to-Peer Networking and Applications, 2021; 14(4): 2537–2553. [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Pandi Vijayakumar

24 May 2022

PONE-D-22-07534Computer Cyberspace Security Mechanism Supported by Cloud ComputingPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Fu,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

ACADEMIC EDITOR: Please insert comments here and delete this placeholder text when finished. Be sure to:

Please ignore reviewer 3 comments which is irrelevant to this work. Other reviewers feel that the paper lacks novelty. Also, strong English proofreading is ​required. The authors are also advised to include the following relevant papers in the literature survey. <o:p></o:p>

Efficient NTRU lattice-based certificateless signature scheme for medical cyber-physical systems<o:p></o:p>

A novel proxy-oriented public auditing scheme for cloud-based medical cyber physical systems<o:p></o:p>

Edge-assisted Intelligent Device Authentication in Cyber-Physical Systems<o:p></o:p>

Key management and key distribution for secure group communication in mobile and cloud network<o:p></o:p>

Please submit your revised manuscript by Jul 08 2022 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Pandi Vijayakumar, Ph.D

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. In your Data Availability statement, you have not specified where the minimal data set underlying the results described in your manuscript can be found. PLOS defines a study's minimal data set as the underlying data used to reach the conclusions drawn in the manuscript and any additional data required to replicate the reported study findings in their entirety. All PLOS journals require that the minimal data set be made fully available. For more information about our data policy, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability.

Upon re-submitting your revised manuscript, please upload your study’s minimal underlying data set as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and include the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers within your revised cover letter. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories. Any potentially identifying patient information must be fully anonymized.

Important: If there are ethical or legal restrictions to sharing your data publicly, please explain these restrictions in detail. Please see our guidelines for more information on what we consider unacceptable restrictions to publicly sharing data: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions. Note that it is not acceptable for the authors to be the sole named individuals responsible for ensuring data access.

We will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide in your cover letter.

3. PLOS requires an ORCID iD for the corresponding author in Editorial Manager on papers submitted after December 6th, 2016. Please ensure that you have an ORCID iD and that it is validated in Editorial Manager. To do this, go to ‘Update my Information’ (in the upper left-hand corner of the main menu), and click on the Fetch/Validate link next to the ORCID field. This will take you to the ORCID site and allow you to create a new iD or authenticate a pre-existing iD in Editorial Manager. Please see the following video for instructions on linking an ORCID iD to your Editorial Manager account: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xcclfuvtxQ

4. Please amend either the abstract on the online submission form (via Edit Submission) or the abstract in the manuscript so that they are identical.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Authors presented Computer Cyberspace Security Mechanism Supported by Cloud Computing in this paper. This paper has merit and covered an important topic, however, I have following suggestions to improve the quality of this paper:

-Explain your contribution in better way.

-Why this kind of study on Computer Cyberspace Security Mechanism Supported by Cloud Computing is important?

- Paper needs to polish and provide a detailed explication of theoretical aspects such as conditions and theorems, and practical issues like algorithms, rules and possible applications.

-Improve the quality of figures.

-The abstract, Introduction and conclusion sections are poor and need to be rewritten to point out significance and impact of the paper.

-I will encourage the authors to spend more time to perform and add some more experiments in the results section.

-remove all typos and other grammatical errors.

-Explain novelty of your work presented in this work.

-Remove all the typos.

-The authors are advised to refer some more recent, relevant and high quality research works. For example:

Blockchain-assisted secure fine-grained searchable encryption for a cloud-based healthcare cyber-physical system,

A reputation score policy and Bayesian game theory based incentivized mechanism for DDoS attacks mitigation and cyber defense,

Secure and energy efficient-based E-health care framework for green internet of things,

A trust infrastructure based authentication method for clustered vehicular ad hoc networks,

IoT transaction processing through cooperative concurrency control on fog–cloud computing environment

The formula character format is best to be different from the main text, and mathematical characters are recommended.

Also, some security related researches may also be explored and discussed:

Defending deep learning models against adversarial attacks,

Secure blockchain enabled Cyber-physical systems in healthcare using deep belief network with ResNet model,

Defense mechanisms against DDoS attack based on entropy in SDN-cloud using POX controller,

Many references are with incomplete bibliographic information (like lack of publication venue, for instance). This must be corrected

The formula character format is best to be different from the main text, and mathematical characters are recommended.

It seems that the contribution points of the article are a little bit few. After or in the section of Motivation, it is recommended that the authors summarize the contribution points of their work, which clearly demonstrate the innovations.

Moreover, the format of the references should strictly follow the rules of the journal.

Reviewer #2: Authors discussed about computer cyberspace security mechanism Supported by Cloud Computing.

Paper seems very weak in its current form. It should be revised as per the following comments:

* Add communication model of the considered communication environment in the paper.

* Add threat model in the paper.

* Add comparative performance analysis of the various security protocols of this domain.

* Improve the English writing of the paper.

* Highlight the research contributions of the paper.

* What is the motivation of the conducted study.

Reviewer #3: The authors addressed all my review comments satisfactoryly. Now this paper looks good in technological aspects. Hence I strongly recommend this paper for possible publication in your reputed journal.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2022 Oct 7;17(10):e0271546. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0271546.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


16 Jun 2022

Date: May 24 2022 06:33AM

To: "Zeyuan Fu" 2019302180015@whu.edu.cn

From: "PLOS ONE" plosone@plos.org

Subject: PLOS ONE Decision: Revision required [PONE-D-22-07534]

PONE-D-22-07534

Computer Cyberspace Security Mechanism Supported by Cloud Computing

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Fu,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Reply: Thank you for your review.

ACADEMIC EDITOR: Please insert comments here and delete this placeholder text when finished. Be sure to:

Please ignore reviewer 3 comments which is irrelevant to this work. Other reviewers feel that the paper lacks novelty. Also, strong English proofreading is ​required. The authors are also advised to include the following relevant papers in the literature survey. 

Efficient NTRU lattice-based certificateless signature scheme for medical cyber-physical systems

A novel proxy-oriented public auditing scheme for cloud-based medical cyber physical systems

Edge-assisted Intelligent Device Authentication in Cyber-Physical Systems

Key management and key distribution for secure group communication in mobile and cloud network

Reply: Thank you for your advice. We have ignored reviewer 3's comments. In the introduction part, the author adds some innovative points and proofreads the English writing of the article. The four literatures you mentioned are cited.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Jul 08 2022 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

�A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

�A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

�An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

Reply: Thank you for your comments. We will upload the revised version of the article according to your requirements.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Pandi Vijayakumar, Ph.D

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Reply: Thank you again for your review. 

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

Reply: Thank you for your advice. We have adjusted the article layout according to the format requirements.

2. In your Data Availability statement, you have not specified where the minimal data set underlying the results described in your manuscript can be found. PLOS defines a study's minimal data set as the underlying data used to reach the conclusions drawn in the manuscript and any additional data required to replicate the reported study findings in their entirety. All PLOS journals require that the minimal data set be made fully available. For more information about our data policy, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability.

Upon re-submitting your revised manuscript, please upload your study’s minimal underlying data set as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and include the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers within your revised cover letter. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories. Any potentially identifying patient information must be fully anonymized.

Important: If there are ethical or legal restrictions to sharing your data publicly, please explain these restrictions in detail. Please see our guidelines for more information on what we consider unacceptable restrictions to publicly sharing data: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions. Note that it is not acceptable for the authors to be the sole named individuals responsible for ensuring data access.

We will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide in your cover letter.

Reply: Thank you for your advice. The dataset Download URL has been added to the "experimental design" section. And add the data package in the attachment.

3. PLOS requires an ORCID iD for the corresponding author in Editorial Manager on papers submitted after December 6th, 2016. Please ensure that you have an ORCID iD and that it is validated in Editorial Manager. To do this, go to ‘Update my Information’ (in the upper left-hand corner of the main menu), and click on the Fetch/Validate link next to the ORCID field. This will take you to the ORCID site and allow you to create a new iD or authenticate a pre-existing iD in Editorial Manager. Please see the following video for instructions on linking an ORCID iD to your Editorial Manager account: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xcclfuvtxQ

Reply: Thank you for your comments. We have obtained and verified the ORCID.

4. Please amend either the abstract on the online submission form (via Edit Submission) or the abstract in the manuscript so that they are identical.

Reply: Thank you for your reminder. We have adjusted the abstract on the online submission form accordingly.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: Yes

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: Yes

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: Yes

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reply: Thank all the reviewers for their comments on this article. We will revise the article according to the specific comments below.

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Authors presented Computer Cyberspace Security Mechanism Supported by Cloud Computing in this paper. This paper has merit and covered an important topic, however, I have following suggestions to improve the quality of this paper:

-Explain your contribution in better way.

Reply: Thank you for your advice. The research contribution of this paper has been added at the end of the introduction.

-Why this kind of study on Computer Cyberspace Security Mechanism Supported by Cloud Computing is important?

Reply: Explanations have been added at the end of the introduction.

- Paper needs to polish and provide a detailed explication of theoretical aspects such as conditions and theorems, and practical issues like algorithms, rules and possible applications.

Reply: Thank you for your advice. More rationale has been added in the "Cyberattack Assessment Model (CAM) based on Grey Relational Grade (GRG)" section.

-Improve the quality of figures.

Reply: Thank you for your comments. The full text figures have been adjusted.

-The abstract, Introduction and conclusion sections are poor and need to be rewritten to point out significance and impact of the paper.

Reply: The abstract, introduction, and conclusion have been rewritten.

-I will encourage the authors to spend more time to perform and add some more experiments in the results section.

Reply: Thank you for your support. For more experimental results, we will conduct in-depth research in the future, which is also one of the future directions of the conclusion part.

-remove all typos and other grammatical errors.

Reply: Thank you for your reminder. English writing has been re-proofread.

-Explain novelty of your work presented in this work.

Reply: Innovations have been added to the introduction.

-Remove all the typos.

Reply: Thank you for your reminder. English writing has been re-proofread.

-The authors are advised to refer some more recent, relevant and high quality research works. For example:

Blockchain-assisted secure fine-grained searchable encryption for a cloud-based healthcare cyber-physical system,

A reputation score policy and Bayesian game theory based incentivized mechanism for DDoS attacks mitigation and cyber defense,

Secure and energy efficient-based E-health care framework for green internet of things,

A trust infrastructure based authentication method for clustered vehicular ad hoc networks,

IoT transaction processing through cooperative concurrency control on fog–cloud computing environment

Reply: Thank you for your advice. We have cited the references you provided.

The formula character format is best to be different from the main text, and mathematical characters are recommended.

Reply: Thank you for your advice. We have confirmed that all formula characters are mathematical characters.

Also, some security related researches may also be explored and discussed:

Defending deep learning models against adversarial attacks,

Secure blockchain enabled Cyber-physical systems in healthcare using deep belief network with ResNet model,

Defense mechanisms against DDoS attack based on entropy in SDN-cloud using POX controller,

Reply: Thank you for your advice. These references have been added to the list of references.

Many references are with incomplete bibliographic information (like lack of publication venue, for instance). This must be corrected

Reply: Thank you for your comments. We have perfected the references.

The formula character format is best to be different from the main text, and mathematical characters are recommended.

Reply: Thank you for your advice. We have confirmed that all formula characters are mathematical characters.

It seems that the contribution points of the article are a little bit few. After or in the section of Motivation, it is recommended that the authors summarize the contribution points of their work, which clearly demonstrate the innovations.

Reply: Thank you for your advice. Article contribution and innovation have been added in the introduction.

Moreover, the format of the references should strictly follow the rules of the journal.

Reply: We have ensured that the format of the references meets the requirements of the journal.

Reviewer #2: Authors discussed about computer cyberspace security mechanism Supported by Cloud Computing.

Paper seems very weak in its current form. It should be revised as per the following comments:

* Add communication model of the considered communication environment in the paper.

Reply: Thank you for your comments. The communication model has been added at the end of the “Intrusion Detection Model (IDM) based on clustering algorithm” section.

* Add threat model in the paper.

Reply: Thank you for your comment. The construction and research of threat model will be carried out in-depth in future research, which has been added to the conclusion.

* Add comparative performance analysis of the various security protocols of this domain.

Reply: Thank you for your advice. The comparative performance analysis of security protocols already exists in the future direction of the conclusion, and we will conduct in-depth research in this field in the future.

* Improve the English writing of the paper.

Reply: Thank you for your reminder. English writing has been proofread.

* Highlight the research contributions of the paper.

Reply: The contribution of the thesis has been highlighted in the abstract, introduction and conclusion.

* What is the motivation of the conducted study.

Reply: Research motivation has been added in the abstract and introduction.

Reviewer #3: The authors addressed all my review comments satisfactoryly. Now this paper looks good in technological aspects. Hence I strongly recommend this paper for possible publication in your reputed journal.

Reply: Thank you for your comment.

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Reply: Thank you again for your support for this study.

Attachment

Submitted filename: renamed_b9af9.docx

Decision Letter 1

Pandi Vijayakumar

4 Jul 2022

Computer Cyberspace Security Mechanism Supported by Cloud Computing

PONE-D-22-07534R1

Dear Dr. Fu,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Pandi Vijayakumar, Ph.D

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Computer Cyberspace Security Mechanism Supported by Cloud Computing is presented in this paper and it is revised well.

Reviewer #2: Paper has been updated as per the comments provided in the previous round of review. The quality of the paper has been improved. I recommend acceptance of the paper.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

Acceptance letter

Pandi Vijayakumar

19 Sep 2022

PONE-D-22-07534R1

Computer Cyberspace Security Mechanism Supported by Cloud Computing

Dear Dr. Fu:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Pandi Vijayakumar

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE


Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

RESOURCES