Security of Two-Party Identity-Based Key Agreement

Identity-based cryptography has become extremely fashionable in the last few years. As a consequence many proposals for identity-based key establishment have emerged, the majority in the two party case. We survey the currently proposed protocols of this type, examining their security and efficiency. Problems with some published protocols are noted.

Causes of injuries resulting in hospitalisation in Australia : assessing coder agreement on external causes

Objective: To assess extent of coder agreement for external causes of injury using ICD-10-AM for injury-related hospitalisations in Australian public hospitals. Methods: A random sample of 4850 discharges from 2002 to 2004 was obtained from a stratified random sample of 50 hospitals across four states in Australia. On-site medical record reviews were conducted and external cause codes were assigned blinded to the original coded data. Code agreement levels were grouped into the following agreement categories: block level, 3-character level, 4-character level, 5th-character level, and complete code level. Results: At a broad block level, code agreement was found in over 90% of cases for most mechanisms (eg, transport, fall). Percentage disagreement was 26.0% at the 3-character level; agreement for the complete external cause code was 67.6%. For activity codes, the percentage of disagreement at the 3-character level was 7.3% and agreement for the complete activity code was 68.0%. For place of occurrence codes, the percentage of disagreement at the 4-character level was 22.0%; agreement for the complete place code was 75.4%. Conclusions: With 68% agreement for complete codes and 74% agreement for 3-character codes, as well as variability in agreement levels across different code blocks, place and activity codes, researchers need to be aware of the reliability of their specific data of interest when they wish to undertake trend analyses or case selection for specific causes of interest.

Strongly Secure Certificateless Key Agreement

We introduce a formal model for certificateless authenticated key exchange (CL-AKE) protocols. Contrary to what might be expected, we show that the natural combination of an ID-based AKE protocol with a public key based AKE protocol cannot provide strong security. We provide the first one-round CL-AKE scheme proven secure in the random oracle model. We introduce two variants of the Diffie-Hellman trapdoor the introduced by \cite{DBLP:conf/eurocrypt/CashKS08}. The proposed key agreement scheme is secure as long as each party has at least one uncompromised secret. Thus, our scheme is secure even if the key generation centre learns the ephemeral secrets of both parties.

Certificateless key agreement in the standard model

We show how to construct a certificateless key agreement protocol from the certificateless key encapsulation mechanism introduced by \cite{lippold-ICISC_2009} in ICISC 2009 using the \cite{DBLP:conf/acisp/BoydCNP08} protocol from ACISP 2008. We introduce the Canetti-Krawczyk (CK) model for certificateless cryptography, give security notions for Type I and Type II adversaries in the CK model, and highlight the differences to the existing e$^2$CK model discussed by \cite{DBLP:conf/pairing/LippoldBN09}. The resulting CK model is more relaxed thus giving more power to the adversary than the original CK model.

Legal Profession Act 2007 s 319 - Whether costs agreement made after trial valid and enforceable - whether agreement had retrospective operation

The decision in QCOAL Pty Ltd v Cliffs Australia Coal Pty Ltd [2010] QSC 479 involved an examination of a number of issues relating to the assessment of costs under the Legal Profession Act 2007 (Qld). The decision highlights a range of issues which, in slightly different circumstances, may have deprived the successful party of the right to recover costs by reference to the costs agreement.

Agreement between self-reported use of in vitro fertilization or ovulation induction, and medical insurance claims in Australian women aged 28–36 years

STUDY QUESTION: What is the self-reported use of in vitro fertilization (IVF) and ovulation induction (OI) in comparison with insurance claims by Australian women aged 28–36 years? SUMMARY ANSWER: The self-reported use of IVF is quite likely to be valid; however, the use of OI is less well reported. WHAT IS KNOWN AND WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: Population-based research often relies on the self-reported use of IVF and OI because access to medical records can be difficult and the data need to include sufficient personal identifying information for linkage to other data sources. There have been few attempts to explore the reliability of the self-reported use of IVF and OI using the linkage to medical insurance claims for either treatment. STUDY DESIGN: This prospective, population-based, longitudinal study included the cohort of women born during 1973–1978 and participating in the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women's Health (ALSWH) (n = 14247). From 1996 to 2009, participants were surveyed up to five times. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: Participants self-reported their use of IVF or OI in two mailed surveys when aged 28–33 and 31–36 years (n = 7280), respectively. This study links self-report survey responses and claims for treatment or medication from the universal national health insurance scheme (i.e. Medicare Australia). MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Comparisons between self-reports and claims data were undertaken for all women consenting to the linkage (n = 3375). The self-reported use of IVF was compared with claims for OI for IVF (Kappa, K = 0.83), oocyte collection (K = 0.82), sperm preparation (K = 0.83), intracytoplasmic sperm injection (K = 0.40), fresh embryo transfers (K = 0.82), frozen embryo transfers (K = 0.64) and OI for IVF medication (K = 0.17). The self-reported use of OI was compared with ovulation monitoring (K = 0.52) and OI medication (K = 0.71). BIAS, CONFOUNDING AND OTHER REASONS FOR CAUTION: There is a possibility of selection bias due to the inclusion criteria for participants in this study: (1) completion of the last two surveys in a series of five and (2) consent to the linkage of their responses with Medicare data. GENERALIZABILITY TO OTHER POPULATIONS: The results are relevant to questionnaire-based research studies with infertile women in developed countries. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): ALSWH is funded by the Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing. This research is funded by a National Health and Medical Research Council Centre of Research Excellence grant.

Self-proxy agreement and weekly school travel behaviour in a sectarian divided society

Proxy reports from parents and self-reported data from pupils have often been used interchangeably to identify factors influencing school travel behaviour. However, few studies have examined the validity of proxy reports as an alternative to self-reported data. In addition, despite research that has been conducted in a different context, little is known to date about the impact of different factors on school travel behaviour in a sectarian divided society. This research examines these issues using 1624 questionnaires collected from four independent samples (e.g. primary pupils, parent of primary pupils, secondary pupils, and parent of secondary pupils) across Northern Ireland. An independent sample t test was conducted to identify the differences in data reporting between pupils and parents for different age groups using the reported number of trips for different modes as dependent variables. Multivariate multiple regression analyses were conducted to then identify the impacts of different factors (e.g. gender, rural–urban context, multiple deprivations, and school management type, net residential density, land use diversity, intersection density) on mode choice behaviour in this context. Results show that proxy report is a valid alternative to self-reported data, but only for primary pupils. Land use diversity and rural–urban context were found to be the most important factors in influencing mode choice behaviour.

Issues in negotiating a Carbon Sequestration Agreement for a Biosequestration Offsets Project

Biosequestration of carbon in trees, forests and vegetation is a key method for offsetting greenhouse gas emissions. To facilitate it, the Commonwealth has introduced the Carbon Farming Initiative, a scheme whereby carbon credits can be earned for biosequestration offsets projects. The project proponent must acquire under state law a ‘carbon sequestration right’ which confers the benefit of the sequestered carbon on the land. Each State provides for an agreement associated with the carbon sequestration right between the landowner and the holder of the right (‘carbon sequestration agreement’). This article identifies some key risks and issues that must be considered in the drafting of a carbon sequestration agreement to support the successful operation of a biosequestration offsets project.