Implementation Project Report
Pre-final Draft of the Report
For the pre-final draft of the report all points and questions shown in bold and italic font are required.
Grammar and Language Clarity
The final project report is supposed to be free from grammatical and other language-related errors and issues. Points will be taken off for lack of clarity, incorrect grammar, or spelling (see the bottom of the general instructions for details).
The abstract should summarize the problem addressed, methodology, results, conclusions, and contributions.
I. Introduction (10%)
The section should provide the following
- Explain clearly the problem addressed by your project.
- Explain why this is an important problem.
- Summarize the implemented system
- Summarize related work.
- Summarize the methodology that you have followed for evaluating your implementation.
- Summarize evaluation results you obtained .
- Summarize the conclusions your drew from the results.
- List contributions of your project.
II. Existing System (7%)
This section should describe the existing system, in which you will implement your subsystem.
- The main components of the existing system and the technologies used for implementing the system components. Make sure to use diagrams and figures to illustrate the main components of the system and their interconnections.
- The data flow between the components,
- The ways various stakeholders interact with the system.
- The adversary model the existing system is intended to resist.
III. Related Work (5%)
This section should explain what others have done in terms of implementing (sub)systems similar to the one implemented by your team.
Make sure to compare and contrast your work with the related work.
IV. Adversary Model (5%)
Describe the adversary model that your implementation is intended to resist. If the adversary model for your (sub)system is exactly the same as for the existing system, you can just state here, without reproducing the adversary model from Section II.
V. System Design (20%)
- This section should explain the most interesting design elements of your implementation.
- Provide rationale for the implementation decisions.
- Explain which principles of implementation of secure systems have been employed by your design.
VI. System Implementation (20%)
- Explain the details of your (sub)system implementation. This is the implementation that is used for evaluating, which is reported in the next section.
VII. System Evaluation
This section should provide details of the evaluation/testing of your implementation, using the following sub-subsections.
- (A. Evaluation Methodology) (8%) This subsection should explain how the system was evaluated. Focus on the most important for the reader elements of your evaluation.
- (B. Results of the evaluation) (6%) This section should describe the results of the evaluation. Remember to keep the description of the evaluation and the description of the results in separate sub-sections.
- (C. Discussion of the evaluation results) (4%) This section should discuss what the results of the evaluation mean.
The above enumerated items should be discussed in separate subsections of Methodology section. Their titles are suggested in the parenthesis.
VII. Discussion (10%)
Discuss pros and cons of your implementation, as well as limitations and advantages of it. This discussion should integrate the related work, the motivation for the implementation, the adversary model, the ideas of the implementation, and the results of the evaluation. This section should be about one page.
Also, report here how your implementation has been
adopted by the developers of the existing system.
VIII. Conclusion (5%)
This section should summarize the report in 1-2 paragraphs. Although a conclusion may review the main points of the report, do not replicate the abstract as the conclusion. A conclusion might elaborate on the importance of the work or suggest applications and extensions.
Place references here. Make sure they are complete (e.g., page numbers, conference and journal titles, author names). Aim to use more academic references than non-academic ones.