human: Given a node-centered hypergraph: <hypergraph>, where nodes represent papers and hyperedges represent sets of papers co-cited by a source paper.

Details of the hypergraph:
Center node: "a formal methodology for integral security design and verification of network protocols"
  Abstract: HighlightsAn iterative methodology for verifying communication protocols, combining formal and informal analysis, is presented.When security flaws are detected, it provides feedback for easing their resolution.Three case studies with real protocols are introduced to show the benefits of such methodology.The first two case studies (MANA III and WEP's Shared Key Authentication) show how some weaknesses could have been detected.The third case study shows the complete process of verification of a new protocol for obtaining digital identities. In this work we propose a methodology for incorporating the verification of the security properties of network protocols as a fundamental component of their design. This methodology can be separated in two main parts: context and requirements analysis along with its informal verification; and formal representation of protocols and the corresponding procedural verification. Although the procedural verification phase does not require any specific tool or approach, automated tools for model checking and/or theorem proving offer a good trade-off between effort and results. In general, any security protocol design methodology should be an iterative process addressing in each step critical contexts of increasing complexity as result of the considered protocol goals and the underlying threats. The effort required for detecting flaws is proportional to the complexity of the critical context under evaluation, and thus our methodology avoids wasting valuable system resources by analyzing simple flaws in the first stages of the design process. In this work we provide a methodology in coherence with the step-by-step goals definition and threat analysis using informal and formal procedures, being our main concern to highlight the adequacy of such a methodology for promoting trust in the accordingly implemented communication protocols. Our proposal is illustrated by its application to three communication protocols: MANA III, WEP's Shared Key Authentication and CHAT-SRP.

Question: Please tell me which class the center node belongs to. The 40 classes are: cs.NA(Numerical Analysis), cs.MM(Multimedia), cs.LO(Logic in Computer Science), cs.CY(Computers and Society), cs.CR(Cryptography and Security), cs.DC(Distributed, Parallel, and Cluster Computing), cs.HC(Human-Computer Interaction), cs.CE(Computational Engineering, Finance, and Science), cs.NI(Networking and Internet Architecture), cs.CC(Computational Complexity), cs.AI(Artificial Intelligence), cs.MA(Multiagent Systems), cs.GL(General Literature), cs.NE(Neural and Evolutionary Computing), cs.SC(Symbolic Computation), cs.AR(Hardware Architecture), cs.CV(Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition), cs.GR(Graphics), cs.ET(Emerging Technologies), cs.SY(Systems and Control), cs.CG(Computational Geometry), cs.OH(Other Computer Science), cs.PL(Programming Languages), cs.SE(Software Engineering), cs.LG(Machine Learning), cs.SD(Sound), cs.SI(Social and Information Networks), cs.RO(Robotics), cs.IT(Information Theory), cs.PF(Performance), cs.CL(Computation and Language), cs.IR(Information Retrieval), cs.MS(Mathematical Software), cs.FL(Formal Languages and Automata Theory), cs.DS(Data Structures and Algorithms), cs.OS(Operating Systems), cs.GT(Computer Science and Game Theory), cs.DB(Databases), cs.DL(Digital Libraries), cs.DM(Discrete Mathematics). Directly output the class name.

gpt: cs.CR(Cryptography and Security)