## 5 Results and Discussion  
To evaluate this model's effectiveness in establishing a secure framework for database systems or any access information system, it is essential to implement a classification mechanism. This mechanism must efficiently prevent unauthorized data access through a structured authentication process that considers access levels, characteristic sizes, and performance requirements. The evaluation involves testing the model with three distinct authentication types, as outlined in Appendix A. Each type comprises 10 unique usernames and passwords, set up to simulate real-world access scenarios. The characteristics of each type of authentication tested in the MLS/DBMS models are specified as follows:  
**Type 1**: Usernames are usually alphanumeric, combining letters and numbers. They are generally simple and easy to remember but must be unique for each user to prevent conflicts. Passwords vary in complexity based on security needs. Simple passwords may consist of common words or short sequences, making them easy to recall but less secure. **Type 2**: Usernames are typically alphanumeric and can include letters, numbers, and special characters such as hyphens or underscores. They are usually simple and easy to remember but must be unique to avoid conflicts. Passwords vary in complexity based on security needs, providing stronger protection against unauthorized access. **Type 3**: Usernames are usually alphanumeric and may consist of a mix of letters, numbers, and unusual characters like hyphens, underscores, or periods. They are designed to be unique, often incorporating a combination of characters and numbers. Complex passwords typically combine uppercase and lowercase letters, numbers, and special characters to support security and prevent unauthorized access. After addressing any issues in the setup, the model assesses the impact of each authentication type. Results indicate that the influence of these different authentication types  
Figure 9: Control panel access information. is substantial, validating the model's efficacy in securing access across varied authentication levels. Table 2 presents a statistical evaluation of three distinct authentication models, assessing their performance in terms of size and time metrics. The analysis highlights the efficiency of each model, with size measured by storage requirements and time reflecting processing speed. This comparison offers valuable insights into the trade-offs between performance and security in multilevel authentication systems. Each type is assessed by cumulative (sum) and average values for these indicators, with results reflecting access constraints detailed in the Appendices. Type 2, exhibiting the highest cumulative size (464) and time (14.67 s), suggests more substantial resource usage, likely due to more intricate username-password setups. Type 1 demonstrates the lowest time averages (0.319 s), indicating a streamlined model with minimal access issues. Type 3, balanced between resource demands and response time (size of 432, time of 15.46 s), represents a moderate solution. Despite its difficulty, Type 3 may be suitable for environments valuing security and efficiency. This analysis helps inform the optimal authentication choice, factoring in resource limitations and user access needs. Table 3 presents a classification analysis of three authentication types, organized into four security levels: U, C, S, and T. These levels are clearly illustrated in Figure 10, highlighting the distribution of each authentication type across the security categories. The analysis emphasizes the authentication model's performance, as each appendix table verifies and supports the effectiveness of each type at different security levels. Each type demonstrates a varying distribution of levels, suggesting differences in suitability for specific security needs. Type 1 demonstrates a balanced distribution across all security levels, with the highest occurrences at U and S levels (seven authentications each).