Campus Card Research Articles

The Architecture and Application of the Financial Pay Cost Based on the Platform of Campus Card System

Through a series designed of students charging system connecting managed functional department of students and outside school bank, it is realized that saving, consumption, student identity authentication, information query, settlement and management etc. This system can deduct all kinds of expenses and deliver student subsidies,scholarship and allowance automatically; May at any time of the fees for statistics collection situation; Can realize the sharing of the information resources, provide various forms of the inquiry statistics function; Follow the principle of safety first, ensure that funds, information security. This article combined with the characteristics and conditions of construction of campus card platform, they put forward the design ideas and its application focusing on the digital campus environment of financial pay cost system.

Student Perceptions and Adoption of University Smart Card Systems

This study investigated student adoption of university campus card (UCC) applications. A review of smart card, technology adoption and Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) literature led to three focus groups and a survey of student perceptions and attitudes towards the university’s campus card. Perceptions of 17 UCC components differed significantly across four student variables – international versus domestic, willingness to load funds, gender, and university level – supporting and extending UTAUT. Willingness to load funds on their UCC differed significantly across 16 out of 17 components, followed by domestic versus overseas students differing on 14 components, university level differing on 13 components and gender on 10. Overall, students reported that extra UCC features would enhance the university’s image, improve their student experience, and encourage them to use UCCs. The results and managerial implications can help universities select and prioritise UCC functions for campus adoption and implementation.

A controllable and accountable state-oriented Card-Aided Firewall

This paper proposes a new approach, named Card-Aided Firewall (CAF) that combines the simplified firewall and the state-oriented smart card technologies to construct a controllable and accountable Internet access framework. The idea suggests that a client computer, protected by a light-weight firewall, could establish diversified authenticated communication channels, controlled and accounted by “legal” states of the smart card. The program of a smart card is state-oriented or a state machine, which defines a chain of events involving various state transitions. The “legal” states of a smart card program are defined to be legal to communicate with surfing targets. A predefined Access Control List (ACL), stored in the same card, is necessary. An ACL is a sequential list of permit or deny statements that apply to addresses or upper-layer protocols. The proposed firewall decides acceptance or rejection messages by matching the current state of the card program and the ACL. In addition, a complete surfing account for tracing back is recorded. It is a by-product of the smart card authentication. The proposed Card-Aided Firewall framework is implemented to demonstrate its effectiveness. The implementation is done at the driver level. It keeps up with the high line speed. The driver takes 39K bytes and works well with other firewalls. The average packet processing time of the CAF driver is 31.74 μs. On the premise of secure authentication within the smart card, the Card-Aided Firewall would facilitate various rapidly growing applications in campus cards, family cards, and employee cards, etc. that require accurate controllability and accountability in the surfing boundary.

Internet security is the killer application for campus cards

The ability to secure data on PCs is set to be the killer application for the smart chip on North American college campuses, says Lyn White of White Consulting, an independent consultancy based in Durham, North Carolina.

Campus cards take off

A flurry of announcements from colleges as far apart as California and Berlin indicates that campus cards are becoming an increasingly important sector for the smart card business.

Smartcards in libraries: A brave new world

The University of Exeter Library, in conjunction with NatWest UK and Mondex, commenced a pilot smartcard project in October 1996. The smartcard functions as a campus card, combining many different features such as identification, student voting, building access, registration, electronic payment — and a library card. Of all these applications, the library card is compulsory. The pilot project concentrates on identification features of current smartcard technology but recent developments, especially an International standard multiple operating system (MULTOS), will increase potential applications for libraries and other agencies. Despite encountering many operational and technical obstacles, the University of Exeter project is now in its second year of operation.

Access control, payment, and smart cards in libraries

As networked information services on the Internet continue to grow, so the problem for libraries of controlling access and management of these services increases. There are three problem areas for libraries: • computer security with regard to open networks: confidentiality, identification and authentication, and document integrity • authorisation: who is authorised to do what on which resources? • cost recovery: libraries will need to develop cost recovery charging mechanisms as the amount of electronic information increases and the costs of electronic licences rise. Current approaches to networked access to electronic information sources favour user direct access and payment, or institutional site licences. Both methods involve multiple connections and interfaces. The former also requires multiple registration procedures and different payment systems while the latter provides no cost-recovery mechanism for libraries. Moreover both approaches give rise to inflation in information prices. Against this background, smart cards are being introduced in libraries as means of controlling user identity and of electronic payment. But current applications in libraries of campus cards and of public payment cards do not yet integrate all the functionalities required by libraries. The TOLIMAC project aims to meet libraries' requirements in terms of user authentication, authorisation, secure communication and charging mechanism. It has developed a smart card-based management system of networked information services for libraries, providing access control and payment mechanisms. These new functionalities enable libraries to agree a new type of institutional contract with providers, based on actual use of their services. By placing libraries as key intermediaries between users and providers, the TOLIMAC system sets a new electronic information management concept for access control and charging functions.

Team Bias in a Card Contest

I t has been found in several laboratory studies (e.g., Dustin & Davis, 1970) that in team competition members tend to evaluate their own team product more favorably than that of the competing team. The purpose of this smdy was to find out whether similar bias existed in a real competition, a campus card contest. Ss were 44 college men and women who had paid $2 a pair to enter a contest in a card game called pitch, for which the first prize was $35. Two student Es, only one of whom took part in planning the study, approached teams as soon as their first match was finished, announcing, Say, I'm doing a little project for a class. Would you tell me what you really think the score would be if you played that team once again? Each of the four Ss at the table was pressed for an answer. Each E approached six tables but missed several players who left too quickly to be questioned. All matches that ended at a time when both Es were busy interviewing were lost to the study. A team was categorized as predicting a win or a loss if both partners predicted accordingly or if the only partner available did. For El, all six of the winning teams predicted they would win another game, while five of the six losing teams predicted that they, themselves, would win. The Fisher exact probability test shows the difference between these two distributions to be significant at the .05 point. For E-, all six of the winning teams predicted they would win again, while three of four losing teams predicted that they, themselves, would win. The two members of a fifth losing team were dropped from the analysis because they split their predictions, and both members of a sixth losing team departed too quickly to be questioned. The Fisher test showed the difference between these two distributions to be significant at the .05 point. It appears that rather extreme bias may occur in group competition outside the laboratory, at least in this particular type of contest. This is not a case where one team predicted they would perform slightly less poorly than cheir opponents predicted they would. Rather, in a majority of cases, both winning and losing opponents predicted that they, themselves, would win if another game were played.