3.8 Proceedings Paper

Privacy-Preserving Data Integrity Verification in Mobile Edge Computing

出版社

IEEE COMPUTER SOC
DOI: 10.1109/ICDCS.2019.00104

关键词

Mobile edge computing; data integrity; privacy-preserving

资金

  1. National Key R&D Program of China [2018YFB1004301]
  2. Ant Financial through the Ant Financial Science Funds for Security Research
  3. NSF [CNS-1816399]
  4. Jiangsu Shuang-Chuang Program
  5. Jiangsu Six-Talent-Peaks Program
  6. [NSFC-61425024]
  7. [NSFC-61872176]
  8. [NSFC-61872179]
  9. [NSFC-61872180]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mobile edge computing (MEC) is proposed as an extension of cloud computing in the scenarios where the end devices desire better services in terms of response time. Edge nodes are deployed at the proximity of the end devices, and it can pre-download parts of data stored in the cloud so that the end devices can access these data with low latency. However, because the edges are usually owned by individuals and small organizations, which have limited operation capacities for maintaining the machines, the data on the edges are easily corrupted (due to external attacks or internal hardware failures). Therefore, it is essential to verify data integrity in the MEC. We propose two Integrity Checking protocols for mobile Edge computing, called ICE-basic and ICE-batch, which are designed for the cases where the user wants to check data integrity on a single edge or multiple edges, respectively. Based on the concept of provable data possession and the technique of private information retrieval, our protocols allow a third-party verifier to check the data integrity on the edges without violating users' data privacy and query pattern privacy. We rigorously prove the security and privacy guarantees of the protocols. Furthermore, we have implemented a proof-of-concept system that runs ICE, and extensive experiments are conducted. The theoretical analysis and experimental results demonstrate the proposed protocols are efficient both in computation and communication.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据