MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2739564306 · doi:10.1109/icc.2017.7997105

CryptMDB: A practical encrypted MongoDB over big data

2017· article· en· W2739564306 on OpenAlexaff
Guowen Xu, Yan Ren, Hongwei Li, Dongxiao Liu, Yuanshun Dai, Kan Yang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCryptography and Data Security
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceHomomorphic encryptionEncryptionCryptosystemNoSQLRelational databaseBig dataDatabaseConfidentialityRelational database management systemComputer securityData accessScalabilityData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In big data era, data are usually stored in databases for easy access and utilization, which are now woven into every aspect of our lives. However, traditional relational databases cannot address users' demands for quick data access and calculating, since they cannot process data in a distributed way. To tackle this problem, non-relational databases such as MongoDB have emerged up and been applied in various Scenarios. Nevertheless, it should be noted that most MongoDB products fail to consider user's data privacy. In this paper, we propose a practical encrypted MongoDB (i.e., CryptMDB). Specifically, we utilize an additive homomorphic asymmetric cryptosystem to encrypt user's data and achieve strong privacy protection. Security analysis indicates that the CryptMDB can achieve confidentiality of user's data and prevent adversaries from illegally gaining access to the database. Furthermore, extensive experiments demonstrate that the CryptMDB achieves better efficiency than existing relational database in terms of data access and calculating.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.160
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.204 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreSoftware

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCryptography and Data SecurityFrench-language works237,207