Efficient and Privacy-Preserving Online Fingerprint Authentication Scheme over Outsourced Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the pervasiveness of mobile devices and the development of biometric technology, biometric identification, which can achieve individual authentication relies on personal biological or behavioral characteristics, has attracted widely considerable interest. However, privacy issues of biometric data bring out increasing concerns due to the highly sensitivity of biometric data. Aiming at this challenge, in this paper, we present a novel privacy-preserving online fingerprint authentication scheme, named e-Finga, over encrypted outsourced data. In the proposed e-Finga scheme, the user's fingerprint registered in trust authority can be outsourced to different servers with user's authorization, and secure, accurate and efficient authentication service can be provided without the leakage of fingerprint information. Specifically, an improved homomorphic encryption technology for secure euclidean distance calculation to achieve an efficient online fingerprint matching algorithm over encrypted FingerCode data in the outsourcing scenarios. Through detailed security analysis, we show that e-Finga can resist various security threats. In addition, we implement e-Finga over a workstation with a real fingerprint database, and extensive simulation results demonstrate that the proposed e-Finga scheme can serve efficient and accurate online fingerprint authentication.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".