MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2930871722 · doi:10.1109/tcc.2019.2908400

Blockchain-Based Public Integrity Verification for Cloud Storage against Procrastinating Auditors

2019· article· en· W2930871722 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Cloud Computing · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCloud Data Security Solutions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaChina Scholarship CouncilNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaBrander Beacons Cancer Research
KeywordsComputer scienceCloud computingPublic key infrastructureKey (lock)CertificatePublic-key cryptographyInformation retrievalAlgorithmDatabaseComputer securityEncryptionOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The deployment of cloud storage services has significant benefits in managing data for users. However, it also causes many security concerns, and one of them is data integrity. Public verification techniques can enable a user to employ a third-party auditor to verify the data integrity on behalf of her/him, whereas existing public verification schemes are vulnerable to <italic xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">procrastinating auditors</i> who may not perform verifications on time. Furthermore, most of public verification schemes are constructed on the public key infrastructure (PKI), and thereby suffer from certificate management problem. In this paper, we propose a <underline xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">c</u> ertificateless <underline xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">p</u> ublic <underline xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">v</u> erification scheme against <underline xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">p</u> rocrastinating <underline xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">a</u> uditors (CPVPA) by using <italic xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">blockchain technology</i> . The key idea is to require auditors to record each verification result into a transaction on a blockchain. Because transactions on the blockchain are time-sensitive, the verification can be time-stamped after the transaction is recorded into the blockchain, which enables users to check whether auditors perform the verifications at the prescribed time. Moreover, CPVPA is built on certificateless cryptography, and is free from the certificate management problem. We present rigorous security proofs to demonstrate the security of CPVPA, and conduct a comprehensive performance evaluation to show that CPVPA is efficient.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.659
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.237 · 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