Blockchain-Assisted Public-Key Encryption with Keyword Search Against Keyword Guessing Attacks for Cloud Storage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cloud storage enables users to outsource data to storage servers and retrieve target data efficiently. Some of the outsourced data are very sensitive and should be prevented for any leakage. Generally, if users conventionally encrypt the data, searching is impeded. Public-key encryption with keyword search (PEKS) resolves this tension. Whereas, it is vulnerable to keyword guessing attacks (KGA), since keywords are low-entropy. In this paper, we present a secure PEKS scheme called SEPSE against KGA, where users encrypt keywords with the aid of dedicated key servers via a threshold and oblivious way. SEPSE supports key renewal to periodically replace an existing key with a new one on each key server to thwart the key compromise. Furthermore, SEPSE can efficiently resist online KGA, where each keyword request made by a user is integrated into a transaction on a public blockchain (e.g., Ethereum), which allows key servers to learn the number of keyword requests made by the user without requiring a synchronization between them for per-user rate limiting. Security analysis and performance evaluation demonstrate that SEPSE provides a stronger security guarantee compared with existing schemes, at the expense of acceptable computational costs.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".