Achieving Efficient Secure Deduplication With User-Defined Access Control in Cloud
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cloud storage as one of the most important services of cloud computing which significantly facilitates cloud users to outsource their data to the cloud for storage and share them with authorized users. In cloud storage, secure deduplication has been widely investigated as it can eliminate the redundancy over the encrypted data to reduce storage space and communication overhead. Regarding the security and privacy, many existing secure deduplication schemes generally focus on achieving the following properties: data confidentiality, tag consistency, access control, and resistance to brute-force attacks. However, as far as we know, none of them can achieve these four requirements at the same time. To overcome this shortcoming, in this article, we propose an efficient secure deduplication scheme that supports user-defined access control. Specifically, by allowing only the cloud service provider to authorize data access on behalf of data owners, our scheme can maximally eliminate duplicates without violating the security and privacy of cloud users. Detailed security analysis shows that our authorized secure deduplication scheme achieves data confidentiality and tag consistency while resisting brute-force attacks. Furthermore, extensive simulations demonstrate that our scheme outperforms the existing competing schemes, in terms of computational, communication and storage overheads as well as the effectiveness of deduplication.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".