HealthFort: A Cloud-Based eHealth System With Conditional Forward Transparency and Secure Provenance via Blockchain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we propose a servers-aided password-based subsequent-key-locked encryption mechanism to ensure the confidentiality of outsourced electronic health records (EHRs). The encryption mechanism achieves conditional forward transparency: a doctor can only access a patient's EHRs related to the current diagnosis with the patient's delegation. It also achieves portability: to delegate a doctor for accessing a specific part of EHRs, the patient only needs to send one key (at most 256 bits) in addition to the delegation information to the doctor; the patient does not need to maintain any secret in a local device. Then, we propose a blockchain-based secure EHR provenance mechanism, where a data structure of EHR provenance record is designed to precisely reflect the EHRs’ provenance information; a smart contract on a public blockchain is deployed to secure both EHRs and the corresponding provenance records. Finally, we develop a cloud-based eHealth system, dubbed HealthFort, based on the two mechanisms. Security analysis and comprehensive performance evaluation are conducted to demonstrate that HealthFort is secure and 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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".