MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385387051 · doi:10.18280/ijsse.130315

A Proxy-Based and Collusion Resistant Multi-Authority Revocable CPABE Framework with Efficient User and Attribute-Level Revocation (PCMR-CPABE)

2023· article· en· W4385387051 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shobha Chawla, Neha Gupta

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Safety and Security Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRevocationCollusionProxy (statistics)Computer securityComputer scienceComputer networkBusinessOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The presence of multiple authorities in multi-authority ciphertext policy attribute based encryption (CPABE) schemes hinders an adversary's ability to compromise security.As each authority is responsible to provide secret keys to the users, thus enforcement of finegrained access control should be carefully designed to ensure data confidentiality.The current study critically reviews the methodologies employed to address user-level and attribute-level revocation in the existing studies.The study has focused on the revocation methodology of those CPABE schemes that are implemented using bilinear pairing cryptography for the encryption and Linear Secret Sharing Scheme (LSSS) for the access structure.It has been observed that the approaches implemented in the existing schemes are computationally expensive and are vulnerable to collusion attacks caused by the cloud and revoked users.Thus, an efficient proxy-based and collusion resistant multi-authority revocable CPABE framework (PCMR-CPABE) is proposed in the current study.The proposed framework is decentralized, dynamic, scalable, and ensures forward/backward secrecy.Additionally, the proposed framework is computationally efficient and is practical to implement as it does not require secret key or group secret key and ciphertext update to address revocation.Furthermore, the incorporation of time and identity-based components allows the proposed framework to resist collusion attacks efficiently.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Safety and Security EngineeringSame topicNatural Language Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207