MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390871494 · doi:10.1109/tdsc.2024.3353827

Privacy-Preserving Anomaly Detection of Encrypted Smart Contract for Blockchain-Based Data Trading

2024· article· en· W4390871494 on OpenAlexaff
Dajiang Chen, Zeyu Liao, Ruidong Chen, Hao Wang, Chong Yu, Kuan Zhang, Ning Zhang, Xuemin Shen

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlockchain Technology Applications and Security
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of Windsor
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceEncryptionSmart contractOverhead (engineering)Database transactionCode (set theory)Homomorphic encryptionBlockchainComputer securityData miningSet (abstract data type)DatabaseProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a blockchain-based data trading platform, data users can purchase data sets and computing power through encrypted smart contracts. The security of smart contracts is important as it relates to that of the data platform. However, due to the inability to apply to detection rules with complex structures and the inefficiency of detection, existing malicious code detection methods are not suitable for the encrypted smart contracts in blockchain-based data trading platforms with high transaction rate requirements. In this paper, a practical and privacy-preserving malicious code detection method is proposed for encrypted smart contract in blockchain-based data trading platform. Specifically, we design two kinds of miners to act as the malicious rule processor and the detector respectively for inspecting the encrypted smart contract. The rule processor generates an obfuscated map with the original open-source malicious rule set. The detector performs a malicious inspection algorithm by inputting the obfuscated map and the randomized tokens, where the latter is generated from smart contract. Then, we theoretically analyze the security syntax of the proposed method. The analysis results demonstrate the proposed scheme can achieve$\mathcal {L}$-secure against adaptive attacks. Extensive experiments are carried out through the open-source real rule sets, which show that the proposed scheme can reduce communication time and communication overhead.

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)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations27
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure ComputingSame topicBlockchain Technology Applications and SecurityFrench-language works237,207