2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.compeleceng.2016.11.028
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A scalable attribute-set-based access control with both sharing and full-fledged delegation of access privileges in cloud computing

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
4

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Thereafter, we compare the performance with fairly standard approaches that are the best suitable schemes for Cloud computational system performance in providing Group signature, User revocation and Data Integrity to its user's. [9,11,27] User revocation 2018 provided better security by the fullysecure scheme processing was more affordable and efficient for mobile devices alone [30,31] 2017 Resistant against cheating and collusion attacks data sharing in the cloud, or secure communication was limited [32] 2016 Improved backward secrecy with efficiency attributes revocation the model seems to be weak or lack of efficiency in user revocation [33,34,35] 2015 the experimental outcome showed low overhead on computation, communication, and storage attribute/user revocation was not achieved effectively [36,37] editor@iaeme.com Data Integrity 2019 comprehensive public auditing scheme proved better performance have some problems for ensuring data integrity and usability [41] 2018 storage auditing scheme was provided the scheme was not conducted real-time environment [21] 2017 Multi scheme stated that supports the integrity verification…”
Section: Comparison and Discussion On The Retrospect Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Thereafter, we compare the performance with fairly standard approaches that are the best suitable schemes for Cloud computational system performance in providing Group signature, User revocation and Data Integrity to its user's. [9,11,27] User revocation 2018 provided better security by the fullysecure scheme processing was more affordable and efficient for mobile devices alone [30,31] 2017 Resistant against cheating and collusion attacks data sharing in the cloud, or secure communication was limited [32] 2016 Improved backward secrecy with efficiency attributes revocation the model seems to be weak or lack of efficiency in user revocation [33,34,35] 2015 the experimental outcome showed low overhead on computation, communication, and storage attribute/user revocation was not achieved effectively [36,37] editor@iaeme.com Data Integrity 2019 comprehensive public auditing scheme proved better performance have some problems for ensuring data integrity and usability [41] 2018 storage auditing scheme was provided the scheme was not conducted real-time environment [21] 2017 Multi scheme stated that supports the integrity verification…”
Section: Comparison and Discussion On The Retrospect Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…From the findings of reviewed studies particularly from 2018-2015, it was evident that the performance was evaluated based upon Communication cost, Computation cost and effectiveness Group signature [9,11,20,[22][23][24][25][26][27]. Some studies reflected the initial cloud setup and private key generation were numerically analyzed based on three main phases 1) The phase of Authenticator Generation 2) The phase of Auditing and 3) The User Revocation [30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37]. Majority of 2015 studies reported that Cloud and their components environment had specific security services towards attribute/user revocation that was not achieved effectively.…”
Section: Discussion Of Retrospect Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Theoretically, access control [4] and group key management [5], [6] can be used for key management on file sharing. However, some unique features of cloud storage introduce new problems that have not been fully considered [7], [8].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One is access control [11], in which only authorized user recorded in the access control table has the access privilege of the shared data. The other method is group key management [12]- [16] in which a group key is used to protect the shared data. Although access control makes the data only be accessed by legitimate participants, it cannot protect the attack from cloud providers.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%