2013
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcss.2012.05.008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A secure self-destructing scheme for electronic data

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
23
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
2

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
23
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In our threat model, the communication channels are assumed to be secured when queries and information are transmitted via communication networks. The existing security schemes [e.g., secure sockets layer (SSL)] and conventional solutions (e.g., cryptography and hashing) can be used to protect the secrecy and integrity of the information through network [25], [26]. Therefore, there are three types of attackers: 1) The LSP, which knows the ASR, may be compromised by the adversary or may leak information for making profits; 2) the Anonymizer, collecting all messages as an intermediate tier between the users and the LSP, may become a bigger target and may reveal the cloaking algorithm; and 3) a small number of malicious users may want to know other users' privacy.…”
Section: B Threat Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In our threat model, the communication channels are assumed to be secured when queries and information are transmitted via communication networks. The existing security schemes [e.g., secure sockets layer (SSL)] and conventional solutions (e.g., cryptography and hashing) can be used to protect the secrecy and integrity of the information through network [25], [26]. Therefore, there are three types of attackers: 1) The LSP, which knows the ASR, may be compromised by the adversary or may leak information for making profits; 2) the Anonymizer, collecting all messages as an intermediate tier between the users and the LSP, may become a bigger target and may reveal the cloaking algorithm; and 3) a small number of malicious users may want to know other users' privacy.…”
Section: B Threat Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Wang. [2] improved the Vanish System by distributing part of the cipher data with key shares into the DHT to resist the cryptanalysis and brute force attack. Reference [3] proposed a deterministic data deletion method applicable for cloud storage to effectively improve the efficiency of key management.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The method used key derivation tree to organize and manage keys which distributed into DHT, and deterministically deleted the keys with the similar method like Van ish. However, Reference [4] argued that the Vanish which using Vu ze DHT was under threat of Sybil attack that attacks could get enough key shares before expiration to reconstruct the key, so references [1][2][3] all had this security issue. Reference [6] proposed the SafeVanish program that extended the length of key shares and encrypt key by RSA to avoid the Sybil hopping attack and sniffing attack respectively.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These systems prefer P2P-like environments, but potentially face Sybil attacks [7] and, 2) those (e.g. [1], [15], [16]) that require a trusted third party (trusted authority) to manage and distribute the secrete key, thereby potentially facing scalability limitations.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Very recently, Wang et al [16] advanced DataAssociate algorithm and implemented SSDD (secure selfdestructing scheme for electronic data) which not only resists against the attacks in DHT networks but also addresses the traditional cryptanalysis and brute-force attacks. Fu et al [1] implemented a self-destructing email system by deleting one piece of the encrypted and split data, so the body of email is uncompleted and can never be compromised.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%