Ownership-guaranteed security framework for the private data in the entrusted management environment

Yoo, SeongMin; Kim, Jinsul; Park, Jae-Hyung; Nam, Ji-Seung; Ryou, Jae-Cheol

doi:10.1007/s10586-015-0474-4

Cited by 1 publication

(22 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The effectiveness of DBFH-CDS Technique is compared against with existing methods namely AKFS [17], two-factor data security protection mechanism [8] and FIBFs [25], respectively. The performance of DBFH-CDS Technique is evaluated along with the following metrics.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…From the figure, red line indicates the results of data storage time taken for unfragmented table whereas the blue line represents data storage time taken for the fragmented table using four methods. As shown in the figure, the Execution time for the Scalar query using proposed DBFH-CDS Technique is lower in the fragmented table as compared to other existing methods namely AKFS [17], Two-Factor Data Security Protection Mechanism [8], FIBFs [25].…”

Section: Measurement Of Execution Timementioning

confidence: 96%

“…The bank marketing dataset is interrelated with direct marketing campaigns of a Portuguese banking institution. The performance of DBFH-CDS Technique is compared against with exiting methods such as Asymmetric Key Fragmentation Scheme (AKFS) [17], twofactor data security protection mechanism [8] and Fragmented-Iterated Bloom Filters (FIBFs) [25]. The experimental evaluation using DBFH-CDS Technique is conducted on different factors such as Execution time, and Data retrieval efficiency.…”

Section: Experimental Settingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…From the experiments done for unfragmented table, the proposed DBFH-CDS Technique takes 75.6 ms of data storage time while considering number of scalar queries as 400 whereas existing AKFS [17], Two-Factor Data Security Protection Mechanism [8], and Fragmented-Iterated Bloom Filters (FIBFs) [25] take 89.5 ms, 80.3 ms, 92.6 ms, respectively. [25] takes 72.3 ms while considering a number of scalar queries as 400 in the fragmented table.…”

Section: Measurement Of Execution Timementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recently, many research works have been designed for a secure cloud data storage. For example, Asymmetric Key Fragmentation Scheme (AKFS) was designed in [17] for improving the security of private data in a cloud environment. However, the security level of private data is not sufficient.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Efficient Dynamic Bloom Filter Hashing Fragmentation for Cloud Data Storage

Jegadeeswari

Dinadayalan²,

Gnanambigai³

2019

Cybernetics and Information Technologies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Security is important in cloud data storage while using the cloud services provided by the service provider in the cloud. Most of the research works have been designed for a secure cloud data storage. However, cloud users still have security issues with their outsourced data. In order to overcome such limitations, a Dynamic Bloom Filter Hashing based Cloud Data Storage (DBFH-CDS) Technique is proposed. The main goal of DBFH-CDS Technique is to improve confidentiality and security of data storage in a cloud environment. The proposed Technique is implemented using data fragmentation model and Bloom filter. The DBFH-CDS Technique uses data fragmentation model for fragmenting the large cloud datasets. After that, Bloom Filter is employed in DBFH-CDS Technique for storing the fragmented sensitive data along with higher security. The DBFH-CDS Technique ensures high data confidentiality and security for cloud data storage with the help of Bloom Filter. The performance of proposed DBFH-CDS Technique is measured in terms of Execution time and Data retrieval efficiency. The experimental results show that the DBFH-CDS Technique is able to improve the cloud data storage security with minimum space complexity as compared to state-of-the-art-works.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Measurement Of Execution Timementioning

confidence: 96%