Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Distributed storage systems store data redundantly at multiple servers that are geographically spread throughout the world. This basic approach would be sufficient in handling server failure due to natural faults, because when one server fails, data from healthy servers can be used to restore the desired redundancy level. However, in a setting where servers are untrusted and can behave maliciously, data redundancy must be used in tandem with Remote Data Checking (RDC) to ensure that the redundancy level of the storage systems is maintained over time.

All previous RDC schemes for distributed systems impose a heavy burden on the data owner (client) during data maintenance: To repair data at a faulty server, the data owner needs to first download a large amount of data, re-generate the data to be stored at a new server, and then upload this data at a new healthy server. We work on a new concept, namely, server-side repair, in which the servers are responsible to repair the corruption, whereas the client acts as a lightweight repair coordinator during repair. We propose two novel RDC schemes for replication-based distributed storage systems, $RDC - SR$ and $ERDC - SR$ , which enable server-side repair (thus taking advantage of the premium connections available between a CSP’s data centers) and minimize the load on the client side. Although both schemes achieve a similar objective, $RDC - SR$ assumes that the computational power of the CSP will not grow over time, whereas $ERDC - SR$ relaxes this assumption and considers a CSP whose computational power can increase over time. Our guidelines on choosing the parameters of these schemes provide insights on their practical usage and also reveal that, whereas $ERDC - SR$ can handle more powerful adversaries, it also imposes a minimal file size.

Finally, we evaluate the performance of the two schemes. For the $RDC - SR$ scheme, we build a prototype on the Amazon cloud and provide experimental results to support its effectiveness. Our prototype for $RDC - SR$ built on Amazon AWS validates the practicality of this new approach. For the $ERDC - SR$ scheme, our analytical performance analysis shows that the scheme is an order of magnitude more efficient than a simple extension of $RDC - SR$ to defend against the stronger adversarial model.

Keywords

Cloud storage remote data integrity checking server-side repair replicate on the fly attack butterfly encoding

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abadi,

Burrows,

Manasse and

Wobber, Moderately hard, memory-bound functions, ACM Transactions on Internet Technology (TOIT) 5(2) (2005), 299–327. doi:10.1145/1064340.1064341.

Ateniese,

Bonacina,

Faonio and

Galesi, Proofs of space: When space is of the essence, in: Proc. of the 9th International Conference, Security and Cryptography for Networks (SCN 2014), Springer International Publishing, 2014, pp. 538–557.

Ateniese,

Bonacina,

Faonio and

Galesi, Proofs of space: When space is of the essence, http://eprint.iacr.org/2013/805.pdf.

Ateniese,

Burns,

Curtmola,

Herring,

Khan,

Kissner,

Peterson and

Song, Remote data checking using provable data possession, ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. Secur. 14 (2011).

Ateniese,

Burns,

Curtmola,

Herring,

Kissner,

Peterson and

Song, Provable data possession at untrusted stores, in: Proc. of ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS’07), 2007.

Ateniese,

R.D.

Pietro,

L.V.

Mancini and

Tsudik, Scalable and efficient provable data possession, in: Proc. of International ICST Conference on Security and Privacy in Communication Networks (SecureComm’08), 2008.

Benson,

Dowsley and

Shacham, Do you know where your cloud files are?, in: Proc. of ACM Cloud Computing Security Workshop (CCSW’11), 2011.

Bowers,

Oprea and

Juels, HAIL: A high-availability and integrity layer for cloud storage, in: Proc. of ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS’09), 2009.

K.D.

Bowers,

M.V.

Dijk,

Juels,

Oprea and

R.L.

Rivest, How to tell if your cloud files are vulnerable to drive crashes, in: Proc. of ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS’11), 2011.

10.

Chen,

A.K.

Ammula and

Curtmola, Towards server-side repair for erasure coding-based distributed storage systems, in: Proc. of the 5th ACM Conference on Data and Application Security and Privacy (CODASPY’15), 2015.

11.

Chen and

Curtmola, Robust dynamic provable data possession, in: Proc. of International Workshop on Security and Privacy in Cloud Computing (ICDCS-SPCC’12), 2012.

12.

Chen and

Curtmola, POSTER: Robust dynamic remote data checking for public clouds, in: Proc. of ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS’12), 2012.

13.

Chen and

Curtmola, Towards self-repairing replication-based storage systems using untrusted clouds, in: Proc. of ACM Conference on Data and Application Security and Privacy (CODASPY’13), 2013.

14.

Chen and

Curtmola, Auditable version control systems, in: Proc. of the 21th Annual Network and Distributed System Security Symposium (NDSS’14), 2014.

15.

Chen,

Curtmola,

Ateniese and

Burns, Remote data checking for network coding-based distributed storage systems, in: Proc. of ACM Cloud Computing Security Workshop (CCSW’10), 2010.

16.

Curtmola,

Khan,

Burns and

Ateniese, MR-PDP: Multiple-replica provable data possession, in: Proc. of International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS’08), 2008.

17.

A.G.

Dimakis,

P.B.

Godfrey,

Wu,

M.O.

Wainwright and

Ramchandran, Network coding for distributed storage systems, IEEE Trans. on Inf. Theory 56 (2010).

18.

Dwork,

Goldberg and

Naor, On memory-bound functions for fighting spam, in: Advances in Cryptology (Crypto’03), 2003.

19.

Dwork and

Naor, Pricing via processing or combatting junk mail, in: Advances in Cryptology (CRYPTO’92), 1993.

20.

Dwork,

Naor and

Wee, Pebbling and proofs of work, in: Advances in Cryptology (CRYPTO’05), 2005.

21.

Dziembowski,

Faust,

Kolmogorov and

Pietrzak, Proofs of space, http://eprint.iacr.org/2013/796.pdf.

22.

W.F.

Ehrsam,

C.H.

Meyer,

J.L.

Smith and

W.L.

Tuchman, Message verification and transmission error detection by block chaining, Patent 4,074,066, Google Patents, 1978.

23.

Erway,

Kupcu,

Papamanthou and

Tamassia, Dynamic provable data possession, in: Proc. of ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS’09), 2009.

24.

Etemad and

Kupcu, Transparent, distributed, and replicated dynamic provable data possession, in: Proc. of 11th International Conference on Applied Cryptography and Network Security (ACNS’13), 2013.

25.

Fiat and

Shamir, How to prove yourself: Practical solutions to identification and signature problems, in: Advances in Cryptology (CRYPTO’86), 1986.

26.

Gondree and

Z.N.J.

Peterson, Geolocation of data in the cloud, in: Proc. of ACM Conference on Data and Application Security and Privacy (CODASPY’13), 2013.

27.

Juels and

B.S.

Kaliski, PORs: Proofs of retrievability for large files, in: Proc. of ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS’07), 2007.

28.

Krawczyk, LFSR-based hashing and authentication, in: Proc. of Annual International Cryptology Conference (CRYPTO’94), 1994.

29.

OpenSSL, http://www.openssl.org/.

30.

Z.N.J.

Peterson,

Gondree and

Beverly, A position paper on data sovereignty: The importance of geolocating data in the cloud, in: Proc. of USENIX Workshop on Hot Topics in Cloud Computing (HotCloud’11), 2011.

31.

M.K.

Reiter,

Sekar,

Spensky and

Zhang, Making peer-assisted content distribution robust to collusion using bandwidth puzzles, Information Systems Security (2009), 132–147.

32.

Rodrigues and

Liskov, High availability in DHTs: Erasure coding vs. replication, in: Proc. of International Workshop on Peer-to-Peer Systems (IPTPS’05), 2005.

33.

Rogaway, Bucket hashing and its application to fast message authentication, in: Proc. of Annual International Cryptology Conference (CRYPTO’95), 1995.

34.

Shacham and

Waters, Compact proofs of retrievability, in: Proc. of Annual International Conference on the Theory and Application of Cryptology and Information Security (ASIACRYPT’08), 2008.

35.

Shacham and

Waters, Compact proofs of retrievability, J. Cryptology 26(3) (2013), 442–483. doi:10.1007/s00145-012-9129-2.

36.

Shi,

Stefanov and

Papamanthou, Practical dynamic proofs of retrievability, in: Proc. of the 20th ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS’13), 2013.

37.

Shoup, On fast and provably secure message authentication based on universal hashing, in: Proc. of Annual International Cryptology Conference (CRYPTO’96), 1996.

38.

J.M.

Steele, The Cauchy–Schwarz Master Class: An Introduction to the Art of Mathematical Inequalities, Cambridge University Press, 2004.

39.

Stefanov,

van Dijk,

Oprea and

Juels, Iris: A scalable cloud file system with efficient integrity checks, in: Proc. of Annual Computer Security Applications Conference (ACSAC’12), 2012.

40.

S.R.

Tate,

Vishwanathan and

Everhart, Multi-user dynamic proofs of data possession using trusted hardware, in: Proceedings of the Third ACM Conference on Data and Application Security and Privacy (CODASPY’13), 2013.

41.

van Dijk,

Juels,

Oprea,

R.L.

Rivest,

Stefanov and

Triandopoulos, Hourglass schemes: How to prove that cloud files are encrypted, in: Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS’12), 2012.

42.

Wang,

Ren and

Lou, Ensuring data storage security in cloud computing, in: Proc. of IEEE International Workshop on Quality of Service (IWQoS’09), 2009.

43.

Wang,

Ren,

Lou and

Li, Enabling public auditability and data dynamics for storage security in cloud computing, IEEE Trans. on Parallel and Distributed Syst. 22(5) (2011). doi:10.1109/TPDS.2010.183.

44.

Waters,

Juels,

J.A.

Halderman and

E.W.

Felten, New client puzzle outsourcing techniques for DoS resistance, in: Proceedings of the 11th ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS’04), 2004.

45.

G.J.

Watson,

Safavi-Naini,

Alimomeni,

M.E.

Locasto and

Narayan, LoSt: Location based storage, in: Proc. of ACM Cloud Computing Security Workshop (CCSW’12), 2012.

46.

M.N.

Wegman and

J.L.

Carter, New hash functions and their use in authentication and set equality, Journal of Computer and System Sciences 22(3) (1981), 265–279. doi:10.1016/0022-0000(81)90033-7.

47.

Wget, http://www.gnu.org/software/wget/.

48.

Zhang and

Blanton, Efficient dynamic provable possession of remote data via balanced update trees, in: Proc. of 8th ACM Symposium on Information, Computer and Communications Security (ASIACCS’13), 2013.

49.

Zheng and

Xu, Fair and dynamic proofs of retrievability, in: Proc. of ACM Conference on Data and Application Security and Privacy (CODASPY’11), 2011.

Remote data integrity checking with server-side repair 1

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References