Advertisement

The Journal of Supercomputing

, Volume 69, Issue 3, pp 1123–1138 | Cite as

On private Hamming distance computation

  • Kok-Seng Wong
  • Myung Ho KimEmail author
Article

Abstract

Finding similarities between two datasets is an important task in many research areas, particularly those of data mining, information retrieval, cloud computing, and biometrics. However, maintaining data protection and privacy while enabling similarity measurements has become a priority for data owners in recent years. In this paper, we study the design of an efficient and secure protocol to facilitate the Hamming distance computation between two semi-honest parties (a client and a server). In our protocol design, both parties are constrained to ensure that no extra information will be revealed other than the computed result (privacy is protected) and further, the output of the protocol is according to the prescribed functionality (correctness is guaranteed). In order to achieve these requirements, we utilize a multiplicative homomorphic cryptosystem and include chaff data into the computation. Two experimental results in this paper demonstrate the performance of both the client and the server.

Keywords

Private Hamming distance Similarity measurement Privacy preserving computation protocol Secure two-party computation 

References

  1. 1.
    Agrawal R, Evfimievski A, Srikant R (2003) Information sharing across private databases. In: Paper presented at the proceedings of the 2003 ACM SIGMOD international conference on management of data, San DiegoGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Agrawal R, Terzi E (2006) On honesty in sovereign information sharing. In: Paper presented at the proceedings of the 10th international conference on advances in database technology, MunichGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Clifton C, Kantarcio M, Doan A, Schadow G, Vaidya J, Elmagarmid A, Suciu D (2004) Privacy-preserving data integration and sharing. In: Paper presented at the proceedings of the 9th ACM SIGMOD workshop on research issues in data mining and knowledge discovery, ParisGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ajmani S, Morris R, Liskov B (2001) A trusted third-party computation. In: Technical report MIT-LCS-TR-847. MIT, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Connor EF, Simberloff D (1983) Intraspecific competition and species co-occurrence patterns on Islands. Oikos 41:455–465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gilpin ME, Diamond JM (1982) Factors contributing to non-randomness in species co-occurrences on Islands. Oecologia 52(1):75–84. doi: 10.1007/bf00349014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pandi MH, Kashefi O, Minaei B (2011) A novel similarity measure for sequence data. J Inf Process Syst 7(3):413–424. doi: 10.3745/JIPS.2011.7.3.413 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fisher DH (1987) Knowledge acquisition via incremental conceptual clustering. Mach Learn 2(2):139–172. doi: 10.1023/a:1022852608280 Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Willett P (2003) Similarity-based approaches to virtual screening. Biochem Soc Trans 31(Pt 3):603–606. doi:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12773164 Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fan C-I, Lin Y-H (2012) Full privacy minutiae-based fingerprint verification for low-computation devices. J Convergence 3(2):21–24Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Upmanyu M, Namboodiri AM, Srinathan K, Jawahar CV (2009) Efficient biometric verification in encrypted domain. In: Paper presented at the proceedings of the 3rd international conference on advances in biometrics, AlgheroGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kok-Seng W, Myung-Ho K (2012) A privacy-preserving biometric matching protocol for iris codes verification. In: 3rd FTRA international conference on mobile, ubiquitous, and intelligent computing (MUSIC), pp 120–125, 26–28 June 2012. doi: 10.1109/music.2012.28
  13. 13.
    Lindell Y, Pinkas B (2009) Secure multiparty computation for privacy-preserving data mining. J Priv Confid 1(1):59–98Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hamming RW (1950) Error detecting and error correcting codes. Bell Syst Tech J 29(2):147–160MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hamming RW (1980) Coding and information theory. Prentice-Hall, New JerseyzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pang KF, Gamal AE (1986) Communication complexity of computing the Hamming distance. SIAM J Comput 15(4):932–947. doi: 10.1137/0215065 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Agrawal R, Srikant R (2000) Privacy-preserving data mining. SIGMOD Rec 29(2):439–450. doi: 10.1145/335191.335438 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Clifton C, Kantarcioglu M, Vaidya J, Lin X, Zhu MY (2002) Tools for privacy preserving distributed data mining. SIGKDD Explor News 14(2):28–34. doi: 10.1145/772862.772867 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bringer J, Chabanne H, Izabachene M, Pointcheval D, Tang Q, Zimmer S (2007) An application of the Goldwasser–Micali cryptosystem to biometric authentication. In: Paper presented at the proceedings of the 12th Australasian conference on information security and privacy, TownsvilleGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sang Y, Shen H (2009) Efficient and secure protocols for privacy-preserving set operations. ACM Trans Inf Syst Secur 13(1):1–35. doi: 10.1145/1609956.1609965 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bringer J, Chabanne H (2012) Embedding edit distance to enable private keyword search. Hum Centric Comput Inf Sci 2(2):1–12. doi: 10.1186/2192-1962-2-2 Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Diffie W, Hellman ME (1976) New directions in cryptography. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 22(6):644–654MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Shah P, Miyake A (2005) The Cambridge handbook of visuospatial thinking. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Feigenbaum J, Ishai Y, Malkin T, Nissim K, Strauss MJ, Wright RN (2006) Secure multiparty computation of approximations. ACM Trans Algorithms 2(3):435–472. doi: 10.1145/1159892.1159900 MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Goldwasser S, Micali S (1984) Probabilistic encryption. J Comput Syst Sci 28(2):270–299MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rivest RL, Adleman L, Dertouzos ML (1978) On data banks and privacy homomorphisms. In: Foundations of secure computation. Academia Press, London, pp 169–179Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Yao AC (1982) Protocols for secure computations. In: Paper presented at the proceedings of the 23rd annual symposium on foundations of computer scienceGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Goldreich O, Micali S, Wigderson A (1987) How to play ANY mental game. In: Paper presented at the proceedings of the 19th annual ACM symposium on theory of computing, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Jarrous A, Pinkas B (2009) Secure Hamming distance based computation and its applications. In: Paper presented at the proceedings of the 7th international conference on applied cryptography and network security, Paris-RocquencourtGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Paillier P (1999) Public-key cryptosystems based on composite degree residuosity classes. In: Paper presented at the proceedings of the 17th international conference on theory and application of cryptographic techniques, PragueGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Yang Z, Zhong S, Wright RN (2008) Towards privacy-preserving model selection. In: Paper presented at the proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGKDD international conference on privacy, security, and trust in KDD, San JoseGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Elgamal T (1984) A public key cryptosystem and a signature scheme based on discrete logarithms. In: Paper presented at the proceedings of CRYPTO 84 on advances in cryptology, Santa BarbaraGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Goldreich O (2005) Foundations of cryptography: a primer. Found Trends Theor Comput Sci 1(1):1–116. doi: 10.1561/0400000001 MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Hazay C, Lindell Y (2008) Efficient protocols for set intersection and pattern matching with security against malicious and covert adversaries. In: Paper presented at the proceedings of the 5th conference on theory of cryptography, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Goldreich O (2004) Foundations of cryptography, vol 2. In: Basic applications. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Goldwasser S, Micali S (1982) Probabilistic encryption and how to play mental poker keeping secret all partial information. In: Paper presented at the proceedings of the 14th annual ACM symposium on theory of computing, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Sakuma J, Wright RN (2009) Privacy-preserving evaluation of generalization error and its application to model and attribute selection. In: Paper presented at the proceedings of the 1st Asian conference on machine learning: advances in machine learning, NanjingGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Computer Science and EngineeringSoongsil UniversitySeoulKorea

Personalised recommendations