Peer-to-Peer Networking and Applications

, Volume 9, Issue 2, pp 299–312 | Cite as

A novel hybrid P2P and cloud storage system for retrievability and privacy enhancement



This paper presents a novel fountain code-based hybrid P2P and cloud storage system. While most cloud storage systems guarantees data retrievability of high level, they may be vulnerable to data privacy since the stored data may be exposed to others by accident or design. On the other hand, P2P storage system keeps any peer from accessing the whole data by dividing the data into small pieces and distributing them to multiple participating peers, but may degrade data retrievability due to unstable peers. The proposed hybrid storage system attempts to enhance data retrievability and privacy by effectively distributing fountain encoded symbols to cloud server system and participating peers. It is demonstrated that the proposed hybrid storage system achieves the desired level of data retrievability with a short upload time, and enhance privacy by preventing others from reading the contents.


Hybrid P2P and cloud storage Fountain codes Data privacy Hybrid storage system reliability Data retrievability 



This research was supported by Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea(NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education (NRF-2013R1A1A2006732) and the MSIP (Ministry of Science, ICT & Future Planning), Korea in the ICT R&D Program 2014.


  1. 1.
    Caceres J, Vaquero LM, RoderoMerino L, Polo A, Hierro JJ (2010) Service scalability over the cloud. Handb Cloud Comput 357–377Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Amazon Glacier. Available: Accessed 18 Oct 2013
  3. 3.
    Google Drive. Available: Accessed 18 Oct 2013
  4. 4.
    Microsoft SkyDrive. Available: Accessed 18 Oct 2013
  5. 5.
    Baca S (2010) Cloud Computing: What it is and what it can do for you (pp. 1–6). Accessed 18 Oct 2013
  6. 6.
    Dropbox. Available: Accessed 18 Oct 2013
  7. 7.
    Harihara SG, Janakiram B, Chandra MG, Aravind KG, Kadhe S, Balamuralidhar P, Adiga BS (2010) SpreadStore: a LDPC erasure code scheme for distributed storage system. Int Conf Data Storage Data Eng 154–158Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Spoor R, Peddemors A (2010) Cloud storage and peer-to-peer storage. [Online]. Available: Accessed 18 Oct 2013
  9. 9.
    iSuppli. Available: Accessed 18 Oct 2013
  10. 10.
    Li J, Huang Q (2006) Erasure resilient codes in peer-to-peer storage cloud. IEEE Int Conf Acoust Speech Signal Process 4:4Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gaidioz B, Koblitz B, Santaos N (2007) Exploring high performance distributed file storage using LDPC codes. Parallel Comput 33:264–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Li J (2006) Adaptive erasure resilient coding in distributed storage. IEEE Int Conf Multimedia Expo 561–564Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rodrigues R, Liskov B (2005) High availability in DHTs: erasure coding vs. replication. Peer-to-Peer Syst IV 3640:226–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kim S, Lee S (2009) Rateless erasure resilient codes for content storage and distribution in P2P networks. 11th International Conference on Advanced Communication Technology 1:444–446Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ji W, Jian Z, Tong W, Qian S (2011) Study on redundant strategies in peer to peer cloud storage systems. Appl Math Inf Sci Int J 5-2S:235S–242SGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Park S, Moon B, Park M (2004) Design, implementation, and performance analysis of the remote storage system in mobile environment. 2nd International Conference on Information Technology for ApplicationGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hertel CR (2003) Implementing CIFS: the common internet file system. Prentice Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Radkov P, Yin L, Goyal P, Sarkar P, Shenoy P (2004) “A Performance comparison of NFS and iSCSI for IP-networked storage”, 3rd USENIX conference on file and storage technologies. USENIX Assoc 3640:101–114Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cao N, Yu S, Yang Z, Lou W, Hou YT (2012) LT code-based secure and reliable cloud storage service. IEEE INFOCOM 693–701Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Blömer J, Kalfane M, Karpinski M Karp R, Luby M, Zuckerman D (1995) An XOR-based erasure-resilient coding scheme. ICSI Technical Report No. TR–950048Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Luby M (2002) LT codes. Ann Symp Found Comput Sci 271–280. doi: 10.1109/SFCS.2002.1181950. Accessed 18 Oct 2013
  22. 22.
    Han S, Joo H, Lee D, Song H (2011) An end-to-end virtual path construction system for stable live video streaming over heterogeneous wireless networks. IEEE J Sel Areas Commun 29:1032–1041CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Shokrollahi A (2006) Raptor codes. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 52(6):2551–2567. doi: 10.1109/TIT.2006.874390. Accessed 18 Oct 2013
  24. 24.
    Xu Q, Stanković V, Xiong Z (2007) Distributed joint source-channel coding of video using Raptor codes. IEEE J Sel Areas Commun 25:851–861CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ribeiro V, Riedi R, Baraniuk R, Navratil J, Cottrell L (2003) pathChirp: efficient available bandwidth estimation for network paths. Passive and Active Measurement Workshop. doi: 10.2172/813038. Accessed 18 Oct 2013
  26. 26.
    Ntene N, Vuuren JHV (2009) A survey and comparison of guillotine heuristics for the 2D oriented offline strip packing problem. Discret Optim 6:174–188CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lodi A, Martello S, Monaci M (2002) Two-dimensional packing problems: a survey. Eur J Oper Res 141:241–252CrossRefMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bustamante FE, Qiao Y (2004) Friendships that last: peer lifespan and its role in P2P protocols. Int Work Web Content Caching Distrib 233–246Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Stutzbach D, Rejaie R (2006) Understanding churn in peer-to-peer network. The 6th ACM SIGCOMM Conference on Internet Measurement, pp. 189–202Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Steiner M, En-Najjary T, Biersack E (2009) Long term study of peer behavior in the KAD DHT. IEEE/ACM Trans Netw 17(6):1371–1384. doi: 10.1109/TNET.2008.2009053. Accessed 18 Oct 2013
  31. 31.
    Leonard D, Yao Z, Rai V, Loguinov D (2007) On lifetime-based node failure and stochastic resilience of decentralized peer-to-peer networks. IEEE/ACM Trans Networking 15:644–656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Mackay DJC (2005) Fountain codes. IEE Proc Commun 152:1062–1068CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Lawler EW, Wood DE (1966) Branch–and–bound method—a survey. Oper Res 14:669–719MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Lunttila T, Lindholm J, Pajukoski K, Tiirola E, Toskala A (2007) EUTRAN uplink performance. Int Symp Wirel Pervasive Comput. doi: 10.1109/ISWPC.2007.342658. Accessed 18 Oct 2013
  35. 35.
    Turner WP, IV, Seader JH, Renaud V, Brill KG (2006) Tier classifications define site infrastructure performance. White Paper, The Uptime InstituteGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Ping L, Ge X, Wang Y, Fu J (2010) Cloud storage as the infrastructure of cloud computing. Intell Comput Cogn Inform380–383Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Yang Y, Yuan D (2011) A novel cost-effective dynamic data replication strategy for reliability in cloud data centers. IEEE Dependable Auton Secure ComputGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    OECD Broadband Portal (2012). Accessed 18 Oct 2013

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringPOSTECHPohangSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations