Advertisement

Peer-to-Peer Networking and Applications

, Volume 9, Issue 6, pp 1128–1144 | Cite as

C-trust: A trust management system to improve fairness on circular P2P networks

  • Alireza Naghizadeh
  • Behrooz Razeghi
  • Ehsan Meamari
  • Majid Hatamian
  • Reza Ebrahimi Atani
Article

Abstract

An important issue in Peer-to-Peer networks is to encourage users to share with others as they use the resources of the network. However, some nodes may only consume from users without giving anything in return. To fix this problem, we can incorporate trust management systems with network infrastructures. Current trust managements are usually made for unstructured overlays and have several shortcomings. They are made to be very similar to e-commerce scoring websites which may not be the best design for fairness in P2P networks. Several problems may arise with their designs such as difficulties to provide a complete history of freeloaders or lack of an autonomous removal mechanism in case of severe attacks. In this paper, we argue that such systems can be deployed more efficiently by using a structured paradigm. For this purpose, we propose C-Trust, a trust management system which is focused on fairness for P2P networks. This is done by getting help from current circular structured designs. This method is able to mark freeloaders, identify their severity of abusion and punish them accordingly. We are also able to effectively protect both Seeder-to-Leecher and Leecher-to-Leecher transactions. This feature is specially important for fairness which other trust systems have not considered so far.

Keywords

P2P Trust Seeder Leecher Fairness DHT 

References

  1. 1.
    Koegel Buford JF, Yu HH, Lua EK (2009) P2P networking and applications”. Elsevier/Morgan Kaufmann, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Li D, Zhu Z, Cheng C, Du F (2011) TD-Trust: A Time Domain Based P2P Trust Model. Lect Notes Comput Sci 7002:467–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Naghizadeh A, Ebrahimi Atani R Improve fairness in peer-to-peer networks by separating the role of Seeders in network infrastructures. doi: 10.3906/elk-1402-304
  4. 4.
    Cover TM, Thomas JA (2006) Elements of information theory. WileyGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jin X, Chan SG (2010) Handbook of Peer-to-Peer networking – Unstructured Peer-to-Peer network architectures. Springer, pp 117–142. doi: 10.1007/978-0-387-09751-0_5
  6. 6.
    Opennap.sourceforge.net Napster protocol. http://opennap.sourceforge.net/napster.txt (2000). Accessed 14 Mar 2014
  7. 7.
    Cohen B (2003) Incentives Build Robustness in BitTorrent?presented at P2PEconGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    stanford.edu The gnutella protocol specification v0.4., http://stanford.edu/class/cs244b/gnutella_protocol_0.4.pdf. Accessed 14 Mar 2014
  9. 9.
    Stoica I, Morris R, Karger D, Kaashoek MF, Balakrishnan H (2001) Chord: A scalable peer-to-peer lookup service for internet applications. vol 31(4), pp 149–160Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cordasco G, Gargano L, Negro A, Scarano V, Hammar M (2008) F-Chord: Improved uniform routing on Chord. vol 52(4), pp 325–332. doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-27796-5_9
  11. 11.
    Huang H, Zheng Y, Chen H, Wang R (2010) PChord: a distributed hash table for P2P network. Frontiers of Electrical and Electronic Engineering in China 5(1):49–58. doi: 10.1007/s11460-009-0068-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hui-Shan L, Ke X, Ming-Wei X, Yong C (2005) S-chord: Hybrid topology makes chord efficient. Springer, pp 480–487. doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-31957-3_57
  13. 13.
    Hong F, Li M, Lu X, Wang Y, Yu J, Li Y (2004) VChord: Constructing Peer-to-Peer overlay network by exploiting heterogeneity. In: Embedded and Ubiquitous Computing, Wakamatsu, Japan, August 25–27. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer, pp 1096–1106. doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-30121-9_105
  14. 14.
    Dellarocas C (2003) The Digitization of Word of Mouth: Promise and Challenges of Online Feedback Mechanisms. Manag Sci 49:1407142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gross B, Acquisti A (2003) Balances of Power on eBay: Peers or Unequals. In: Workshop on Economics of Peer-to-Peer SystemsGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Resnick P, Zeckhauser R, Friedman E, Kuwabara K (2000) Reputation Systems: Facilitating Trust in Internet Interactions. ACM 43(12)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Aberer K, Despotovic Z (2001) Managing trust in a peer-2-peer information system. In: Proceedings of the tenth international conference on Information and knowledge management, pp 310–317, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Garcia-Molina H, Schlosser MT, Kamvar SD (2003) The Eigentrust algorithm for reputation management in P2P networks. In: Proceedings of the 12th international conference on World Wide Web, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Damiani E, di Vimercati DCC, Paraboschi S, Samarati P, Violante F (2002) A reputation based approach for choosing reliable resources in peer-to-peer networks. In: 9th ACM conference on Computer and communications security, pp 207216Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lu L, Han J, Liu Y, Hu L, Huai J, Ni LM, Ma J (2008) Zero-Knowledge Authentication in Anonymous P2Ps. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems 19(10):1325–1337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Damiani E, De Capitani di Vimercati S, Paraboschi S, Samarati P (2003) Managing and Sharing Servents Reputations in P2P Systems. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng:840–854Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hao L, Lu S, Tang J, Zhang A (2008) A Low Cost and Reliable Anonymity Scheme in P2P Reputation Systems with Trusted Third Parties. IEEE GLOBECOMGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Conti M, Salve AD, Guidi B, Pitto F (2014) Laura Ricci Trusted Dynamic Storage for Dunbar-Based P2P Online Social Networks. Lect Notes Comput Sci 8841:400–417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Tian C, Yang B (2014) A D-S evidence theory based fuzzy trust model in file-sharing P2P networks. Peer-to-Peer Networking and Applications 7(4):332–345Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Menga X, Dinga Y, Gongb Y (2012) @Trust: A trust model based on feedback-arbitration in structured P2P network. Comput Commun 35(16):2044–2053CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ha B, Cho G (2013) A Collusion-Resistant Trust Management Scheme for Distributed P2P Network. Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering 214:135–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Xin C, Han H, Lin X (2013) Geng-yu Wei A P2P Reputation Model Based on P2P File-Sharing Behavioral Characteristics. Communications in Computer and Information Science 320:373–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hu Y, Wang D, Zhong H, Wu F (2014) SocialTrust: Enabling long-term social cooperation in peer-to-peer services. Peer-to-Peer Networking and Applications 7(4):525–538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Clarke S, Christianson B, Xiao H (2013) Trust*: Using Local Guarantees to Extend the Reach of Trust. Lect Notes Comput Sci 7028:171–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Chang J, Pang Z, Xu W, Wang H, Yin G (2014) An incentive compatible reputation mechanism for P2P systems. J Supercomput 69(3):1382–1409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kim S (2014) Repeated Public Goods Game Mode for Trust Based P2P Networks. Wirel Pers Commun 79(1):473–485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Noroozian A, de Weerdt M, Witteveen C (2013) Incentivizing Cooperation in P2P File Sharing. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 7607:36–50Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Razeghi B, Okati N, Abed Hodtani G (2015) A novel approach to mathematical multiple criteria decision making methods based on information theoretic measures. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Iran Workshop on Communication and Information Theory (IWCIT), Tehran, IranGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Razeghi B, Okati N, Abed Hodtani G (2015) A novel multi-criteria relay selection scheme in cooperation communication networks,”. In: Proceedings of the 49th Annual Conference on Information Sciences and Systems (CISS), Baltimore, Maryland, USAGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hwang CL, Yoon K (1981) Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications, A State of the Art Survey. Sprinnger, New YorkCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Tzeng GH, Huang JJ (2011) Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications. CRC PressGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Vishnumurthy V, Francis P (2007) A Comparison of Structured and Unstructured P2P Approaches to Heterogeneous Random Peer Selection. USENIX Annual Technical Conference, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Castro M, Costa M, Rowstron A (2004) Peer-to-peer overlays: structured, unstructured, or bothGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Montresor A, Jelasity M (2009) PeerSim: A scalable P2P simulator. In: 9th Int. Conference on Peer-to-Peer (P2P’09), Seattle, WA, pp 99–100Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alireza Naghizadeh
    • 1
  • Behrooz Razeghi
    • 2
  • Ehsan Meamari
    • 3
  • Majid Hatamian
    • 4
  • Reza Ebrahimi Atani
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer EngineeringUniversity of GuilanRashtIran
  2. 2.Department of Electrical EngineeringFerdowsi University of MashhadMashhadIran
  3. 3.Department of Electrical EngineeringIran University of Science and TechnologyTehranIran
  4. 4.Department of Computer Engineering, Dezful BranchIslamic Azad UniversityDezfulIran

Personalised recommendations