Advertisement

Peer-to-Peer Networking and Applications

, Volume 11, Issue 4, pp 766–777 | Cite as

Secure, efficient and revocable data sharing scheme for vehicular fogs

  • Kai Fan
  • Junxiong Wang
  • Xin Wang
  • Hui Li
  • Yintang Yang
Article
  • 403 Downloads
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Special Issue on Fog Computing on Wheels

Abstract

With the rapid development of vehicular networks, the problem of data sharing in vehicular networks has attached much attention. However, existing data access control schemes in cloud computing cannot be applied to the scenario of vehicular networks, because cloud computing paradigm cannot satisfy the rigorous requirement posed by latency-sensitive mobile application. Fog Computing is a paradigm that extends Cloud computing and services to the edge of the network. The vehicular fog is the ideal platform to achieve data sharing in vehicular networks. In this paper, we propose a revocable data sharing scheme for vehicular fogs. We construct a new multi-authority ciphertext policy attribute-based encryption (CP-ABE) scheme with efficient decryption to realize data access control in vehicular network system, and design an efficient user and attribute revocation method for it. The analysis and the simulation results show that our scheme is secure and highly efficient.

Keywords

Vehicular fogs Attribute-based encryption Revocation Security Efficiency 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work has been financially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 61303216, No. 61272457, No. U1401251, and No. 61373172), the National High Technology Research and Development Program of China (863 Program) (No. 2012AA013102), the Open Research Project of the State Key Laboratory of Industrial Control Technology, Zhejiang University, China (No. ICT170312), and National 111 Program of China B16037 and B08038.

References

  1. 1.
    Zhu H, Chang S, Lu L, Zhang W (2016) RUPS: fixing relative distances among urban vehicles with context-aware trajectories. Proceedings of IPDPS 2016:123–131Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zhu H, Chang S, Li M, Naik K, Shen S (2011) Exploiting temporal dependency for opportunistic forwarding in urban vehicular networks. Proceedings of INFOCOM 2011:2192–2200Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gerla M, Kleinrock L (2011) Vehicular networks and the future of the mobile internet. Comput Netw 55(2):457–469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Luan T, Shen X, Bai F (2013, 2013) Integrity-oriented content transmission in highway vehicular ad hoc networks. Proceedings of INFOCOM:2562–2570Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fernando N, Loke S, Rahayu W (2013) Mobile cloud computing: a survey. Futur Gener Comput Syst 29(1):84–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Tuli A, Hasteer N, Sharma M, Bansal A (2013) Exploring challenges in mobile cloud computing: An overview. Proceedings of Next Generation Information Technology Summit 2013:496–501Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bonomi F (2011) Connected vehicles, the internet of things, and fog computing. VANET 2011:13–15Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bonomi F, Milito R, Zhu J, Addepalli S (2012, 2012) Fog computing and its role in the internet of things. Proceedings of MCC:13–16Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Aazam M, Huh E (2014) Fog computing and smart gateway based communication for cloud of things. Proceedings of FiCloud 2014:464–470Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Aazam M, Huh E (2015) E-HAMC: leveraging fog computing for emergency alert service. Proceedings of PerCom 2015:518–523Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hong K, Lillethun D, Ramachandran U, Ottenwälder B, Koldehofe B (2013) Mobile fog: a programming model for large-scale applicationson the internet of things. Proceedings of MCC 2013:15–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ottenwalder B, Koldehofe B, Rothermel K, Ramachandran U (2013) Migcep: Operator migration for mobility driven distributed complexevent processing. Proceedings of DEBS 2013:183–194Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nishio T, Shinkuma R, Takahashi T, Mandayam N (2013) Service oriented heterogeneous resource sharing for optimizing service latency in mobile cloud. Proceedings of MobileCloud 2013:19–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dong M, Liu X, Qian Z, Liu A, Wang T (2015) QoE-ensured price competition model for emerging mobile networks. IEEE Wirel Commun 22(4):50–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wei K, Dong M, Ota K et al (2015) CAMF. Context-aware message forwarding in mobile social networks. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems 26(8):2178–2187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Luo S, Dong M, Ota K et al (2015) A security assessment mechanism for software-defined networking-based mobile networks. Sensors 15(12):31843–31858CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ota K, Dong M, Chang S et al (2015) MMCD: cooperative downloading for highway VANETs. IEEE Trans Emerging Topics Comput 3(1):34–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ostrovsky R, Sahai A, Waters B (2007, 2007) Attribute-based encryption with non-monotonic access structures. Proceedings of CCS:195–203Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rafaeli S, Hutchison D (2003) A survey of key management for secure group communication. ACM Comput Surv 35(3):309–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Boyen X, Waters B (2007, 2007) Full-domain subgroup hiding and constant-size group signatures. Proceedings of PKC:1–15Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Liang X, Lu R, Lin X, Shen X (2010) Ciphertext policy attribute-based encryption with efficient revocation. IEEE symposium on security and privacy. Pp 321-334Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Xie X, Ma H, Li J, Chen X (2013) New ciphertext-policy attribute-based access control with efficient revocation. Proceedings of ICT 2013:373–382Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hur J, Noh D (2010) Attribute-based access control with efficient revocation in data outsourcing systems. IEEE Transactions on Paralleland Distributed Systems 22(7):1214–1221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Beimel A (1996) Secure schemes for secret sharing and key distribution. Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, Faculty of Computer Science. pp 22–28Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Dong M, Zheng L, Ota K, Guo S, Guo M, Li L (2009) A trade-off approach to optimal resource allocation algorithm with cache technology in ubiquitous computing environment. Proceedings of CSE 2009. Pp 9-15Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Chang S, Qi Y, Zhu H et al (2012) Footprint: detecting Sybil attacks in urban vehicular networks. IEEE Transactions on Parallel & Distributed Systems 23(6):1103–1114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Stojmenovic I, Sheng W (2014, 2014) The fog computing paradigm: scenariosand security issues. Proceedings of FedCSIS:1–8Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Chase M (2007) Multi-authority attribute based encryption. Proceedings of theory of cryptography. Pp 515-534Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lewko A, Waters B (2011, 2011) Decentralizing attribute-based encryption. Proceedings of advances in cryptology–EUROCRYPT:568–588Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ruj S, Nayak A, Stojmenovic I (2011) DACC: distributed access control in clouds. Proceedings of TrustCom 2011:91–98Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Akinyele J, Garman C, Miers I et al (2013) Charm: a framework for rapidly prototyping cryptosystems. J Cryptogr Eng 3(2):111–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lynn B. PBC Library: The pairing-based cryptography library. http://crypto.stanford.edu/pbc. Accessed 26 Jul 2016
  33. 33.
    Charm: A tool for rapid cryptographic prototyping. http://www.charm-crypto.com. Accessed 26 Jul 2016

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.State Key Laboratory of Integrated Service NetworksXidian UniversityXi’anChina
  2. 2.Key Laboratory of Ministry of Education for Wide Band-Gap Semicon, Materials and DevicesXidian UniversityXi’anChina

Personalised recommendations