Faster fog-aided private set intersectionwith integrity preserving

  • Qiang Wang
  • Fu-cai Zhou
  • Tie-min Ma
  • Zi-feng Xu


Private set intersection (PSI) allows two parties to compute the intersection of their private sets while revealing nothing except the intersection. With the development of fog computing, the need has arisen to delegate PSI on outsourced datasets to the fog. However, the existing PSI schemes are based on either fully homomorphic encryption (FHE) or pairing computation. To the best of our knowledge, FHE and pairing operations consume a huge amount of computational resource. It is therefore an untenable scenario for resource-limited clients to carry out these operations. Furthermore, these PSI schemes cannot be applied to fog computing due to some inherent problems such as unacceptable latency and lack of mobility support. To resolve this problem, we first propose a novel primitive called “faster fog-aided private set intersection with integrity preserving”, where the fog conducts delegated intersection operations over encrypted data without the decryption capacity. One of our technical highlights is to reduce the computation cost greatly by eliminating the FHE and pairing computation. Then we present a concrete construction and prove its security required under some cryptographic assumptions. Finally, we make a detailed theoretical analysis and simulation, and compare the results with those of the state-of-the-art schemes in two respects: communication overhead and computation overhead. The theoretical analysis and simulation show that our scheme is more efficient and practical.

Key words

Private set intersection Fog computing Verifiable Data privacy 

CLC number



Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Abadi A, Terzis S, Dong CY, 2016. VD–PSI: verifiable delegated private set intersection on outsourced private datasets. Proc Int Conf on Financial Cryptography and Data Security, p.149–168. Google Scholar
  2. Ateniese G, de Cristofaro E, Tsudik G, 2011. (If) size matters: size–hiding private set intersection. Proc Int Workshop on Public Key Cryptography, p.156–173. zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. Baldi P, Baronio R, de Cristofaro E, et al., 2011. Countering GATTACA: efficient and secure testing of fullysequenced human genomes. Proc 18th ACM Conf on Computer and Communications Security, p.691–702. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chen H, Laine K, Rindal P, 2017. Fast private set intersection from homomorphic encryption. Proc ACM SIGSAC Conf on Computer and Communications Security, p.1243–1255. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Falk BH, Noble D, Ostrovsky R, 2018. Private Set Intersection with Linear Communication from General Assumptions. Cryptology ePrint Archive: Report 2018/238.Google Scholar
  6. Freedman MJ, Nissim K, Pinkas B, 2004. Efficient private matching and set intersection. Proc Int Conf on the Theory and Applications of Cryptographic Techniques, p.1–19. CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. Ghosh E, Ohrimenko O, Papadopoulos D, et al., 2015. Zero–Knowledge Accumulators and Set Operations. Cryptology ePrint Archive: 2015/404.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. Guan ZT, Li J, Wu LF, et al., 2017. Achieving efficient and secure data acquisition for cloud–supported Internet of Things in smart grid. IEEE Internet Things J, 4(6):1934–1944. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ion M, Kreuter B, Nergiz E, et al., 2017. Private Intersection–Sum Protocol with Applications to Attributing Aggregate Ad Conversions. Cryptology ePrint Archive: Report 2017/738.Google Scholar
  10. Kamara S, Mohassel P, Raykova M, et al., 2014. Scaling private set intersection to billion–element sets. Proc Int Conf on Financial Cryptography and Data Security, p.195–215. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kerry CF, Secretary A, Director CR, 2013. Federal Information Processing Standards Publication Digital Signature Standard (DSS), FIPS PUB 186–4. National Institute of Standards and Technology of America.Google Scholar
  12. Kolesnikov V, Kumaresan R, Rosulek M, et al., 2016. Efficient batched oblivious PRF with applications to private set intersection. Proc ACM SIGSAC Conf on Computer and Communications Security, p.818–829. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kolesnikov V, Matania N, Pinkas B, et al., 2017. Practical multi–party private set intersection from symmetric–key techniques. Proc ACM SIGSAC Conf on Computer and Communications Security, p.1257–1272. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Nagy M, de Cristofaro E, Dmitrienko A, et al., 2013. Do I know you?: efficient and privacy–preserving common friend–finder protocols and applications. Proc 29th Annual Computer Security Applications Conf, p.159–168. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Narayanan A, Thiagarajan N, Lakhani M, et al., 2011. Location privacy via private proximity testing. Network and Distributed System Security Symp.Google Scholar
  16. Nyberg K, Rueppel RA, 1994. Message recovery for signature schemes based on the discrete logarithm problem. Proc Workshop on the Theory and Application of Cryptographic Techniques, p.182–193. zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. Orrù M, Orsini E, Scholl P, 2017. Actively secure 1-out-of-N OT extension with application to private set intersection. Proc Cryptographers’ Track at the RSA Conf, p.381–396. CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. Papamanthou C, Tamassia R, Triandopoulos N, 2011. Optimal verification of operations on dynamic sets. 31st Annual Cryptology Conf, p.91–110. CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. Pinkas B, Schneider T, Zohner M, 2014. Faster private set intersection based on OT extension. Proc 23rd USENIX Conf on Security Symp, p.797–812.Google Scholar
  20. Pinkas B, Schneider T, Segev G, et al., 2015. Phasing: private set intersection using permutation–based hashing. Proc 24th USENIX Conf on Security Symp, p.515–530.Google Scholar
  21. Pinkas B, Schneider T, Zohner M, 2018. Scalable private set intersection based on OT extension. ACM Trans Priv Secur, 21(2):7.1–7.35. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Rindal P, Rosulek M, 2017a. Improved private set intersection against malicious adversaries. Proc 36th Annual Int Conf on the Theory and Applications of Cryptographic Techniques, p.235–259. CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. Rindal P, Rosulek M, 2017b. Malicious–secure private set intersection via dual execution. Proc ACM SIGSAC Conf on Computer and Communications Security, p.1229–1242. CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. Stanford University, 2013. The Pairing–Based Cryptography Library. Google Scholar
  25. Wu J, Dong MX, Ota K, et al., 2018. Big data analysis–based secure cluster management for optimized control plane in software–defined networks. IEEE Trans Netw Serv Manag, 15(1):27–38. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Zhang E, Li FH, Niu B, et al., 2017. Server–aided private set intersection based on reputation. Inform Sci, 387:180–194. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Zheng QJ, Xu SH, 2015. Verifiable delegated set intersection operations on outsourced encrypted data. Proc IEEE Int Conf on Cloud Engineering, p.175–184. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Editorial Office of Journal of Zhejiang University Science and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Software CollegeNortheastern UniversityShenyangChina
  2. 2.School of Computer Science and EngineeringNortheastern UniversityShenyangChina

Personalised recommendations