A Reputation-Based System for Confidentiality Modeling in Peer-to-Peer Networks

  • Christoph Sorge
  • Martina Zitterbart
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3986)


The secure transmission of messages via computer networks is, in many scenarios, considered to be a solved problem. However, a related problem, being almost as crucial, has been widely ignored: To whom to entrust information? We argue that confidentiality modeling is a question of trust. Therefore, the article at hand addresses this problem based on a reputation system. We consider a Peer-to-Peer network whose participants decide on whether or not to make information available to other nodes based on the author’s trust relationships. Documents are only forwarded to another node if, according to the sender’s local view, the recipient is considered to be sufficiently trustworthy. In contrast to most existing reputation systems, trust relationships are considered only with respect to a specific domain. Privacy is preserved by limiting the revelation of trust relationships.


Malicious Node Trust Relationship Reputation System Forwarding Node Multiple Identity 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Abdul-Rahman, A.: The PGP Trust Model. EDI Forum: The Journal of Electronic Commerce (April 1997)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Abdul-Rahman, A., Hailes, S.: Supporting trust in virtual communities. In: HICSS 2000: Proceedings of the 33rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Washington, DC, USA, vol. 6, p. 6007. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2000)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Daignault, M., Shepherd, M., Marche, S., Watters, C.: Enabling trust online. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Symposium on Electronic Commerce, pp. 3–12. IEEE, Los Alamitos (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Douceur, J.R.: The sybil attack. In: Druschel, P., Kaashoek, M.F., Rowstron, A. (eds.) IPTPS 2002. LNCS, vol. 2429, p. 251. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Esser, H.: Institutionen: Soziologie: Spezielle Grundlagen, vol. 5. Campus Verlag, Frankfurt (2000)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gambetta, D. (ed.): Can We Trust Trust? Basil Blackwell, Malden (1988)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Glaeser, E.L., Laibson, D.I., Scheinkman, J.A., Soutter, C.L.: Measuring trust. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 115(3), 811–846 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Guha, R., Kumar, R., Raghavan, P., Tomkins, A.: Propagation of trust and distrust. In: WWW 2004: Proceedings of the 13th international conference on WorldWide Web, pp. 403–412. ACM Press, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gupta, M., Judge, P., Ammar, M.: A reputation system for peer-to-peer networks. In: NOSSDAV 2003: Proceedings of the 13th international workshop on Networkand operating systems support for digital audio and video, pp. 144–152. ACM Press, New York (2003)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jones, K.: Trust: Philosophical Aspects. In: International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences, vol. 23, pp. 15917–15922. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kamvar, S.D., Schlosser, M.T., Garcia-Molina, H.: The Eigentrust algorithm for reputation management in P2P networks. In: WWW 2003: Proceedings of the 12th international conference on WorldWide Web, pp. 640–651. ACM Press, New York (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kinateder, M., Pearson, S.: A Privacy-Enhanced Peer-to-Peer Reputation System. In: Bauknecht, K., Tjoa, A.M., Quirchmayr, G. (eds.) EC-Web 2003. LNCS, vol. 2738, pp. 206–215. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Leibowitz, N., Ripeanu, M., Wierzbicki, A.: Deconstructing the kazaa network. In: WIAPP 2003: Proceedings of the The Third IEEE Workshop on Internet Applications, Washington, DC, USA, p. 112. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Marsh, S.P.: Formalising Trust as a Computational Concept. PhD thesis, University of Stirling (1994)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Resnick, P., Zeckhauser, R.: Trust among strangers in internet transactions: Empirical analysis of ebay’s reputation system. In: Baye, M. (ed.) The Economics of The Internet and E-Commerce. Advances in Applied Microeconomics, vol. 11. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Resnick, P., Zeckhauser, R., Friedman, E., Kuwabara, K.: Reputation systems. Commun. ACM 43(12), 45–48 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ripeanu, M.: Peer-to-peer architecture case study: Gnutella network. In: P2P 2001: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Peer-to-Peer Computing (P2P 2001), Washington, DC, USA, p. 99. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2001)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Stallings, W.: Cryptography and Network Security: Principles and Practices, 3rd edn. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (2003)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Walsh, K., Sirer, E.G.: Fighting peer-to-peer spam and decoys with object reputation. In: P2PECON 2005: Proceeding of the 2005 ACM SIGCOMM workshop on Economics of peer-to-peer systems, pp. 138–143. ACM Press, New York (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Westin, A.F.: Privacy and freedom. Atheneum (1967)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Yu, B., Singh, M.P.: A social mechanism of reputation management in electronic communities. In: Cooperative Information Agents, pp. 154–165 (2000)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christoph Sorge
    • 1
  • Martina Zitterbart
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of TelematicsUniversität Karlsruhe (TH)KarlsruheGermany

Personalised recommendations