Advertisement

DStore: A Distributed Cloud Storage System Based on Smart Contracts and Blockchain

  • Jingting Xue
  • Chunxiang Xu
  • Yuan Zhang
  • Lanhua Bai
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11336)

Abstract

In this article, we propose a client-side encrypted distributed cloud storage system named DStore, which is constructed in a peer-to-peer networking environment. DStore allows data owners to rent the local idle disks of other peers to store personal data in a distributed manner without relying on centralized control by trusted third parties. For DStore, we propose a challenge-verification solution based on the Merkle hash tree to periodically audit the integrity of outsourced data. DStore employs smart contracts to generate records and achieve consensus regarding lease relationships. Upon completion of an audit, the smart contract verifies the audit result and automatically performs the payment operation. Finally, we conduct a comprehensive evaluation to ensure that DStore is secure and feasible.

Keywords

Distributed storage Peer-to-peer networking Personal data Smart contract Blockchain 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work is supported by the National Key R&D Program of China under Grant 2017YFB0802000 and the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant 61370203.

References

  1. 1.
    Kamara, S., Lauter, K.: Cryptographic cloud storage. In: Sion, R., et al. (eds.) FC 2010. LNCS, vol. 6054, pp. 136–149. Springer, Heidelberg (2010).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14992-4_13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jiang, T., Chen, X.F., Li, J., et al.: Towards secure and reliable cloud storage against data re-outsourcing. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 52, 86–94 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Summary of the Amazon S3 Service Disruption in the Northern Virginia (US-EAST-1) Region. https://aws.amazon.com/cn/message/41926/
  4. 4.
    Storj vs Dropbox: Why Decentralized Storage is the Future. http://www.8btc.com/storj-vs-dropbox-why-decentralized-storage-is-the-future
  5. 5.
    Li, J., Yan, Q.B., Chang, V.: Internet of things: security and privacy in a connected world. Future Gener Comput. Syst. 78(3), 931–932 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Schollmeier, R.: A definition of peer-to-peer networking for the classification of peer-to-peer architectures and applications. In: 1st International Conference on Peer-to-Peer Computing, pp. 101–102. IEEE Press, Linköping (2001)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wood, G.: Ethereum: a secure decentralised generalised transaction ledger. Ethereum Project Yellow Paper 151, 1–32 (2014)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rowstron, A., Druschel, P.: Storage management and caching in PAST, a large-scale, persistent peer-to-peer storage utility. In: 18th ACM SIGOPS Operating Systems Review, vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 188–201. ACM Press, Banff (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kubiatowicz, J., Bindel, D., Chen, Y.: OceanStore: an architecture for global-scale persistent storage. In: 17th ACM SIGOPS Operating Systems Review, vol. 34, no. 5, pp. 190–201. ACM Press, Cambridge (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cooper, B.F., Garcia-Molina, H.: Peer-to-peer data trading to preserve information. ACM TOIS 20(2), 133–170 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hesselink, L., Rizal, D., Bjornson, E.S.: Managed Peer-to-peer Applications, Systems and Methods for Distributed Data Access and Storage. US Patent 9,894,141 (2018)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Li, J.: Reliable, Efficient Peer-to-peer Storage. US Patent 9,047,310 (2015)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chen, Y.F., Huang, Y., Rahe, J., et al.: Peer-to-peer Distributed Storage for Internet Protocol Television. US Patent 9,578,288 (2017)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nakamoto, S.: Bitcoin: A Peer-to-peer Electronic Cash System (2008)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Miller, A., Juels, A., Shi, E., et al.: Permacoin: repurposing Bitcoin Work for Data Preservation. In: 35th IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, pp. 475–490. IEEE Press, Berkeley (2014)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wilkinson, S., Boshevski, T., Brandoff, J., et al.: Storj: A Peer-to-peer Cloud Storage Network (V2). Citeseer Press (2016)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kuo, T.T., Ohno-Machado, L.: ModelChain: Decentralized Privacy-Preserving Healthcare Predictive Modeling Framework on Private Blockchain Networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:1802.01746 (2018)
  18. 18.
    Kang, J.W., Yu, R., Huang, X.M., et al.: Enabling localized peer-to-peer electricity trading among plug-in hybrid electric vehicles using consortium blockchains. IEEE T Ind. Inform. 13(6), 3154–3164 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zyskind, G., Nathan, O., et al.: Decentralizing privacy: using blockchain to protect personal data. In: 36th IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy Workshops, pp. 180–184. IEEE Press, San Jose (2015)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Azaria, A., Ekblaw, A., Vieira, T., et al.: MedRec: using blockchain for medical data access and permission management. In: 2nd International Conference on Open and Big Data, pp. 25–30. IEEE Press, Vienna (2016)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Juels, A., Kaliski, B.: PORs: proofs of retrievability for large files. In: 14th ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 584–597. ACM Press, Alexandria (2007)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bowers, K.D., Juels, A., Oprea, A.: Proofs of retrievability: theory and implementation. In: 1st ACM Workshop on Cloud Computing Security, pp. 43–54. ACM Press, Chicago (2009)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Shacham, H., Waters, B.: Compact proofs of retrievability. J. Cryptol. 26(3), 442–483 (2013)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bowers, K.D., Juels, A., Oprea, A.: HAIL: a high-availability and integrity layer for cloud storage. In: 16th ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 187–198. ACM Press, Chicago (2009)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Shi, E., Stefanov, E., Papamanthou, C.: Practical dynamic proofs of retrievability. In: 20th ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 325–336. ACM Press, Berlin (2013)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ateniese, G., Burns, R., Curtmola, R., et al.: Provable data possession at untrusted stores. In: 14th ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 598–609. ACM Press, Alexandria (2007)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Cash, D., Küpçü, A., Wichs, D.: Dynamic proofs of retrievability via oblivious RAM. J. Cryptol. 30(1), 22–57 (2017)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Erway, C.C., Küpçü, A., Papamanthou, C., et al.: Dynamic provable data possession. ACM T Inform. Syst. Secur. 17(4), 15 (2015)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Buterin, V., et al.: A Next-generation Smart Contract and Decentralized Application Platform. White Paper (2014)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
  31. 31.
  32. 32.
  33. 33.
    Pouwelse, J., Garbacki, P., Epema, D., Sips, H.: The bittorrent P2P file-sharing system: measurements and analysis. In: Castro, M., van Renesse, R. (eds.) IPTPS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3640, pp. 205–216. Springer, Heidelberg (2005).  https://doi.org/10.1007/11558989_19CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for Cyber Security, School of Computer Science and EngineeringUniversity of Electronic Science and Technology of ChinaChengduChina
  2. 2.Department of Electrical and Computer EngineeringUniversity of WaterlooWaterlooCanada

Personalised recommendations