Advertisement

Formal Proof of Cooperativeness in a Multi–Party P2P Content Authentication Protocol

  • Almudena Alcaide
  • Esther Palomar
  • Ana I. González–Tablas
  • Arturo Ribagorda
Conference paper
  • 1k Downloads
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6264)

Abstract

The goal of this paper is to present a formal framework specially defined for the analysis of cooperative behavior in self–organizing multi–party security protocols. To illustrate the formalism, we formally analyze a multi–party peer to peer (MP–P2P) content authentication protocol which ensures content integrity in a decentralized P2P file sharing system. Our approach, based on Game Theory, will serve to formally analyze and verify cooperation among a variable number of selfish and untrustworthy participant peers.

Keywords

Nash Equilibrium Security Protocol Dynamic Game Bayesian Game Protocol Description 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Zhang, Y., Lin, L., Huai, J.: Balancing trust and incentive in peer-to-peer collaborative system. Int. Journal of Network Security 5(1), 73–81 (2007)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Marti, S., Garcia-Molina, H.: Taxonomy of trust: Categorizing p2p reputation systems. Computer Networks 50, 472–484 (2006)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Andrade, N., Mowbray, M., Lima, A., Wagner, G., Ripeanu, M.: Influences on cooperation in bittorrent communities. In: Proceedings of the 2005 ACM SIGCOMM workshop on Economics of Peer-to-Peer systems, pp. 111–115. ACM, New York (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cheng, J., Li, Y., Jiao, W., Ma, J.: A utility-based auction cooperation incentive mechanism in peer-to-peer network. In: Zhou, X., Sokolsky, O., Yan, L., Jung, E.-S., Shao, Z., Mu, Y., Lee, D.C., Kim, D.Y., Jeong, Y.-S., Xu, C.-Z. (eds.) EUC Workshops 2006. LNCS, vol. 4097, pp. 11–21. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zambonelli, F., Gleizesb, M., Mameia, M., Tolksdorf, R.: Spray computers: Explorations in self-organization. Pervasive and Mobile Computing 1, 1–20 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ellis, T., Yao, X.: Evolving cooperation in the non-iterated prisoner’s dilemma: A social network inspired approach. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation, Singapore, September 2007, pp. 25–28 (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Palomar, E., Tapiador, J., Hernandez-Castro, J., Ribagorda, A.: Certificate-based access control in pure p2p networks. In: Proceedings of the 6th Int. Conference on Peer-to-Peer Computing, Cambridge, UK, September 2006, pp. 177–184. IEEE, Los Alamitos (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Palomar, E., Estevez-Tapiador, J., Hernandez-Castro, J., Ribagorda, A.: Secure content access and replication in pure p2p networks. Computer Communications 31(2), 266–279 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Palomar, E., Alcaide, A., Estevez-Tapiador, J., Hernandez-Castro, J.: Bayesian analysis of secure p2p sharing protocols. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z. (eds.) OTM 2007, Part II. LNCS, vol. 4804, pp. 1701–1717. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Abadi, M., Gordon, A.: A calculus for cryptographic protocols: the spi calculus. In: Proceedings of the 4th ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 36–47. ACM, New York (1997)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Aristizabal, A., Lopez, H., Rueda, C., Valencia, F.: Formally reasoning about security issues in p2p protocols: A case study. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Taiwanese-French Conference on Information Technology, Nancy, France, INRIA Technical report (March 2006)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Schneider, S., Borgstrom, J., Nestmann, U.: Towards the application of process calculi in the domain of peer-to-peer algorithms. In: Proceedings of the 8th Int. Workshop on Autonomous Systems–Self-Organization, Management and Control, Shanghai, China, October 2008. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Velipasalar, S., Chang-Hong, L., Schlessman, J., Wolf, W.: Design and verification of communication protocols for peer-to-peer multimedia systems. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo., Toronto, Canada, July 2006, pp. 1421–1424. IEEE, Los Alamitos (2006)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Buragohain, C., Agrawal, D., Suri, S.: A game theoretic framework for incentives in p2p systems. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Int. Conf. on Peer-to-Peer Computing, Linkping, Sweden, September 2003, pp. 48–56. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2003)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gupta, R., Somani, A.K.: Game theory as a tool to strategize as well as predict nodes behavior in peer-to-peer networks. In: ICPADS, pp. 244–249 (2005)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Morselli, R., Katz, J., Bhattacharjee, B.: A game-theoretic framework for analyzing trust-inference protocols. In: Second Workshop on the Economics of Peer-to-Peer Systems (2004)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Palomar, E.: Content authentication and access control in pure peer-to-peer networks. Technical report, University Carlos III of Madrid. Computer Science Department. Spain, Ph.D. Thesis (2008)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Almudena Alcaide
    • 1
  • Esther Palomar
    • 1
  • Ana I. González–Tablas
    • 1
  • Arturo Ribagorda
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity Carlos III of MadridSpain

Personalised recommendations